Pushback!? We Don't Need No Stinking Pushback!

Art VanDelay said:
We used to do it all the time with the MD-80s and DC-9s. You just haven't been around long enough.
Click to expand...
Guess not... I have never seen a power back by a jet from a gate. I knew it happened in the distant past, but had no clue about it since the advent of jet bridges, tugs, and other equipment that could get blown to pieces.
 
Larry in TN said:
Power-backs were standard procedure for American Airlines on the 727 and MD80s in the 1990s and earlier.

You have to have OpsSpecs approval for each aircraft type and each specific gate.
Click to expand...
Indeed.... But I don't think anyone has those OP specs any longer. If they do, they certainly don't exercise them.
 
Back at my last job, we were authorized to power back from the gate with CP approval. I never actually did one, but it was a popular PC oral topic - one that I still remember. No more than 1.3 EPR and no more than 1.2 once the plane is moving, TRs needed to be operative, do not touch the ****ing brakes*, and the ramp area needed to be contaminant free.

*I think the manual worded it a little differently. ;)
 
flyingron said:
I never knew the reason for the hatch over the pilot's seat was to you could see where you were going when taxiing backwards. I always thought it was for emergencies when the pilot turns to the copilot and says "I'm going for help, you stay here."
Click to expand...
The Gulfstream 1 has a hatch, but no prop reverse. It's the emergency exit for ditching.
 
Kritchlow said:
Guess not... I have never seen a power back by a jet from a gate. I knew it happened in the distant past, but had no clue about it since the advent of jet bridges, tugs, and other equipment that could get blown to pieces.
Click to expand...
After numerous aircraft being put on their tails, maybe everyone (almost) has learned?
 
I've seen more than one lengthy delay because the tug broke or none was available. Would have neen nice if the option to power back had been available.
 
Power-backs went out of favor as fuel prices rose as the power-back requires both engines to be started at the gate which eliminates single-engine taxi. Once the airports all had plenty of tugs and tow-bars there really wasn't any benefit in the power-back. The push-back was faster since you don't have to wait at the gate for the engines to be started.
 
Larry in TN said:
Power-backs went out of favor as fuel prices rose as the power-back requires both engines to be started at the gate which eliminates single-engine taxi. Once the airports all had plenty of tugs and tow-bars there really wasn't any benefit in the power-back. The push-back was faster since you don't have to wait at the gate for the engines to be started.
Click to expand...
Yeah
weilke said:
I've seen more than one lengthy delay because the tug broke or none was available. Would have neen nice if the option to power back had been available.
Click to expand...
But could you imagine a power back today with all the equipment in the area? We'd be blowing crap through the concourse windows.
 
Kritchlow said:
But could you imagine a power back today with all the equipment in the area? We'd be blowing crap through the concourse windows.
Click to expand...

Is there more equipment at a gate today than there was 30 years ago ?
 
Pilawt said:
I remember in the late 1960s watching the early Twin Otters of Aero Commuter (later Golden West Airlines) back out of tight parking spaces at cramped Fullerton Municipal Airport, like a soccer mom's minivan backing out of a parking space at Safeway.
Click to expand...

On some narrow runways with no parallel taxiway, I'd have to do the three point turn at the end of the runway, then back up a bit to get full length. The Twin Otter was good for that.
 
weilke said:
Is there more equipment at a gate today than there was 30 years ago ?
Click to expand...
My guess is yes, especially since now they don't move it for power backs. In front of the airplane seems to be storage for everything from tugs, to rampers sitting areas with tables and chairs.
Not sure if 30 years ago airplanes were parked further away with stairs, vs now upclose with jet bridges. Not sure exactly when the bridges came into fashion.
 
Kritchlow said:
Guess not... I have never seen a power back by a jet from a gate. I knew it happened in the distant past, but had no clue about it since the advent of jet bridges, tugs, and other equipment that could get blown to pieces.
Click to expand...

Distant past? Jeez, were the 90's that long ago? :D
 
The airlines, usually one step away from bankruptcy due to bad management and absurd fuel prices are not about to crank both engines with the fuel prices of four or five years ago. With out government bailouts some years ago, many of the majors would be gone. With fuel prices as they are now they should have plenty of money for tugs that work well. You can bet fuel prices will go way up again but gradually so as not to spook the public too badly.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
The airlines, usually one step away from bankruptcy due to bad management and absurd fuel prices are not about to crank both engines with the fuel prices of four or five years ago. With out government bailouts some years ago, many of the majors would be gone. With fuel prices as they are now they should have plenty of money for tugs that work well. You can bet fuel prices will go way up again but gradually so as not to spook the public too badly.
Click to expand...

The "bailouts" were to make up for losses incurred when the government ordered all the airlines grounded following 9/11, as well as the cost of onerous security measures required upon restart.

There were no bailouts comparable to what happened with banks and car manufacturers. The Feds have been quite happy to let airlines go bankrupt and/or go out of business or get bought out and shrunk.

Except to the extent the government controls drilling, fracking, taxes and pipelines, they do not control fuel prices, either.
 
Last edited:
Mason said:
The "bailouts" were to make up for losses incurred when the government ordered all the airlines grounded following 9/11, as well as the cost of onerous security measures required upon restart.

There were no bailouts comparable to what happened with banks and car manufacturers. The Feds have been quite happy to let airlines go bankrupt and/or go out of business or get bought out and shrunk.

Except to the extent the government controls drilling, fracking, taxes and pipelines, they do not control fuel prices, either.
Click to expand...
Wrong. This was before 9-11 and I remember that american ( just for example) paid the lawyers over 400 mill. ( read taxpayers money.) in their day, these bailouts were huge. It had absolutely nothing to do with 9-11. Also important to remember it was government funding that started the airlines in the first place and they provide major funding to every major airport that exists today and many many smaller ones, not to mention state funding!
 
Americans bankruptcy was long after 9-11 so it too was not due to anything related to 9-11. As for the auto company's if they had not , along with the banks been bailed we would have had a full fledged depression . It was the government that finally ended the great depression. It was called WW 2.
 
Funding of airports comes largely from airline ticket taxes, airline lease payments and landing fees, state grants paid thru fuel taxes, and other user fees. Government did help get airports started, same as they did for railroads, highways, rural electrification, and other public utility deals.

Many airlines did get government help starting up, often thru air mail contracts. There were subsidies from the essential air service program to serve unprofitable cities.

If you have any proof of pre-9/11 "bailouts" how about providing a cite?
 
Mason said:
If you have any proof of pre-9/11 "bailouts" how about providing a cite?
Click to expand...
How about not.

The two of you who have hijacked this thread need to remember the Hangar Talk rules.

NOTE: Politics and religion and any other topic likely to become highly charged are not allowed, and threads may be deleted or closed if they start or trend, respectively, towards "spin" topics.
Click to expand...

We are serious about this. Posts will be deleted an infractions given if it doesn't stop.
 
Last edited:
As I mentioned earlier, ValuJet did them in ATL in old DC9s, then they may have done them with the new 717s (now Delta 717s) but not sure about the 717s.
 
Kritchlow said:
My guess is yes, especially since now they don't move it for power backs. In front of the airplane seems to be storage for everything from tugs, to rampers sitting areas with tables and chairs.
Not sure if 30 years ago airplanes were parked further away with stairs, vs now upclose with jet bridges. Not sure exactly when the bridges came into fashion.
Click to expand...
I'm just a caveman, but I've been on many jets that powered out of the gate, and I can't say when the last time was, but it was most definitely later than the '90s.
 
Lindberg said:
I'm just a caveman, but I've been on many jets that powered out of the gate, and I can't say when the last time was, but it was most definitely later than the '90s.
Click to expand...
Okay. I haven't seen it in recent years, but perhaps others have.
 
My grandfather used to tell stories about WWII crews backing up 4-engine bombers (that don't have beta props) by judicious use of brakes and alternating powering up the outboard engines. (left brake, power up #1, pivot on left wheel, right brake, power up #4, pivot on right wheel, repeat as needed).

--Carlos V.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top