reverse thrust at the gate
"All you had to remember was that to stop after the power back, it was forward thrust not brakes - not unless you want an embarrassing view of the sky and a "hats-on" interview with the the Chief Pilot."
I was going to say....! Note that a nose-wheel plane will be temporarily converted to a tail-dragger when going BACKWARDS under power (location of CG relative to wheels). With enough speed you could even ground-loop it, I expect, although a "tail-over" would probably occur first.
As a pax I've ridden through several power-backs over the years and thought it a neat idea - but in an era when some (Virgin?) are suggesting tractoring all the way to the RWY threshold, burning Jet-A just to go backwards a few feet seems like an idea whose time has passed.
I was going to say....! Note that a nose-wheel plane will be temporarily converted to a tail-dragger when going BACKWARDS under power (location of CG relative to wheels). With enough speed you could even ground-loop it, I expect, although a "tail-over" would probably occur first.
As a pax I've ridden through several power-backs over the years and thought it a neat idea - but in an era when some (Virgin?) are suggesting tractoring all the way to the RWY threshold, burning Jet-A just to go backwards a few feet seems like an idea whose time has passed.
I seem to recall that, shortly after the Soviets had shot down an airliner, the ramp staff at Heathrow had some form of strike and refused to let an Aeroflot airliner have a pushback.
Whereupon the Russian announced that he'd back his Il-62 off the parking slot.
This was refused until the Terminal staff had cleared everyone from the area as they were concerned that the windows might be blown in.
Whereupon the Russian announced that he'd back his Il-62 off the parking slot.
This was refused until the Terminal staff had cleared everyone from the area as they were concerned that the windows might be blown in.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"At 3:23pm, Palm 90 was cleared to push from the gate. The tug tried to push the 737, but snow that had accumulated on the ground caused it's tires to spin. Wheaton then suggested that, contrary to policy, they would use the aircraft's reverse thrust to assist in the push. The reversers were engaged for about a minute and a half, but were only successful in throwing up slush and snow. Another tug was brought in with chains and the aircraft was successfully pushed back."
This was an unapproved, ill-advised, and practically useless procedure that gained nothing and, despite a lot of opinions to the contrary, did NOT contribute to the stall and crash after takeoff.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Age: 53
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
onthehill2,
You mentioned going from low-to-high power in short time not being good on the engines. Actually, a powerback doesn't really require a very high power setting. You just select reverse thrust, and just a small increase in power, similar to the amount needed to taxi forward, will move the airplane backwards. So you are not going to shock the engines any more than you would when pushing the power up to taxi forward.
Regarding terminal windows, this procedure is fairly common at some places, with no ill effects to the windows. It is always done with tail-mounted engines, so they are quite some distance back.
All that being said, I've never been a fan of powerbacks due to FOD concerns, even with tail-mounted engines. I think it is an unnecessary risk.
You mentioned going from low-to-high power in short time not being good on the engines. Actually, a powerback doesn't really require a very high power setting. You just select reverse thrust, and just a small increase in power, similar to the amount needed to taxi forward, will move the airplane backwards. So you are not going to shock the engines any more than you would when pushing the power up to taxi forward.
Regarding terminal windows, this procedure is fairly common at some places, with no ill effects to the windows. It is always done with tail-mounted engines, so they are quite some distance back.
All that being said, I've never been a fan of powerbacks due to FOD concerns, even with tail-mounted engines. I think it is an unnecessary risk.
