What an absolute load of nonsense on this thread...

What does it say in the FCOM limitations?
Is the B757 certified for backing up using reverse thrust or not?

YES or NO

If yes, then fine, no probs..

If no, continue to the end, use the approved turning dumbell..

Getting into the who, what, why, when, how is irrelevant..

Just operate the jet in the approved way..

End of story

I think it wouldn't be so straightforward in this case. The driver had started the left turn toward the taxiway then seems to have realised he wasn't going to make it. So, the choice now was reverse a short way and complete the turn to the left or reverse a short way to make the turn to his right in order top get to the runway end. Once the pilot had realised the turn into the taxiway was not going to happen, it was going to be a reverse whichever choice he made.

Fast cruiser is 100% correct.

If you are going to go against the AFM then you'd better have a damn good reason.

If the approved AFM says:- "the intentional use of reverse thrust to back up the Aircraft is not permitted....." then you are a very brave Captain to attempt it nowadays especially. ( every landing can be filmed and on Facebook before you've done the parking checklist!! )

All Boeing and Airbus Jets I've flown have that statement, I haven't flown the 757.

So, is that statement in that Airlines AFM?

Doubtlass yes, but about a different scenario from the one that occurred.

As pointed out above, by the time the decision to use reverse was being made, continuing to the end was not an option. That's the reality that was faced by the crew.

Once the crew "stuffed up" making the exit and stopped, did they intentionally use reverse thrust to back their Aircraft, yes or no?
The answer appears to be:-- yes they did as evidenced in the Video.

If their AFM says "not approved" then they shouldn't have attempted it and can probably expect Tea and Bikkies with their Chief Pilot, especially since it's on YouTube for the whole World to see.

In any case maybe they should plan their exit strategy a little better at this Airfield! :confused:

Exactly ACMS, very well put:D

Quite so. But there they are. They've "stuffed up" (which none of us here ever, ever do, of course) and people here suggest that having done so, they're unable to proceed up the runway and turn sensibly. Now, since you rule out using reverse thrust to get out of the situation, what do you say the crew should have done to get their aircraft off the runway, bearing in mind the credible statement up-thread that there's no tug at that airfield? Would blocking the runway for hours or days result in a longer or shorter session of Tea and Bikkies than a brief unauthorized use of reverse thrust?

There is a big difference between common sense and a (un)permitted procedure in the minds eye of airline management.
The safe (career) option is to shut down, await a pushback team to manoeuvre the a/c off the runway. Yes you blocked the rwy and caused half a dozen diversions and delays. But you are legally safe. Will no doubt get a call from someone to discuss the incident, but you followed the letter of the AFM. Do not go to jail.
The common sense option is what the crew did, well it was common sense if they did it without damage to anything/anyone, unfortunately what would have once been an interesting anecdote down the pub is now all over YTube and your ass is in a sling with the airline management.
I know what they did and I know what I'd do and the only thing that would change my course of action is if some other a/c needed to do a priority landing.

macdo:

"await a push back team".

You obviously haven't bothered to read the thread. As someone has already pointed out, their is no tug at Skiathos so waiting for a push back team would probably take several days (or weeks).

I can well remember being posted on to the Short Belfast, which was the first aircraft I had flown which was capable of reversing. One of the first exercises that we did was to fly over to Fairford and spend some time doing three point turns into and out of the many ex-SAC dispersals on the south side of the airfield.

This usually consisted of dropping the tail gate, positioning the loadmaster at the back to give us a clue as to where we were going. The other alternative was to put him out through the crew door with a long lead and a talking hat.

So let us assume that the 757 captain had also come from such a reversing background. He knew that there were no obstacles behind for he had just landed on the runway.

Perhaps he is training a new Captain or F/O. They miss the turn off by a few feet and since the "real" runway is only 30 metres wide and he well knows that there is no tug at Skiathos, he ensures that all feet are off the brakes, selects idle reverse and does a three point turn.

What is so miraculous about that?

This is yet another example of every unpromising hysteric on pprune whose only experience of reversing an aeroplane consists of pushing a PA-28 back into a hangar leaping into action when they have no idea about what they are talking about.

Please God, can we please get pprune back for us professional pilots?

Don't know about the 757 AFM or the operator's own Ops Manual rules (willing to hazard a guess reversing is non-SOP though). However, aside from whether the manoeuvre in itself was or wasn't a good idea, quick thinking, safe/dangerous etc. etc. etc. my immediate reaction is more to do with how bad the CRM must evidently have been there. I mean, look at the time between stopping and when the reversers unlock - there is no way this could have been a two-crew discussion. In my opinion, CRM should have moved on from the days where one guy takes an immediate decision to do something out of the ordinary where safety is clearly not on the line.

JW411,

During VC10 and 707 base training we used to teach reversing.

Check behind, feet under rudder pedals, select reverse idle and perhaps a smidgin of thrust, stop the rearwards motion by selecting forward thrust, but NEVER ever use the brakes.

But I have no idea what the SOPs are for a 757.

I'm assuming the PIC briefed to exit the runway after landing at that point or at least raised it as an option. I have never been to JSI but the holes in the Swiss cheese started there. The poor decision making process will no doubt be examined and the potential lack of good CRM.

Roughly 30 years ago, I was on a lot of certification and engineering flight testing on a 767/CF6-80C2.
After one of the flight tests, we went to a remote corner of the airport and used the reversers to back the aircraft. When I asked why we were doing the test I was told it was to make sure it would work - so if an operator came in and wanted to use the T/Rs to back the aircraft we could give them a "No Technical Objection" (NTO). It was intended to cover the exact sort of circumstances as this thread - urgent need to back up and no tug available...

Maybe it is due time to apply the Break to Vacate function...

Again.. (I wrote the same thing earlier in this thread)

Our FCOM/OM-A/OM-B (or any other manual I am aware of) does not mention any limitation regarding the use of reverse. What do you make of that?

tdracer hints that Boeing, at least on one type/engine, takes no definite stance on the subject either.

Fair play, I only read most of the thread and missed the fact that no tug exists at JSI. Also I have not done the narrow runway training, so have not been there. Hands are up. But the rest of the post does reflect modern life in an airline, not, with respect what we used to do in the 1970's on a Belfast, 707, Bac1-11, VC-10 or whatever. The commercial environment is different to then. I would also say that it was an extremely observant skipper sitting in the left seat that could guarantee that here were no obstructions on the opposite side of the runway that he was reversing into!
If you don't have an immaculate reason for doing something that is not in the FCOM/AFM etc. you are asking for trouble. I have seen it in practice where people have gone outside of the bible for good reasons and get hung out to dry. There is a term called Just Culture, the ability to admit a muck up without the fear of punitive measures, which aviation took a lead in some time ago but it has largely been lost.

Could I reverse my A330 in that situation? Yes no doubt, we've all played around in the Sim and done it before along with landing on an Aircraft Carrier, but it's not allowed and we are not trained for it.

But the point here is that unless we have a very good reason we follow the AFM.

If he made a mistake trying to be smart and make the exit quickly he'll have to suck up the consequences.......lesser of two evils.

1/ block the runway, delay flights and cop a bollocking from the boss but following the AFM.
2/ ignore the AFM, reverse the Jet like a C17 and not only cop a bollocking but quite possibly get the sack.

It's called ERROR recovery, we all make mistakes, it's how we recover legally and safely that matters.

If their company allow reversing then this thread is all a waste of bandwidth.

What JW411 said. :ok:

O'Leary:-- Retired, congrats on a long career.:ok:

However he is correct in this modern World. Ever heard of FDAP? Not to mention You Tube....:eek:
Big brother is watching everything we do and loves to penalize us for the slightest transgression. We have to be sure we operate inside their defined FCOM AFM procedures and only deviate outside for very good reasons.

It's not hard to understand.


In my company backing the Aircraft is strictly not approved and one commander has already been let go.

Enjoy the long overdue retirement.:)

26K hours on 737, 747 100/200/400, 757, 767, 777.

No way in the world would I attempt that and if I did consider it I'm sure P2 would object so wouldn't.

Guess that makes me totally unprofessional..... ahh well, at least I keep my job.

I'm sure the airport has a plan for extracting a jet that puts its nose in the grass even if it amounts to borrowing the local farmers tractors and a length of rope.


Anyone remember a certain ex-CP accidentally selecting reverse with the nose wheel nearly in the grass in a -400? ;)