737 Blown Across Ramp

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:5d5a8261-1459-465f-9e7e-
:

On Dec 27, 10:32*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

The best reason I can think of for not relying on the parking brake in a
wind is that they are not very reliable. Schwinn could make a better
arrangement than you see on most Cessnas, for instance.
Brakes are next to useless in very high winds anyway. After all, if the
wing is being lifted....

I've never had occasion to stand on an airplane's brake but when I use
the same amount of foot pressure on my Mooney as in my Saturn the
Saturn will stop in 1/2 the distance.


Well, you have twice the wheels, dontcha?

Bertie

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.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200712/1

On Dec 28, 12:05*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:5d5a8261-1459-465f-9e7e-
:

On Dec 27, 10:32*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

The best reason I can think of for not relying on the parking brake in a
wind is that they are not very reliable. Schwinn could make a better
arrangement than you see on most Cessnas, for instance.
Brakes are next to useless in very high winds anyway. After all, if the
wing is being lifted....

I've never had occasion to stand on an airplane's brake but when I use
the same amount of foot pressure on my Mooney as in my Saturn the
Saturn will stop in 1/2 the distance.

Well, you have twice the wheels, dontcha?

But about 1/2 the weight. The Saturn weights 4300 lbs.
-Robert

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.



--
Message posted via AviationKB.comhttp://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200712/1

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
The best reason I can think of for not relying on the parking brake in a
wind is that they are not very reliable. Schwinn could make a better
arrangement than you see on most Cessnas, for instance.
Brakes are next to useless in very high winds anyway. After all, if the
wing is being lifted....

Not to mention we're talking winter here. I've been at the controls of a
172, engine idling, foot brakes fully applied, and been pushed sideways
across an icy ramp by the wind. Found out later a Citation (I think -
some small bizjet) had slid off a taxiway. In Iowa, no less. Proving it
not only sucks there, it also blows...

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
:

On Dec 28, 12:05*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
news:5d5a8261-1459-465f-9e7e-

:

On Dec 27, 10:32*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

The best reason I can think of for not relying on the parking
brake in
a
wind is that they are not very reliable. Schwinn could make a
better arrangement than you see on most Cessnas, for instance.
Brakes are next to useless in very high winds anyway. After all,
if the

wing is being lifted....

I've never had occasion to stand on an airplane's brake but when I
use the same amount of foot pressure on my Mooney as in my Saturn
the Saturn will stop in 1/2 the distance.

Well, you have twice the wheels, dontcha?

But about 1/2 the weight. The Saturn weights 4300 lbs.
-Robert


He heh. I was only kidding. it's an apples oranges thing anyway.

Bertie

Rich Ahrens wrote in
ouse.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
The best reason I can think of for not relying on the parking brake
in a wind is that they are not very reliable. Schwinn could make a
better arrangement than you see on most Cessnas, for instance.
Brakes are next to useless in very high winds anyway. After all, if
the wing is being lifted....

Not to mention we're talking winter here. I've been at the controls of
a 172, engine idling, foot brakes fully applied, and been pushed
sideways across an icy ramp by the wind.


Wow, you're almost like a seaplane in those conditions.


Found out later a Citation (I
think - some small bizjet) had slid off a taxiway. In Iowa, no less.
Proving it not only sucks there, it also blows...

Bwawhahwhahwhhahwh!

Bertie

"F. Baum" wrote in
:

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.


hmm, I think you may be mistaken about the tie down provisions. I've never
seen anthing except the tug/towbar thng you mentioned, but I think some may
have a spot where a ring can be screwed in , maybe where the hardpoints for
the jacks go. I'll ask the guys next chance I get.

Bertie

F. Baum wrote:
On Dec 27, 4:18 pm, "Bob Gardner" wrote:
While its possible that someone does it, I'm not aware of any operator
that sets the brake on aircraft when its not occupied. Usually chalks
work just fine and are easier to move when you need to tow. In smaller
aircraft there are other reasons to avoid setting the brake, like
changes in outside pressure could burst the brake seals.

-Robert

Robert, out of everyone so far you are the closest. The brakes are
released as soon as the chalks in signal is recieved. This is mainly
done to facilitate brake cooling because airlines typicaly work with
45 minute turn times and leaving them set would greatly increase QTA
The brake temp actually peaks about 10 minutes after landing .the fuse
plugs can melt if the brake are left set . The 737 has a brake
acumulator which will sufice for several parking brake applications,
but chalks are still used for safety reasons . Just before push the
process is reversed, The parting brake is set before the tug is hooked
up and the chalks removed. Someone ask about brake pressures; the A&B
hydraulics run at 3000 LBS which is reduced to 300 at the gear (In the
event of a leak this prevents a total loss of fluid) I was not able to
open the link but I hope this helps.
FB

Chalks. Ha, ha, ha... That is hilarious.

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.

That is much more plausible than the "temperature change will blow the
seals excuse." I agree that tiedowns are best and chocks are fine for
most conditions, but aren't as good as the brakes being set. If a gust
of wind causes a chock jump, then the plane will keep on moving with
nothing to restrain it. If the brakes are set, then even a gust that
slides the tires won't keep the airplane moving once the gust subsides.

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