737 Blown Across Ramp

wrote:
Mike Beede wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

I've heard this many times and yet can imagine no situation other than
maybe leaving the brakes on for months at a time where it would do anything.

I was told during primary training that if you left the parking brake
on the pads could rust to the disks or drum and make it hard to get
moving. Don't know if that's realistic or not, but chocks and tiedowns
work a lot better for a small plane anyway.

It is realistic and happens to cars in wet weather, but it takes several
days in wet weather for that to happen.

Depending on the parking brake on an airplane for more than a short
time is foolish in that the system wasn't really designed to hold the
airplane in place for days and weeks at a time; that's what chocks are
for.

No, that is what tie downs are for. Chocks are for temporary restraint
only and should not be used alone for long-term restraint.

Matt

JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
RST Engineering wrote:
No chocks, only tiedowns could have kept that aircraft from moving.


Chocks aren't perfect. At my home field we often get violent downbursts
from thunderstorms in the summer. Peak gusts of 60-70 kts aren't unusual. I
use both chocks and tiedowns, and I've found that after a particularly bad
storm, the chocks were often blown away from wheels and the plane was sitting
slightly sideways with the tiedowns pulled tight.

Yes, chocks are temporary restraints and no better on ice than are the
tires and brakes. Tie downs are the only way to go for permanent
restraint (other than a hangar!).

Matt

F. Baum wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:28 pm, "JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote:
No chocks, only tiedowns could have kept that aircraft from moving.
Chocks aren't perfect.

They may not be perfect but close. The chocks typicaly used on
airlines could have prevented this. There are no provisions for tying
down a jet. The 737 manual does recommend leaving the parking brake
set in windy conditions.

Parking brake? Who woulda thunk it? :-)

Matt

On Dec 29, 9:53*am, Matt Whiting wrote:

The main reason I know of that most people park airplanes with the
brakes released is to facilitate movement of the airplane when the owner
isn't around.

Matt,
As it relates to the OP, the parking brake is never relied upon and
the plane is always chocked with or without the brake on. An airline
does not tow an airplane without a qualified person (Either a pilot or
mechanic who has been checked out for towing) in the front seat.
FB

F. Baum writes:

As it relates to the OP, the parking brake is never relied upon and
the plane is always chocked with or without the brake on. An airline
does not tow an airplane without a qualified person (Either a pilot or
mechanic who has been checked out for towing) in the front seat.

I don't understand how a small pair of chocks can hold an aircraft in place.
It seems like a trivial obstacle to overcome when the wind is hitting all
those aerodynamic surfaces.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

F. Baum writes:

As it relates to the OP, the parking brake is never relied upon and
the plane is always chocked with or without the brake on. An airline
does not tow an airplane without a qualified person (Either a pilot
or mechanic who has been checked out for towing) in the front seat.

I don't understand how a small pair of chocks can hold an aircraft in
place.

That's because you don;t fly, fjukkwit.


Bertie

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

I don't understand how a small pair of chocks can hold an aircraft in
place.

Gee, There's a surprise. I'm gonna have a heart attack and die from that
surprise.

On Dec 29, 11:57*am, Matt Whiting wrote:
JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
RST Engineering wrote:
No chocks, only tiedowns could have kept that aircraft from moving.

* Chocks aren't perfect. * At my home field we often get violent downbursts
from thunderstorms in the summer. *Peak gusts of 60-70 kts aren't unusual. *I
use both chocks and tiedowns, and I've found that after a particularly bad
storm, the chocks were often blown away from wheels and the plane was sitting
slightly sideways with the tiedowns pulled tight.

Yes, chocks are temporary restraints and no better on ice than are the
tires and brakes. *Tie downs are the only way to go for permanent
restraint (other than a hangar!).

Matt

Do small planes have parking brakes? I don't remember having ever
seen one that I could set the brakes.

Wil

William Hung wrote in
:

On Dec 29, 11:57*am, Matt Whiting wrote:
JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
RST Engineering wrote:
No chocks, only tiedowns could have kept that aircraft from
moving.

* Chocks aren't perfect. * At my home field we often get violent
dow
nbursts
from thunderstorms in the summer. *Peak gusts of 60-70 kts aren't
unus
ual. *I
use both chocks and tiedowns, and I've found that after a
particularly b
ad
storm, the chocks were often blown away from wheels and the plane
was si
tting
slightly sideways with the tiedowns pulled tight.

Yes, chocks are temporary restraints and no better on ice than are
the tires and brakes. *Tie downs are the only way to go for permanent
restraint (other than a hangar!).

Matt

Do small planes have parking brakes? I don't remember having ever
seen one that I could set the brakes.

Most modern ones do. Lots of old ones too.


Bertie

William Hung wrote:

Do small planes have parking brakes?

Look closer. G