Talk:Pushback (aviation)

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Still needs work

Per Wikipedia:German-English_translation_requests#de:Pushback - This still needs some work. I'm not an aviator, and I'm not totally sure what a de:Hubschlepper is (could be a tug?), but they're quicker than pushback tractors. I also still need sources for the broken tow bars and forgotten bypass pin thing, I know... JanesDaddy 06:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There is a "2.1" but no "2.2" in the contents.
There is no reference to other processes/equipment, such as Virgin Airlines "Taxibot" (which was dropped because it caused to much shock to the landing gear every time it moved the plane), or to "WheelTug" (www.WheelTug.com)

Needs updating

I've seen fancy new remote control pushback at Adelaide Airport - the tractor is U-shaped and seems to clamp on to one of the main wheels. The operator uses a wireless remote control and stands back from the aircraft, leaving the tractor on the taxiway until the aircraft has taxied away (after disconnecting and rolling the tractor back a few metres first). I'm not sure how the plane is steered. From what I've seen only Virgin Blue use this method, Qantas use conventional pushback tractors. --59.167.21.107 11:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

weight and materials?

i cannot see no 500lb minicar pushing a 30T jet aircraft,

would this mean these tugs are about half the weight of the aircraft or proportionate to maintain gripage on the ground as the aircraft is being moved? Murakumo-Elite (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the tractor does need to be heavy to have enough weight. I've brought in some more data on this. The largest tractors weight up to 55 tons. Rpvdk (talk) 07:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig?

I feel like this article could use some disambiguation between pushback (procedure) and pushback (support equipment). The article seems to be focused on the equipment, but mentions the procedure in passing. I feel like it should delegate one of these topics, and not try to handle them both. 70.247.169.197 (talk) 00:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Pinnaclepushback.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claim

Being electric rather than internal combustion-powered, electric tugs are low-emission which is a major advantage for environmentally-conscious operators...

That is an often-repeated fallacy about electrically-powered tugs. The tug itself may be zero- or low-emission, but the same can't be said about the generating station whose output is required to charge the tug's batteries.

The primary incentive for using an electrically-powered tug is its relatively low maintenance requirements compared to a tug using internal combustion power. On the other hand, batteries have a finite life and replacement costs are high. Also, the most powerful electric tugs are not at the power level of a typical gas- or Diesel-powered unit. So the argument in favor of an electric tug is weak, methinks, especially if it is expected to move the most massive wide-bodied aircraft, such as a loaded 747 freighter.

216.152.18.131 (talk) 17:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 July 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) {{replyto|SilverLocust}} (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pushback → Pushback (aviation) – Not the primary topic, see Google Scholar results. Should be a dab page listing this topic, pushback (migration), and backlash with a link to wiktionary as well. Aviation pushback is not suitable natural disambiguation because it isn't commonly used. (t · c) buidhe 21:16, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support There does not seem to be a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:14, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pushback (disambiguation). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:14, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Line lenght?

Pushback line lenght 178.149.95.186 (talk) 14:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]