Colgan overheard in EWR today

[OPECJet]

It is not prohibited at PDT by any means, i wouldn't even go so far as to say 'not encouraged'. Really there just isnt need for the use of reverse thrust on the smaller dash models, the 'disc' section pretty much removes all forward thrust, the ground spoilers/wheel brakes take care of the rest.

That said I've seen it used plenty of times, some ppl think it saves on brake wear, some people just use it every time even if they dont need it at all.

This goes back to a certain department (don't want to blame a hyper check airman when I don't have the facts) saying that reverse is hard on the engine mounts, therefore they don't want you using it.

I had a cap spend most of a ROA-CLT leg in the POH looking for that restriction after I used reverse going into ROA. He never found it.

I figure if they didn't want you using it, they wouldn't put it on there....

 

[kf4amu]

It's probably something as simple/dumb as "its gets louder in the cabin".

 

[Flybywire44]

ATIS reporting wind 300 14 gusting to 19. ILS 22L and visuals for 11 in use. Tower reporting wind 300 at 11. "Colgan can you take 11"? Without missing a beat, "Yeah we can make that". Next five aircraft refuse. Yeah I know that the tailwind component can be 10 or less if you do some careful interperlation but is it worth it? Can you say judgement? Especially when your name isn't the best in the business.

They may have been very light, either way they don't need a lot of runway. Worst case they could end up consuming what normal RJ would use w/out a tail wind.

 

[Thurman Merman]

They may have been very light, either way they don't need a lot of runway. Worst case they could end up consuming what normal RJ would use w/out a tail wind.

Again, I hate using facts on Flight Info but a Q400 fully loaded can use RWY 11 with a 20kt tailwind that is the whole reason they got the endoresement. A Dash 8(any dash 8) is designed for short unimproved field performance. 11 is not some 3500 foot strip on a mountain top, for god sakes, it's 6800 feet! For a Turbo Prop that might as well be a 12000 foot runway. Given, we were "encouraged" not to enter the perpendicular runway even though no LAHSO operations were used but as long as you didn't float her half way down the runway you didn't even need to slam on the brakes and reverse for a max effort stopping. We could do intersection Take Off's on rwy 11 with 20kt tailwinds as well. All this is computed through Aerodata, we input the information into the ACARS and it spits ref speeds back out. When a 20kt tailwind take off was performed usually it meant flaps 15, NTOP(no reduce power). Now I know this is foreign to many bent wing jet drivers, but this is where we live in the straight wing prop world. The guys who have done all jet flying missed out on some fun times in the prop world.

 

[CaribPilot]

It's cumulative.

Gives a new meaning to the term 'Bro's before Hoes' :laugh:

 

[PropPiedmont]

This goes back to a certain department (don't want to blame a hyper check airman when I don't have the facts) saying that reverse is hard on the engine mounts, therefore they don't want you using it.

I had a cap spend most of a ROA-CLT leg in the POH looking for that restriction after I used reverse going into ROA. He never found it.

I figure if they didn't want you using it, they wouldn't put it on there....

Prohibiting the use of reverse thrust would be like prohibiting the use of ailerons in flight. Or prohibiting the use of the landing gear.

Maybe, someone is thinking about the use of reverse thrust inflight being prohibited.

 

[rustypigeon]

I would have refused runway 11. Although you are a full 1 knot from the limit now, what if tower calls the winds from 320 with gust to 24 on short final? Are you going to pull out your E6-B in the landing flare to see if you are legal?

If you have a tire fall off on landing (hey, it could happen right?) the FAA might just take a close look at the flight in question. They might just decide to violate you for landing with a 21 knot tailwind.

 

[FirstMate]

Some of the best landings in a Dash are the product of a tailwind/quartering tailwind.

 

[CaptainChris77]

ATIS reporting wind 300 14 gusting to 19. ILS 22L and visuals for 11 in use. Tower reporting wind 300 at 11. "Colgan can you take 11"? Without missing a beat, "Yeah we can make that". Next five aircraft refuse. Yeah I know that the tailwind component can be 10 or less if you do some careful interperlation but is it worth it? Can you say judgement? Especially when your name isn't the best in the business.

Who cares.... they can do it, they can do it. None of your business. This thread has proved that you are a dbag. Next five aircraft...what were their types? moron.

 

[onionluvr]

I would have refused runway 11. Although you are a full 1 knot from the limit now, what if tower calls the winds from 320 with gust to 24 on short final? Are you going to pull out your E6-B in the landing flare to see if you are legal?

If you have a tire fall off on landing (hey, it could happen right?) the FAA might just take a close look at the flight in question. They might just decide to violate you for landing with a 21 knot tailwind.

You must be one of those "wind check" guys. What a silly bit of logic. By the same token you probably shouldn't accept an approach to minimums. What if the visibility goes to 1/4 while you're in the flare!.....oh no!

 

[FirstMate]

Look at the windsock and fly the airplane.

 

[onionluvr]

Look at the windsock and fly the airplane.

...Amen

 

[rustypigeon]

You must be one of those "wind check" guys. What a silly bit of logic. By the same token you probably shouldn't accept an approach to minimums. What if the visibility goes to 1/4 while you're in the flare!.....oh no!

I have never asked for a windcheck.

Your visibility analogy is a silly bit of logic in itself.

 

[onionluvr]

I have never asked for a windcheck.

Your visibility analogy is a silly bit of logic in itself.

I obviously disagree.

Your contention is that one should have an extra cushion when landing in winds close to the airplane's limits for fear of a chance that those limits might be exceeded at the last minute. So, why wouldn't you do the same for an instrument approach?

 

[kf4amu]

I would have refused runway 11. Although you are a full 1 knot from the limit now, what if tower calls the winds from 320 with gust to 24 on short final? Are you going to pull out your E6-B in the landing flare to see if you are legal?

Why refuse it if it's within limitations? The only other reason would be personal limitations of skill or comfort which is just as important, but don't blame the airplane if you won't do it and it will.

 

[OPECJet]

Prohibiting the use of reverse thrust would be like prohibiting the use of ailerons in flight. Or prohibiting the use of the landing gear.

Maybe, someone is thinking about the use of reverse thrust inflight being prohibited.

Amen.

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

Is it prohibited there or just not encouraged?

More of an "operational culture" thing. Nothing prohibited that I am aware of.

 

[papanovember]

Prohibiting the use of reverse thrust would be like prohibiting the use of ailerons in flight. Or prohibiting the use of the landing gear.

American Eagle prohibits the use of reverse (idle) on the erj on any dry runway over 7000 feet. Some TSA jets don't even have reversers.

 

[OPECJet]

American Eagle prohibits the use of reverse (idle) on the erj on any dry runway over 7000 feet. Some TSA jets don't even have reversers.

If you got 'em, use 'em. I can understand a company not wanting you to spool when you've got carbon brakes, but not popping them just doesn't make sense. Eagle's policy will be just fine until one of their jets ends up off the end of a runway. The Feds will want to know why that policy is there.

Nothing against Eagle guys, just something against a stupid corporate policy that takes safety down a notch.

 

[papanovember]

They don't want the mx costs associated with maintaining the reversers. My roommate busted his type ride for opening the buckets because he (violated a limitation) yes, it's in the limitations.

To prevent people from going off the end of the runway they now require a ref + call at 500 feet instead of an app + - call to "remind" you to slow to cross the threshold at ref. Add in a little wind correction and turbulence and you get "500 ref + 20 sink 700" people think they are 20 knots fast (when they are on speed for the condtions) and go to idle and damn near fall out of the sky. This is what happens when you have guys who have never flown a jet teaching and making the procedures on a jet.

For the lawyers there is a section that says reverse may be used if the PIC determines it is necessary or something like that.