GOLDHOFER

[Hopeful]

Well I am a AP mechanic and I only needed about a minute to look at the set up to tell you I would not ever step foot in one of the things. You see the truth is you do not need to be a AP or GSE mechanic to know that they are dangerous.

My Father was in the Trucking business and I can tell first hand that trailers have brakes for a host of reasons not the least of which is stopping, the configuration used in all of these tugs that I have seen is that of tractor trailer using the nose wheel in place of the fifth wheel on the truck the problem there is the nose wheel tires are free to rotate and under a large enough load do and allow the ass end of the tractor to lift off the groung normally this would be prevented by trailer braking but since the trailer aka {Boeing 777} has no braking all that energy is transfered to the point of connection between it and the tractor. No truck driver I have ever met would dream of pulling something that weighs that much with a tractor so small without trailer brakes.

Of course this just the opinion of one AP who I assure wil never drive the current tug!!!

With all due respect to the trucking business and namely truck divers, aircraft being towed by goldhofers are no where being done at the speeds tractor trailers are moving. The momentum of a fully loaded tractor trailer barreling down the interstate and having to immediatley stop is quite difference than a 200 ton 777 being towed at 15 miles per hour...

What is at issue here is that the "advertised" performance of these machines is now in question.

 

[Hopeful]

But, it appears M&E has decided to operate as their own company within the company once again, because nobody without an A&P could possibly understand the complexity involved in picking a piece of adequate ground equipment...

Who do you suggest M&E consult with to purchase ground equipment designed to move aircraft at higher speeds than traditional tugs? Flight Attendants? Cabin Service?

Since this is not your first "dig" at a mechanic with an A&P license, if it were as "menial and trivial" as you might think, then why is it issued by the government? It's called liability, my friend. the company can wash its hands when a mechanic screws up and caused an accident and maybe a few deaths.

I know mechanics who were called to testify because they were involved in the 1979 DC10 crash in ORD. Can your job cause death, Eric?

 

[The Foreigner]

Who do you suggest M&E consult with to purchase ground equipment designed to move aircraft at higher speeds than traditional tugs? Flight Attendants? Cabin Service?

Since this is not your first "dig" at a mechanic with an A&P license, if it were as "menial and trivial" as you might think, then why is it issued by the government? It's called liability, my friend. the company can wash its hands when a mechanic screws up and caused an accident and maybe a few deaths.

I know mechanics who were called to testify because they were involved in the 1979 DC10 crash in ORD. Can your job cause death, Eric?

Oh boy now you lit the fuse, the stewardesses are coming for you

 

[Hopeful]

Oh boy now you lit the fuse, the stewardesses are coming for you

Actually, they'll be coming for you for calling them stewardesses!

 

[aapitbull]

With all due respect to the trucking business and namely truck divers, aircraft being towed by goldhofers are no where being done at the speeds tractor trailers are moving. The momentum of a fully loaded tractor trailer barreling down the interstate and having to immediatley stop is quite difference than a 200 ton 777 being towed at 15 miles per hour...

What is at issue here is that the "advertised" performance of these machines is now in question.

Actually they are very similar the average tractor trailer weighs 40,000 to 60,000 lbs traveling at 60 mph is very comparable to 600,000 lb aircraft at 15 to 20 mph however none of this is the point the point is with no braking ablity in the trailer in this case Boeing 777 it tends to push or lift the tractor which in most cases will cause the tractor to jack knife. This Goldhofer does not weigh enough or have a long enough wheel base or enough braking power to stop the weight in question.

There are tractors large enough to do the job but for whatever reason AA chose not to buy them however no matter how large the tractor under emergency stopping a large aircraft with no braking of its own will be a bear to keep the nose pointed in the direction of choice hence trailer brakes!

 

[Bob Owens]

Actually they are very similar the average tractor trailer weighs 40,000 to 60,000 lbs traveling at 60 mph is very comparable to 600,000 lb aircraft at 15 to 20 mph however none of this is the point the point is with no braking ablity in the trailer in this case Boeing 777 it tends to push or lift the tractor which in most cases will cause the tractor to jack knife. This Goldhofer does not weigh enough or have a long enough wheel base or enough braking power to stop the weight in question.

There are tractors large enough to do the job but for whatever reason AA chose not to buy them however no matter how large the tractor under emergency stopping a large aircraft with no braking of its own will be a bear to keep the nose pointed in the direction of choice hence trailer brakes!

Even the 10 wheeler I used to drive had trolley brakes which would allow me to apply brakes to the rear wheels only and allow me to steer out of a skid. When we got this thing the issue of no brakerider was brought up, and ignored.

 

[TWU informer]

There are tractors large enough to do the job but for whatever reason AA chose not to buy them however no matter how large the tractor under emergency stopping a large aircraft with no braking of its own will be a bear to keep the nose pointed in the direction of choice hence trailer brakes!

The reason appears to be that the decision makers were too busy calculating the Stock Award Bonus amounts, and just bought the cheapest available of the 2-3 tugs looked at during the process.

I say we double their stock bonus awards next year to insure that such superior decision makers do not dart off to another airline an create problems there. If they were to leave, we may actually be able to recover at least some of the farm we gave away in 2003. And we all know the Mechanic and Related group no longer needs a piece of the farm.

 

[eolesen]

Who do you suggest M&E consult with to purchase ground equipment designed to move aircraft at higher speeds than traditional tugs?

Hmmm... How about the guys who evaluate all of the other pushout tractor purchases?... Why is it OK for HDQ-GSE to spec out what needs to be used for the terminal? Picking out ground equipment isn't rocket science by any means.

Since this is not your first "dig" at a mechanic with an A&P license

Oh, come down off the pedestal. I'm not saying that A&P's are stupid by any means. I believe the opposite, whether or not you chose to believe it.

It's a dig at TUL management. Turning a wrench doesn't qualify you to know how to lead, how to make a sound purchasing decision, or any number of other decisions that the L6's and above are expected to be capable of doing outside the realm of touching metal. That's the problem I've had with TUL and M&E management for the past ten years -- lot of guys who would have never otherwise made it into a management position if it hadn't been for the fact they held an A&P.

SOC management had the same problem for a very, very long time. If you didn't hold a dispatch or pilot license, there were only two or three management jobs within the SOC organization you could qualify for. That eventually changed.

Y'all complain about how nothing changes within M&E. That's because nobody in a position to actually effect change has been in an organization outside the one they're leading.

To use the buzzword, it's the lack of diversity within M&E from a business standpoint that results in a lot of the problems within that particular division. Other divisions (even Flight) have the benefit of choosing people for management positions who have worked in other areas of the company, and that brings in other experiences to help influence what goes on.

 

[TWU informer]

It's a dig at TUL management. Turning a wrench doesn't qualify you to know how to lead, how to make a sound purchasing decision, or any number of other decisions that the L6's and above are expected to be capable of doing outside the realm of touching metal. That's the problem I've had with TUL and M&E management for the past ten years -- lot of guys who would have never otherwise made it into a management position if it hadn't been for the fact they held an A&P.

It's even worse than that in Tulsa "E"!

For the last 20+ years in Tulsa, management has been an "undesireable" job to have. The smart A&P's would never give up their seniority and overtime pay to leave the union and join undesireable ranks.

From Carmine Romano down to the latest promoted Supervisor, you have either those without much intelligence, those that screw-up everything they touch with a wrench, or worse a person with a huge ego to feed and seeking a power trip. For sure the best available have not even applied for the job for many years. Maybe o'le Fred Cleveland will figure this out soon and do something about it, but I suspect the Union will and already has protected those that never deserved the job to begin with. yes, the union even protects the worthless management in exchange for protecting those in the union ranks.

I have given up hope of ever having superior management and accountability during my career at AA.
It not just the L6 and above "E", it is the first level to the top.

 

[The Goose]

Actually they are very similar the average tractor trailer weighs 40,000 to 60,000 lbs traveling at 60 mph is very comparable to 600,000 lb aircraft at 15 to 20 mph however none of this is the point the point is with no braking ablity in the trailer in this case Boeing 777 it tends to push or lift the tractor which in most cases will cause the tractor to jack knife. This Goldhofer does not weigh enough or have a long enough wheel base or enough braking power to stop the weight in question.

There are tractors large enough to do the job but for whatever reason AA chose not to buy them however no matter how large the tractor under emergency stopping a large aircraft with no braking of its own will be a bear to keep the nose pointed in the direction of choice hence trailer brakes!

Just so you guys will stop arguing, I've done some simple math for you.

To calculate kinetic energy, the formula is .5M (mass) X V2 (velocity in feet per second squared). Mass is defined a weight in pounds/32.

A 60,000 lb. semi at 60 mph (88 fps) = ((60,000 / 32) / 2) = 937.5 X (88**) = 7744 X 937.5= 7,260,000 ft. pounds of energy, or the ability to push a 7,260,000 lb. weight 1 foot.


On the other hand, the airplane stores a tad less energy: (These are your numbers given above)

((600,000 / 32) / 2) = 9375
For velocity, I'll use the given 20 mph or approx. 30 fps.

(30**) = 900 X 9375 = 7,030,800 ft. lbs. of energy. Just a tad less than the semi.

Looking at these numbers, I doubt if anything Goldhofer sells would be adequate to tow a 777 at 20 mph with no braking on the towed aircraft, or maybe they never thought any airline would be that stupid - welcome to American.

The formula I used is the same as what's used by ammunition companies like Remington to calculate projectile energy at different velocities. It's reasonably accurate with anything that has mass and motion.

 

[AMFAMAN]

Just so you guys will stop arguing, I've done some simple math for you.

To calculate kinetic energy, the formula is .5M (mass) X V2 (velocity in feet per second squared). Mass is defined a weight in pounds/32.

A 60,000 lb. semi at 60 mph (88 fps) = ((60,000 / 32) / 2) = 937.5 X (88**) = 7744 X 937.5= 7,260,000 ft. pounds of energy, or the ability to push a 7,260,000 lb. weight 1 foot.


On the other hand, the airplane stores a tad less energy: (These are your numbers given above)

((600,000 / 32) / 2) = 9375
For velocity, I'll use the given 20 mph or approx. 30 fps.

(30**) = 900 X 9375 = 7,030,800 ft. lbs. of energy. Just a tad less than the semi.

Looking at these numbers, I doubt if anything Goldhofer sells would be adequate to tow a 777 at 20 mph with no braking on the towed aircraft, or maybe they never thought any airline would be that stupid - welcome to American.

The formula I used is the same as what's used by ammunition companies like Remington to calculate projectile energy at different velocities. It's reasonably accurate with anything that has mass and motion.

Nice job with the math...and 20 mph is the advertised speed, but 18 mph was the norm except when going downhill we would hit 20 mph.

 

[The Goose]

Nice job with the math...and 20 mph is the advertised speed, but 18 mph was the norm except when going downhill we would hit 20 mph.

Thanks - math and drinking beer was all I was ever good at.

 

[aapitbull]

Nice job with the math...and 20 mph is the advertised speed, but 18 mph was the norm except when going downhill we would hit 20 mph.

I yield to your math goose. to borrow a line from Ralph Nader UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED!!

 

[DFWPRIUS]

Thank you for math. 6th of April the numbers work out to Appox.

4,096,681.25 lbs if I am correct.

7AD + Fuel = 419,500 lbs

17 MPH

 

[AMFAMAN]

So I hear that the radioman in the original accident, not the management re-enactment, has had his airport badge returned today and is back at work. No word on the driver yet...