We just had this yesterday, and luckily it is rare in our fleet. Some planes end up with all four main tires having flat spots, according to one of our mechanics/engineers. Isn't this a bit expensive? Why is it more economical to keep the system on MEL (even for just two days)? The guy said that he had to change all four mains in New***, on a different ship. I decided later during rollout to not make a normal turn off at a hub's intersecting runway (runway 22) , due to the desire to avoid wearing out more tires.
Our MEL states that during an abort, only about 60 or 70% of maximum braking is allowed. Has anyone out there had any problems with an inoperative anti-skid, especially on wet runways? How about refusing to accept the plane, even with all hydraulic systems normal, autospoilers and reverse thrust normal etc?
It is my intention to one day refuse an airplane if our destination is quite short or wet, depending upon the planned landing weight, and possible crosswinds and/or tailwinds. Beware of equipment which automatically transmits wind direction and velocity. At San Antonio (SAT) not too long ago, the actual winds were from the opposite direction of what was reported.
And how often do you guys/gals walk onto a plane with an anti-skid, or a thrust reverser MEL-anything which can decrease your ability to abort or maintain directional control etc
?