From the "Ryanair- stranger than fiction" file...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411
Notwithstanding the arrogance of your reply, you miss the point. No doubt powerbacks of jets do occur in some places. No doubt this is an approved procedure for the airlines and airports concerned. However, we are not talking about powerbacks, we are talking about using reversers to slow down on the ramp, rather than using that the boring old standby, the wheel brake.
Maybe using reverse for this purpose is also approved in some places and for some airlines (although I doubt it). However, it certainly isn't at EDI and I doubt it is at Ryanair either... which is the point of question...
Notwithstanding the arrogance of your reply, you miss the point. No doubt powerbacks of jets do occur in some places. No doubt this is an approved procedure for the airlines and airports concerned. However, we are not talking about powerbacks, we are talking about using reversers to slow down on the ramp, rather than using that the boring old standby, the wheel brake.
Maybe using reverse for this purpose is also approved in some places and for some airlines (although I doubt it). However, it certainly isn't at EDI and I doubt it is at Ryanair either... which is the point of question...
Putting it quite simply, I don't believe that the reversers were being used to slow down the aircraft. That just does not work.
I also refuse to believe that the crew had any intention of causing injury to anyone or anything. What could be the possible motive for that plan of action?
Let me ask you three questions:
1. How many people were injured in the subject uncident?
2. Was damage caused to any ground equipment etc in the immediate area?
3. How many complaints were received by the airport authority?
I also refuse to believe that the crew had any intention of causing injury to anyone or anything. What could be the possible motive for that plan of action?
Let me ask you three questions:
1. How many people were injured in the subject uncident?
2. Was damage caused to any ground equipment etc in the immediate area?
3. How many complaints were received by the airport authority?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411
Again, you comprehensively miss the point. If the intention was not to slow the aircraft, why were the reversers deployed, obviously deliberately, twice? For show? To dislodge a stubborn wren that was trying to nest in the engine?
I'm sure the crew had no intention of causing injury or damage either- however there are dozens of things you can do with an aircraft that will cause inadvertent damage or injury.
The whole point of an effective safety culture is not "was anybody hurt", but "was there the remotest possibility of anyone being hurt". That is why we wear flouro tabards and such like...
And then there is the original question... which will now probably never be answered...
Again, you comprehensively miss the point. If the intention was not to slow the aircraft, why were the reversers deployed, obviously deliberately, twice? For show? To dislodge a stubborn wren that was trying to nest in the engine?
I'm sure the crew had no intention of causing injury or damage either- however there are dozens of things you can do with an aircraft that will cause inadvertent damage or injury.
The whole point of an effective safety culture is not "was anybody hurt", but "was there the remotest possibility of anyone being hurt". That is why we wear flouro tabards and such like...
And then there is the original question... which will now probably never be answered...
I rather think it is you that is comprehensively missing the point. I have already said:
"It is not unusual to exercise the reversers a couple of times to get rid of a transient fault before bursting into print (ie: writing in the tech log)".
I have little knowledge of 732s but I have certainly seen the buckets being exercised several times on the ground whilst taxying in on occasions when I have been sat down the back. I have always assumed that this was the reason.
Certainly it was not totally unusual on the DC-10 to have to make a few reselections in order to get a reverser to stow properly.
In any event, I am sure that the ramps at EDI are swept frequently and kept scrupulously clean so that there should be no loose objects or debris to be thrown around in the first place.
It should also be noted that nobody should even consider approaching an aircraft while the anti-collision beacon is still flashing. I presume that it still was?
"It is not unusual to exercise the reversers a couple of times to get rid of a transient fault before bursting into print (ie: writing in the tech log)".
I have little knowledge of 732s but I have certainly seen the buckets being exercised several times on the ground whilst taxying in on occasions when I have been sat down the back. I have always assumed that this was the reason.
Certainly it was not totally unusual on the DC-10 to have to make a few reselections in order to get a reverser to stow properly.
In any event, I am sure that the ramps at EDI are swept frequently and kept scrupulously clean so that there should be no loose objects or debris to be thrown around in the first place.
It should also be noted that nobody should even consider approaching an aircraft while the anti-collision beacon is still flashing. I presume that it still was?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Stansted
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one that everyone has missed and have had a few times on both the 200 and 800 is the situation where normally one reverser will fail to stow properly.
The tried and tested method is to recycle them. This can take several attempts and if it can be resolved while still moving all the better. Because once on stand without guidance and help of engineering its too dangerous to keep trying them.
Can be awkward at outstations with limited engineering perhaps why it was going on so close to stand.
Its a possibilty.
Apologies missed JW411 comments about recycling reversers was getting ready for work skim read a few posts.
Will try harder next time!
The tried and tested method is to recycle them. This can take several attempts and if it can be resolved while still moving all the better. Because once on stand without guidance and help of engineering its too dangerous to keep trying them.
Can be awkward at outstations with limited engineering perhaps why it was going on so close to stand.
Its a possibilty.
Apologies missed JW411 comments about recycling reversers was getting ready for work skim read a few posts.
Will try harder next time!
Paxing All Over The World
GCC "I have never seen powerbacks done anywhere outside the US."
I have seen this with Turbo props in South Africa as commonplace. With regards to the machine sitting on it's @rse, I gather the point to watch for is to let her slow without brakes. Make sure there is enough space behind for her to just drift to a stop or with g-e-n-t-l-e brake. Once stationary, apply brake, change pitch and race off into the sunset.
I have not seen jets powerback in South Africa. On remote stations, upon arrival, they usually just turn to face departure before shutting down. There is enough room for others to get by and that saves having a tug. They leave the APU running and just start and go.
I have seen this with Turbo props in South Africa as commonplace. With regards to the machine sitting on it's @rse, I gather the point to watch for is to let her slow without brakes. Make sure there is enough space behind for her to just drift to a stop or with g-e-n-t-l-e brake. Once stationary, apply brake, change pitch and race off into the sunset.
I have not seen jets powerback in South Africa. On remote stations, upon arrival, they usually just turn to face departure before shutting down. There is enough room for others to get by and that saves having a tug. They leave the APU running and just start and go.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a big difference between cycling the reversers, and deploying them for several seconds at a time whilst applying lots of power- so, no, I don't buy the transient fault idea.
Whether the ramp is clean or not is irrelevant- the pilot has no clear idea of what FOD might have been left in even the last few minutes.
The point is, is using the reversers to slow the aircraft, using a lot of power to do so, a smart idea on a crowded ramp, or approaching a stand? I rather think not. No matter how you dress it up, it isn't a good idea. We have wheel brakes for that purpose- despite the cost of routine brake pack replacements, that what they should be used for.
Now, if I had to guess, this particular pilot was probably attempting to display his prowess/company mindedness or whatever. You think that is OK, I think it is unwise. Fine. It is a bit like an unstabilised approach- 99% of the time you will get away with it- but that doesn't make it a good idea (as any TRI/TRE will tell you).
BTW I spent a few years doing powerbacks in turboprops. Nothing much to it, just remember to never touch the brakes when in reverse (use forward thrust), and be careful how much nosewheel steering you use as it is easy to get the nosewheel cocked at an unrecoverable angle on some types. It is also important that the ground crew know how to do them, and what to expect (ie a lot of wind!)
Whether the ramp is clean or not is irrelevant- the pilot has no clear idea of what FOD might have been left in even the last few minutes.
The point is, is using the reversers to slow the aircraft, using a lot of power to do so, a smart idea on a crowded ramp, or approaching a stand? I rather think not. No matter how you dress it up, it isn't a good idea. We have wheel brakes for that purpose- despite the cost of routine brake pack replacements, that what they should be used for.
Now, if I had to guess, this particular pilot was probably attempting to display his prowess/company mindedness or whatever. You think that is OK, I think it is unwise. Fine. It is a bit like an unstabilised approach- 99% of the time you will get away with it- but that doesn't make it a good idea (as any TRI/TRE will tell you).
BTW I spent a few years doing powerbacks in turboprops. Nothing much to it, just remember to never touch the brakes when in reverse (use forward thrust), and be careful how much nosewheel steering you use as it is easy to get the nosewheel cocked at an unrecoverable angle on some types. It is also important that the ground crew know how to do them, and what to expect (ie a lot of wind!)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SMN
Revese idle only, then?
AFAIK, one of the reasons for the Qantas B747 accident at Bangkok was "not more than reverse idle was selected"
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Revese idle only, then?
AFAIK, one of the reasons for the Qantas B747 accident at Bangkok was "not more than reverse idle was selected"
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have come late to this subject and I know I'm really gonna annoy JW411 as he will think I'm FR bashing.
Re the cycling reverse to clear transient faults, FR must have an awful lot of transient thrust reverser faults on the 732 'cos they've done it at every airport I've seen them at, several times a day in some places and on different aircraft.
Maybe this is the REAL reason they're getting rid of them sooner than anticipated!!!
Re the cycling reverse to clear transient faults, FR must have an awful lot of transient thrust reverser faults on the 732 'cos they've done it at every airport I've seen them at, several times a day in some places and on different aircraft.
Maybe this is the REAL reason they're getting rid of them sooner than anticipated!!!
Thank you for your concern but I am not in the least annoyed. You are simply confirming what I have observed myself. As I have said before, the only reason I could come up with for this practice was to get a reverser to stow properly.
Registered User **
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: poll position
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Boeing fctm says non to reversers for moving backwards.
2 levers left in the interlock for more than 15ish seconds will result in an auto stow circiut opening and a reverser unlocked light .
only two ways to sort it, go in e/e bay and press reset button(i think it is fourth down on the right (but any button will do
)
or force the levers back up to a percentage setting with the engines running and it will clear.ie cycle them
a general description of both as i cant be arsed looing it up
hope this helps.
Anyway there will be an influx of excel crews and aircraft workin for ryan air this winter so standards should improve on the 200 routes, as they've all got proper licences and not validations
written on the back of a vodka label with a free guiness pen
2 levers left in the interlock for more than 15ish seconds will result in an auto stow circiut opening and a reverser unlocked light .
only two ways to sort it, go in e/e bay and press reset button(i think it is fourth down on the right (but any button will do
)or force the levers back up to a percentage setting with the engines running and it will clear.ie cycle them
a general description of both as i cant be arsed looing it up
hope this helps.
Anyway there will be an influx of excel crews and aircraft workin for ryan air this winter so standards should improve on the 200 routes, as they've all got proper licences and not validations
written on the back of a vodka label with a free guiness pen
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Stansted
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Excel crew comments about licences etc wether tongue in cheek I know not.
Before I start I flew with many Excel guys last year and enjoyed flying with everyone of them.
BUT some of the guys I flew with thought they had seen a fair bit, Greek islands flights etc, but if you ask most of them I think they would admit they initially found it tough going 25 min turnarounds, some really crappy wx a lot of CAT3 stuff and very importantly a lack of winter ops experience. Not exactly your average Palma!
By the way this is not having a go at anyone because I will repeat they were a super bunch of guys but I think they would admit having learnt a hell of alot having done the Ryanair thing.
Admittedly they may not be back for another dose but 'dicks..' comments are slightly wide of the mark.
Before I start I flew with many Excel guys last year and enjoyed flying with everyone of them.
BUT some of the guys I flew with thought they had seen a fair bit, Greek islands flights etc, but if you ask most of them I think they would admit they initially found it tough going 25 min turnarounds, some really crappy wx a lot of CAT3 stuff and very importantly a lack of winter ops experience. Not exactly your average Palma!
By the way this is not having a go at anyone because I will repeat they were a super bunch of guys but I think they would admit having learnt a hell of alot having done the Ryanair thing.
Admittedly they may not be back for another dose but 'dicks..' comments are slightly wide of the mark.
