Testing of idle reverse thrust before takeoff. A wise precaution?
 

https://avherald.com/h?article=4c5b3f3d&opt=0

An A320 lands and reverse thrust fails to operate. There had been no prior warning flags in the cockpit. Maintenance staff had forgotten to remove the reverser lockout pins after servicing. The situation could have been critical if a high speed rejected takeoff occurred at the departure airfield and the crew were unaware the reversers had been locked out.

System caution lights have removed the once good airmanship requirement of the momentary testing of brakes after moving from the tarmac. However, the above incident illustrates that on this occasion a fault in reverser operation did not show up to the cockpit crew until too late

A short test of reverse idle at an appropriate point before takeoff would have revealed this maintenance defect.. Another cue for good airmanship?
.

But could be a seriously big deal on a high speed rejected take off if runway limited..

A thought

The plane is certified to stop safely with the reversers locked out.

Give a thought to how many tasks you want to perform over and above what's in the manuals

Just in case I would also check the spoilers movement, and check the engines are getting up to toga thrust should I need it, and also check the flaps travel down to 3 if I need to come back quickly and also I would close manually the outflow vale and pressurise the plane to check it does pressurise. Anyway short answer to the above : no, it's not, as performance data is there for you to consider a no reverse situation up to a contaminated runway.

I agree with most of the posters here: it’s not a major issue 99.99% of the time should they not deploy, plus static use of of thrust reversers is not helpful in terms of FOD and/or surging. After all, if you’re going to check they work properly that involves full reverse...

Forty+ years ago on the B707-436 with R-R Conway engines reverse was indeed checked on taxy out. Try that with a JT3D powered aircraft and you will be in a whole world of pain!

On dry runways the effect of REV is not taken into account for PERF calculations. The scenario you fear is (all need to apply at the same time)
- wet runway or worse
- ASDA limited take-off
- RTO at V+-10 to V1

The chances are very remote. For what is left, the standard walk around check of REV lock-out pins should cover. No need to envisage new procedures where at least 50% compliance with the present ones would do. Agreed?

-----

although from the report: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/577576...-064_final.pdf
it is not clear whether the standard pin as seen here https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/577576...-064_final.pdf was visible on the outside of the casing.

Now, the paragraph "AMM specific wording of HMU deactivated ..." of the report is the funny part.

Highly visible lock out pins should have been caught on even the most cursery walkaround.

The HCU is under the pylon on left side underneath the cowling, it isn't visible externally so can't detect incorrect HCU config during walk-around.

There is a streamer-free pin that lives up there and stays with the aircraft. that is what the engineers used to lock out the reversers and forgot to remove.

Very sloppy maintenance. If I'm not mistaken, landing performance is predicated on braking action with nil reverser credit? (I'm not a pilot).

Correct. The only difference is that, in case of landing on a contaminated runway, You need to take it into account from a performance point of view (i.e. add the impact of a no reverser configuration).

Thanks sonicbum. I forgot to ask. Would the takeoff run be the same?

Just follow SOPs
 

I agree with the ‘not a good idea’ crowd.

Also on every Boeing I’ve flown selecting REV on the ground deletes all your Vspeeds from the FMC.

Keep It Simple, just follow manufacturer and company SOPs.

The willingness not to, as alluded to by some of the questions on this forum, do make me worry about my fellow aviators.

Global Express, Citations, I suspect Gulfstreams too. Never seen in done on modern airliners though