Re: O'Hare -> Hong Kong Non-Stop

From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
Date:         20 Jul 96 15:59:07 
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>   How much does that add to the block time?  I'd think that taxi time
>   would be significantly longer with a tug than on engine power.

>Why would it take longer?

Obviously because I'd expect the top speed for the tug to be slower
than the best taxi speeds.

>Unlike a convential tug, which uses a drawbar connected to the front
>wheels, this new tug has a wide slot in the back, going to the center
>of the tug. It backs up until the front wheels are in the middle of the
>tug, and then somehow grabs the front wheels and LIFTS them off the
>ground.

United has at least one at SFO as well.  It does seem to move at a
pretty good clip, but I'd still be surprised if taxiing wasn't at
least potentially faster.

I'd also wonder about a tug that lifts the nose with a fully loaded
aircraft, as opposed to an empty aircraft.  Weight might be all that
much different, since most of the weight is on the mains, but the
balance might be enough different to make the practice questionable.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@netapp.com
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills