isitsafenow
Posts: 3413
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:22 am

Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:05 am

The DC-9 power outs at DTW have ended. I was through there 4 times in the past 4 weeks and did not see or
hear one power out.
In the March issue of the NW onboard mag, there is an article that talks about NW fuel
conservation. One sentence stated the "NW has a different pushback procedure that now saves the airline
fuel" It must be no power outs because its awfully quiet around the A building these days.
safe
If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
 
michman
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 9:51 am

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:26 am

While I understand the need to save fuel (why didn't they implement this months ago???) , I will definitely miss the power-backs in the DC-9. Love the sound of those JT-8D's spooling up.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:41 am

Quoting Michman (Reply 1):
While I understand the need to save fuel (why didn't they implement this months ago???) , I will definitely miss the power-backs in the DC-9.

You know, while it does save fuel, it ends up costing them more on the labor and non-aircraft related expense end.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:42 am

Everyone wants to be friendly to the environment these days.....even if it costs more money. It's all about the image of green (as in green movement)....kinda makes me sick actually.

Someone tell me a terribly heavy pushback truck with a big v8 (at least) burns just as much fuel as those twin JTs during the same manuever. Once the aircraft is in motion backwards.....it does not take much thrust to keep it that way.
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:52 am

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 3):
Someone tell me a terribly heavy pushback truck with a big v8 (at least) burns just as much fuel as those twin JTs during the same manuever. Once the aircraft is in motion backwards.....it does not take much thrust to keep it that way.

Increased a/c maintenance costs as well. Powerbacks are rough on engines and by eliminating the practice you save on the costs of maintaining and replacing engines.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 2):
You know, while it does save fuel, it ends up costing them more on the labor and non-aircraft related expense end.

The cost of additional labor and GSE is still less than the cost of a replacement engine. Even FL realized (in addition to the fuel savings) that and quit the practice a few years back.
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:13 am

Reverse thrust on landing is also hard on engines, and most of the time entirely unnecessary. Is catching the nearest exit worth the added engine maint. expense? I guess so since it happens all the time.

A better argument would be reducing noise levels in and near the terminals and having less chance of blowing debris being tossed around the tarmac. I think the "fuel saver" mantra is basically to appease those that are currently deemed the most politically-correct.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Powerouts At DTW End

Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:52 pm

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 3):
Someone tell me a terribly heavy pushback truck with a big v8 (at least) burns just as much fuel as those twin JTs during the same manuever.

A diesel tractor probably doesn't burn that much fuel doing that.

Quoting Srbmod (Reply 4):
Even FL realized (in addition to the fuel savings) that and quit the practice a few years back.

FL still does powerbacks regularly.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss