Thread: Heathrow CC
View Single Post
  #16   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 05:01 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Recliner[_4_] Recliner[_4_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 895
Default Heathrow CC

Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 23/09/2019 16:04, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 14:58:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-expected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.


Isn't that what those yellow drones someone linked to last week are for?


They don't fly, so they're not drones.

They're robotugs called Mototok Spacer 8600s. They aren't powerful
enough to push back wide-bodied jets, though a larger model might. In
any case, they don't replace any jet fuel, as pushback would otherwise
be done by hefty diesel tugs. So they save some diesel fuel and fumes,
but not aviation fuel.

But it seems obvious that the best solution would be some kind of
(presumably) electrical tug that could take a plane from the gate to the
point where it needs to switch to using its own engines for takeoff.
This might require some taxiway optimisation (as at the last point
before turning on to the runway the planes would presumably spend
somewhat longer there), and some way for the tugs to get out of the way
(but a smaller taxiway for them to return via would be perfectly easy to
do).


Yes, ideas along these lines are often suggested, but I guess the economics
don't yet work. I'm not sure how long jet engines need to run before
take-off — perhaps quite a bit of the taxi time?


If you took the idea further then you could considerably optimise the
airport - planes would only need to be at gates for when passengers were
embarking/disembarking and there could be dedicated cleaning and
refueling areas where planes could be taken at the relevant times. Yes
- I realise that for shorthaul there are often very quick turnarounds,
but at LHR for example there seems to be a poor utilisation of gates in
a lot of circumstances.


They do move long haul planes away from the gates during layovers. For
example, you can normally see a Qantas A380 parked near the tank farm
during the day. If you look on Google Maps you'll see six planes parked in
that area, and another near the control tower. There's also a parking area
to the east of T2 with room for about eight aircraft.

But moving the aircraft to and from the remote stands costs money and
disrupts other aircraft movements, so is only worth doing if there's a
shortage of gates.