While overall demand for air travel is low at the moment, we are seeing a number of rescue and repatriation flights to pick up stranded travelers, as well as a bunch of extra cargo flights to get supplies around.
Continue reading: Cool: Wamos Air 747 Pushed Back Manually
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Cool - yes / but those people causally waking in-front of the engines was stressing me out!
Here at HNL, Wamos ran two charter 747s that went back to Frankfurt and Madrid. Ferrying the people from a stranded cruise ship that was allowed to come into Honolulu harbor due to mechanical reasons. Only time I heard of direct flights to either airport from HNL. Kinda cool.
Ben - do you reckon it may be a 'powerback' (where the engines run in reverse thrust on the ground, but at very low power, effectively giving the plane a 'reverse' gear), which was common with your beloved (not...) fleet of American MD-80s, especially in places like Dallas and Miami? Therefore the people were there to make sure it was keeping to the centre line, and not actually pushing it? 900,000 lb is a lot for 24 or so people to move...
Ryanair/Spirit will be getting ideas next....would you like to pay extra to not push the plane back? 😛
Actually looks easier than I thought it would be. I bet there were a lot of naysayers when someone suggested it. I would have been one.
I've seen C130s start another by sitting in front and blowing enough air over the second one to air start it, and a C7 Caribou crew rope start theirs like a lawn mower engine. Just to see if it could be done. And if they used reversers there would have been cargo pallets all over the tarmac area. Good solution.
@Andy: Engines usually get started after pushback. The video resolution is low, but I'd guess the engines weren't running at that point, since that would be a major safety hazard.
@David. That reminded me back in the day in the 80's and early 90's when AA used to push back using thrust reversers on MD-80's all the time. Especially at DFW. They never used pushes from tugs.
@Alex, powerbacks are/were only regularly performed on planes with high mounted engines to minimize FOD ingestion, so I doubt this was a powerback.
They probably didn't have a 747-400 tow bar. Tow bars are rated for each aircraft differently and are designed to give way at a specific loading to prevent damaging the plane itself in case the tug operator makes a mistake. Using a 787 tow bar on a 747 would likely cause it to snap under a normal pushback. Conversely using a 747 tow bar on a 787, while possible, would not give way before the 787 nose gear is damaged if the tug operator makes an error.
One of the cool things about Porter departures from Toronto City airport - planes reverse propeller pitch to back away from the terminal.
And now that question which has plagued us for so long now finally has been answered!
@Alex, "900,000 lb is a lot for 24 or so people to move…" It might be easier than you think, since rolling friction << sliding friction. High school physics haha
One person can push a 747 back. The airplane is so well balanced and engineered it is very easy to get moving by just one person. I've done it but I must say the first time I saw it done I was amazed.
Remember a QF 707 at SFO who couldn't wait for pushback so powerbacked on reverse thrust, and blew out the windows of the terminal! Lucky: might find a clip?
At my hometown airport in Monterey, CA, back in the 90s, the United 757s and A320s would typically push back with one engine in reverse thrust. Fun to watch.
Back in the 80's, powerbacks were common at Port Columbus Airport (CMH) on TWA. It wasn't until much later that I learned that it wasn't universally done.
Bring Back the MD 80’s my favorite, from seating 2 starboard, now with middle seats ‘socialized’ back to 2 on port side..these recently ‘retired’ aircraft can fill the void experienced by the 737 MAX debacle...bring back my Fav AA 1087 !