United Aircraft Parking Procedures

[shon7]

I was waiting for a flight yesterday and noticed that United did not use any ramp agents to guide their A319, 320 and their Boeing 737's to the parking ramp. Is this true for most airlines or is this peculiar to United. Also, if it is possible to not use agents to guide the aircraft to the parking gate why do other airlines use such procedures at all?

 

[Boz]

Exactly right, certain airports are equiped with the automatic guidance systems, allowing the flight crew to be guided into the ramp by simply following the signals and lights provided.

 

[Bill Mostellar]

Is this true for most airlines or is this peculiar to United. Also, if it is possible to not use agents to guide the aircraft to the parking gate why do other airlines use such procedures at all?

I don't recall ever taxiing to the gate without wing-walkers at Delta. In fact, I've had to stop on the ramp numerous times waiting for the ground crew to finish their "huddle." ("Ladies and Gentleman, please stay in your seats...").

We do have lines that mark the acceptable boundaries for ground equipment and carts, but the gate itself is usually in the way (not prepositioned for the next aircraft).

I guess it all boils down to safety vs. cost. An airline could save money allowing the crew to self park, but then the passengers would be standing in the aisle waiting to deplane. On the other hand, the cost(s) associated with incidents on the ramp (delays, FAA, etc) might be more expensive than getting the ground crew there on time.

I wish you success!

 

[F/O]

Can anybody ever remember which gates at O'Hare have Accu-park? I wish they'd put it in at all the gates or get rid of it all together. The parking systems are entirely non-standardized at the moment.

 

[KC-10 Driver]

Self parking is very common at many major international airports -- especially (in my experience) in Europe. As a 767 F/O, I have seen it used many times and there are no safety concerns in my mind. It works well.

 

[GuppyPuppy]

The parking procedures at UA include:

1. Taking all B737-200 airplanes and flying them to the desert for long term storage.

2. Taking all B727 aircraft and flying them to the desert for long term storage...then selling them to to a low cost carrier (Pan Am).

3. Taking several (not sure of the total number) B747-400 aircraft and flying them to the desert for long term storage.

Sorry for the sarcasm....it just ticks me off that the company dropped so many routes out of LAX and SFO last fall. These include LAX to SLC, OAK, SMF, SJC, SAN, PHX and TUS. Even our new CEO stated that United may have cut back too much last fall.

Also SFO to SBA....SFO-GEG was dropped completely before 9/11. All these routes are now served solely by RJ's, er....SJ's, with a single mainline flight on a couple of LAX routes.

Too bad ALPA ever let express carriers fly the RJ's.

Cheers!

GP

 

[acaTerry]

GuppyPuppy,
You forgot where you came from! Though I am no longer an express pilot (thank God), I do not share your view on the RJ issue. While at ACA I flew the J32 and J41, but never the RJ. And as a 4 year "prop trash pilot" I can not count the times we heard about how "I'll never fly United again, these **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** props", or "is this thing safe?" etc etc.
Sorry pal, but the customer has spoken: they hate props. And you can expect to lose your job by a loss of feed by the softspined public who can't handle flying in props any longer, not by the additional feed created byy the RJ.
I can see the issue with 70 and 90 seat RJ's. But there is no PROVEN evidence that the 50 seat RJ's are killing your/our livelihood. In fact, the RJ's are what are keeping many airlines (that is mainline) alive at all right now. Don't think for a second that your 737 with 25 seats full per flight is going to cut it.
I'll bet my big toe that if you were still in the regionals today that you'd be all too happy to fly those RJ's and actually make a decent living.
Thanks alot for stomping all over the guys who are still "down there" beneath you. Nice to know that someone still looks downward. I'll bet you're a joy for a new FO who flew RJ's. What do you do to them? Bust their ball$ too?
You guys were always happy to take a ride home on that RJ. How about we just get rid of them all so you can have no room to ride home. And then the customers will be happy again to be on props. And the extra hundreds of pax fed to UAL by the extra seats will disappear too. THEN you can say the RJ cost you a job. Gawd, this feels like the ALPA boards!

 

[GuppyPuppy]

Response to acaTerry

This is gonna be fun!

First of all I'm not your pal.

Second, I have not forgotten from where I came. My career has included flight instructing, bush flying, tour flying, regional/commuter flying, night cargo, and a major passenger airline. In fact, I am on leave and am again flying "where I came from".

Third, I take offense that you would call yourself a "prop trash pilot". I am flying an airplane with a propeller in my job right now. However, it only has one propeller. Maybe I'm only half the "prop trash pilot" you are.

Fourth...You must be psychic. To know that I am a "joy for a new F/O who flew RJ's". Wow! Maybe I can try being psychic too...You have a chip on your shoulder.

Fifth...How is it that I am "stomping on the guys 'down there' beneath [me]". The only reason that I look down on most people is that I am 6'7" tall and that is the only way I can see them! Please, grow up dude...listen to some Bob Marley and chill out.

Sixth...I completely understand that "[my] 737 with 25 seats full per flight isn't going to cut it". On most of those routes that I mentioned in the previous post those flights had well more than a full RJ load. And, on most of those routes we compete with Southwest, Delta, American, America West and Alaska who all fly mainline equipment. Now, as a passenger, what would you rather fly on...an RJ or a 737?

Seventh...Maybe I need to clarify my previous statement of "I wish ALPA never let express carriers fly the RJ's". OK, I can't get much more clear than this...I WISH THE RJ'S WERE FLOWN BY MAINLINE UNITED!!! Then, since UA is replacing 737's with RJ's, we wouldn't have 844 pilots on furlough!

Eighth..."You guys were always happy to take a ride home on that RJ". You better believe it. If I'm going home I don't care if it is an RJ, 747, a flea infested cargo plane, a Cherokee 6, a train full of smelly hikers, the back of a Geo Metro (I've done 'em all)....so long as I'm going home!

Ninth...You can keep your big toe, Sgt. Hulka.

Tenth....Lighten up, Francis!

Cheers!

GP

 

[acaTerry]

Reply to GuppyPuppy

Suprised you caught on to the Big Toe......
Obviously, we'll never agree on this thing. It's going to be a hot issue forever for a lot of people. My questions to you remain--
1. Would you turn down the RJ if you were still at the Reg'ls?
2. Why do you guys give $hit to the regional pilots?--It ain't their fault! Yes you do..maybe not YOU, but many mainliners.
3. Wat's the big deal with 50 seaters? Horizon is an example of this...the Q400 (a DASH) is well over 50 seats and flies routes that Alaska shares. Nobody complains. But put a 50 seat jet there, and it hits the fan. I totally see the issue over larger jets (if you PM me your e-mail I'll send you a picture that'll have you rolling, but you probably already saw it on the ALPA boards, I have not been to them for a while. BTW, don't worry, I'm not the kind to send a virus or anything, even if I knew how). Back to the subject, I can see how anything bigger than 50 seats is not a "regional jet". But I don't see the harm in a 50 seater. Besides, at ACA the type aircraft for route was dictated by UAL. Not ACA. Without that RJ, some markets would have been totally lost to UAL.
4. Most of the West Coast markets you said UAL had to compete with AWA,SWA, etc are not the fault of the express carrier. The only reason AWA, SWA and the others beat you guys is pricing. Really, if prices were the same, many would take UAL over the low fare airlines.
5. "Prop Trash" was a term given to us by a UAL pilot I tried to jump with. Long story short---denied JS because "you prop tash guys are killing us with those RJ's". I wrote a pass instead (this was back when we had to pay for passes). I hope that guy is reading this.....BUT, the overwhelming number of UAL pilots were swell about giving JS. (thanks guys)
6. Most mainline pilots would not have anything to do with flying the RJ's. Too small, pay is too low. Maybe for some FO's it's a way to get a quicker upgrade (if there is such a thing at the majors). But bottom line is that a regional pilot has every **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** right to work for a decent wage.
7. No need to go ballistic. Maybe I walked you into it, but the attitude that nobody but major airline pilots deserve to fly equipment that pays enough to live on is unwelcome. Sorry, this is America and there is something called free enterprise and competition. No need to run a whipsaw, but no need to keep others down either. You can most of the pie, but at least let someone else have a piece too. The day of the 19 year old single pilot is over. The guys at the regionals have bills too.
8. "Staple to the Botoom" may be the answer.....

Fly Safe,
Terry

 

[Kjet]

The parking procedures at UA include:

3. Taking several (not sure of the total number) B747-400 aircraft and flying them to the desert for long term storage.

Sorry for the sarcasm....it just ticks me off that the company dropped so many routes out of LAX and SFO last fall. Also SFO to SBA....SFO-GEG was dropped completely before 9/11.
Too bad ALPA ever let express carriers fly the RJ's.

Cheers!

GP

Sorry sir, but your statements do portray you as an employee with a bad attitude. In this time of terrorists and difficult times we all must sit back and reflect on our lives and those around us and truly count our blessings.

 

[F/O]

Sorry sir, but your statements do portray you as an employee with a bad attitude

Dude, I guess you haven't figured out yet that he's furloughed...