VC-10 Thrust Reverse
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I won't try the reverse in the air, I can get myself in the XX without doing daft things like that."
It was used, and I imagine approved by Vickers and Air Transport Command, in the sixties. No doubt about it. Maybe things have changed - but used it was.
It was used, and I imagine approved by Vickers and Air Transport Command, in the sixties. No doubt about it. Maybe things have changed - but used it was.
VC10 reversers, 2 or 4?
Hi Tonks,
Small snippet of information I got from an ex-BA engineer:
At some point during the Super VC10s life the RR Conways were upgraded with a heavy liner around the turbine section to cater for unwanted shedding of turbine blades around the UK. The extra weight caused by this mod was a bit dissappointing, and therefore they went looking for something they could discard. And with proven experience on the Standards they descended on the inboard reversers and kicked those off the airframe. By that time in its life runway length wasn't as limiting as when the VC10 was first designed, and the trade off in weights kept the airframe within normal performance specs.
No telling if this is the true reason, but it sounds about right to me
J.
Small snippet of information I got from an ex-BA engineer:
At some point during the Super VC10s life the RR Conways were upgraded with a heavy liner around the turbine section to cater for unwanted shedding of turbine blades around the UK. The extra weight caused by this mod was a bit dissappointing, and therefore they went looking for something they could discard. And with proven experience on the Standards they descended on the inboard reversers and kicked those off the airframe. By that time in its life runway length wasn't as limiting as when the VC10 was first designed, and the trade off in weights kept the airframe within normal performance specs.
No telling if this is the true reason, but it sounds about right to me
J.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Croydon
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly off topic, I admit, but only by the presence (or absence) of one engine: I distinctly remember being at a Farnborough show (1962, I think) and watching the prototype Trident coming into a v. noisy landing from"over the black sheds". The commentator clearly took pride in telling us that, to shorten landing run, the pilot (John Cunningham?) had selected reverse-thrust in the top engine before rubber touched runway.
This, of course, was in the days when no 'furren' aeroplanes were allowed to take part and I was but knee-high to a grasshopper at the time, but I don't think I dreamed it.
This, of course, was in the days when no 'furren' aeroplanes were allowed to take part and I was but knee-high to a grasshopper at the time, but I don't think I dreamed it.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Trident was cleared for use of reverse in the air - and dropping main gear only (no nose gear) as an airbrake. We had a lengtjy thread about it a while ago. The 'main gear only' trick was unique to the 1E, and was implemented by use of a selector by the gear lever.
SSD
SSD
.............and was on certain models of Trident, as well, Gainesy.
e.g. RW35 at BFS, - unless the wind was v.strong.
Rgds, Sleeve.
e.g. RW35 at BFS, - unless the wind was v.strong.
Rgds, Sleeve.
Re. the inflight use of reversers on the DC8.... don't know whether it was approved but it was certainly possible!! Witnessed same on an SAS (?) on very short final at Don Muang in the 60s. By guesstimate he took reverse at about 30 feet and the arrival must have offered the punters the choice of oxygen masks!! 
