Airbus sop

[michelda]

Hi guys,

I have just received last revision of sop.......
on landing you MUST select full reverse if runway is not dry?!?!
and you can select full reverse with nose gear still not touching ground.

What do you think about this new procedures?

I have some doubts, but......sop are sop!! (my company apply standard airbus procedures)

[PantLoad]

Interesting...Can you cite the page number of the FCOM for reference, please?

[Checkboard]

It sounds like an airline SOP rather than an airbus FCOM update.

Having said that, my airline has a vague "practice using reverse thrust at intervals" comment while our standard use is for idle only. My personal procedure to fulfil that SOP, and to avoid "locked in syndrome" on idle reverse only, is to select full reverse any time I touch down with precipitation actually falling.

I figure that the one day I really need reverse will probably be a landing during a rain shower or the like, so I know that I will have "automatically" have it already deployed before I realise I need it ;)

[GaryGnu]

It is now an Airbus SOP across all the fleets I have seen. Most recently the LR Fleet in our company has lined up with the A380 and explicitly stated that Idle Reverse cannot be used on Wet runways (or worse). If you haven't seen it yet, then it will be in an upcoming revision unless your Flight Ops department customises it out.

In my view it is an overly restrictive application that arises as a consequence of how EASA certification and operational regs are written.

It gives no flexibility to, or at least places a large risk management burden on, operators that fly to airports where idle reverse is required under certain conditions (curfew shoulder periods etc).

I can't comment on the techinique (reverse before NLG touchdown) as it sounds like it might be a type I have not flown.

[michelda]

Hi GaryGnu,

I think EASA says that rev COULD be used for landing calculation on wet and contaminated rwy. (not must). For sure AIB used them for landing performance tables.

If you ck on new landing distance you have to subtract from landing distance reverse coefficient (it means, in my idea, you could land also without max reverse application and your landing distance will be longer).

I don't know what will happen in noise sensitive airports when soon half of the landing plane,in wet condition, will be with full reverse. (i don't know boeing procedure).
I don't think some chief pilots will publish something against airbus policy!

[Checkboard]

PRO-NOR-SOP-21 (Landing)


Select MAX REV immediately after the main landing gear touches down.

If the airport regulations restrict the use of thrust reversers, select and maintain the thrust levers in reverse idle position until taxi speed is reached.

A slight pitch up that can be easily controlled by the pilot, may occur when the thrust reversers are deployed before the nose landing gear touches down.

After reverse thrust is selected, the flight crew must perform a full stop landing.

[michelda]

this is the old revision.....new one report use of max reverse on wet or contaminated.
I don't think your company can publish something against airbus sop!!

[seventhreedriver]

Do you mean this?:

"‐ On dry runway only and if landing performance permits, the flight crew can select and maintain REV IDLE until taxi speed is reached. For any other case, immediately select REV MAX on all reverser levers after main landing gear touches down."

[michelda]

exactly!
but as I told before, in landing distance tables, reverse coefficient can be subtracted, so i don't know why I must land with full reverse on wet (or worse) if I have enough landing distance available.

[reubenjosephdsouza]

Landing:
BOTH THRUST LEVERS...................................................... .......................REV MAX or REV IDLE ‐ On dry runway only and if landing performance permits, the flight crew can select and maintain REV IDLE until taxi speed is reached. For any other case, immediately select REV MAX on all reverser levers after main landing gear touches down. The flight crew must select REV MAX if the aircraft is affected by any failure that impacts the landing performance, or if required due to an emergency. A slight pitch up that can be easily controlled by the pilot, may occur when the thrust reversers are deployed before the nose landing gear touches down. ‐ After the flight crew selects reverse thrust, they should perform a full stop landing.

[Check Airman]

It is now an Airbus SOP across all the fleets I have seen. Most recently the LR Fleet in our company has lined up with the A380 and explicitly stated that Idle Reverse cannot be used on Wet runways (or worse). If you haven't seen it yet, then it will be in an upcoming revision unless your Flight Ops department customises it out.

In my view it is an overly restrictive application that arises as a consequence of how EASA certification and operational regs are written.

Consider yourself lucky. At my company it is SOP not to use reversers, except for a hand full of situations.:ugh:

[safetypee]

This appears to be a timely and sensible revision of SOPs in the light of increasing safety evidence that wet runways are contributors in the majority of overrun accidents. Well done Airbus.
A good aid for a change of mind-set - Checkboard #3 :ok:

The revision also takes the opportunity to clarify the on-runway baulked landing issue; – if reverse is deployed then stay down.

michelda – read the safety statistics. Think safety before noise.

GaryGnu; how is this change a consequence of EASA’s regulations?

[michelda]

safetypee - I have not only red safety statistic, I studied them......
Fortunately I'm working for a company where use of reveres is not only allowed but also encouraged!
We don't use them only in few airports where strictly noise regulation must be applied.

I'll be very happy to use them and if somebody ask me.....reply with a copy of fcom page!!

[seventhreedriver]

I just received the new QRH landing distance calculations. The way I see it, there is a column at each runway condition table which has the corrections for reverse usage.

For me, this Airbus SOP line means that once I have calculated the landing distance required, and the runway is long enough to stop even with idle reverse, I can legally use idle reverse.

Ps: I hate the term "legally". To me, it says that I am not concerned and regulated by the rules of physics anymore, but by some legal mambo-jumbo...

And for those who say we should always use full reverse as a safety precaution, I suggest to always fill up all the tanks with fuel and refuse half of the passengers, as this way, the aircraft will have plenty of extra fuel, but still light as payload does not degrade the landing performance... As for braking, always use max manual as this way, the aircraft will always stop on the runway. And if there is just chance of even a slight drizzle, don't even leave...

[Microburst2002]

You can select max reverse and a few seconds later set idle thrust if you are satisfied that the airplane is stopping well before the runway end. No need to maintain max all the way.

As for the technique, I always select reverse as soon as I touch down with the MLG. It is more efficient and it makes sure I will have spoilers.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

...I always select reverse as soon as I touch down with the MLG. It is more efficient...

And when you have asymmetric reverse deployment?!

[safetypee]

michelda, “We don't use them only in few airports where strictly noise regulation must be applied”
So what alternative mitigating action is taken?

seventhreedriver, ‘legally’ :yuk:
Yes I agree, the issue is an individual’s judgement of risk in the situation, which implies knowledge of the contributors to risk – those things which might not go to plan or are not as expected.
So if the reverse charts are used as indicated (which I would choose not to do so - like the autobrake levels), then would the next higher column be used to provide an additional safety margin?

What does the small print with the SOP state; is there much room for interpretation / assumption?

LSM, “And when you have asymmetric reverse deployment?!” … use rudder, follow recommended actions.
And what is the probability of asymmetric reverse vs not getting it when you really need it?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Recommended actions are to wait two whole seconds, until the nose wheel is on the deck, until you select reverse. Try it in the sim (I'm not brave enough to try it for real) and you're unlikely to stay on the black stuff using rudder alone.

And what is the probability of asymmetric reverse vs not getting it when you really need it?

It's the same thing no? Unless you plan for one reverse inop take off and landing.

[Craggenmore]

And when you have asymmetric reverse deployment?!

then your PNF will call, "No reverse Engine...."

etc.......................

:ok:

[Slasher]

‐ On dry runway only and if landing performance permits, the flight crew can select and maintain REV IDLE until taxi speed is reached.

Well that's what everyone's been doing anyway?


For any other case, immediately select REV MAX on all reverser levers after main landing gear touches down.

For a wet runway (<3mm) its ok to revert to idle if deceleration is adaquate (if that's what you want) but for ungrooved runways I keep full bore till 70kts.


The flight crew must select REV MAX if the aircraft is affected by any failure that impacts the landing performance, or if required due to an emergency.

And that NEEDS to be written into a SOP? :ugh:


A slight pitch up that can be easily controlled by the pilot, may occur when the thrust reversers are deployed before the nose landing gear touches down.

Covered during endorsement on both the 320 suck-squirt and the 737.


‐ After the flight crew selects reverse thrust, they should perform a full stop landing.

Even my old DC9 SOP said the same thing. Every jet jockey's golden rule.


Far as I see Airboos has to state the bleedin' obvious to cater to the lowest common denominator - ie your 200 hour kid in the RHS, as well as the lowest form of life - parasitic lawyers.

[seventhreedriver]

Slasher.... Good one, especially about lawyers:-) What worries me a bit is that new 200hrs FOs learn airmanship from the SOP, not from experienced instructors.