RJ reverse thrust... overdose!

[aa73]

The other day we were waiting to cross 4 at LGA and this USAir ERJ lands.... and he about blew our ears off with the amount of reverse! despite using maybe half of the runway. Now, I've noticed this while riding in the back of CRJs/ERJs, but it seems like you guys practically go to 2.00 EPR on reverse, even if your touchdown speed is in the low 120s... and then the reverse is only on for like, 4 seconds! Is that really necessary, or do you guys just like to hear your engines roar. Not criticism, just curious.

 

[FlyAuburn]

We don't reference EPRs. Don't even have the gauges. Just pull back all the way for a short time.

 

[CitationLover]

have you heard your brakes in the S80's at AA? it sounds to me like you use no reverse at all. squeak squeal all the while taxiing. no criticism, just curious.

besides these are NEW jets. what's EPR?

keep picking up open time with 3000 comrAAdes on the street.

 

[ohplease!]

cheaper than brakes....

 

[Flyeys]

Pop the buckets but dont spool up the engines in reverse unless you need to(i.e last leg of a 4-day and you need to catch a flight home) . It is really loud in the back and you typically dont need them on normal day.

 

[Birddog]

Depends, at LGA it seems like you can never get off the runway fast enough, but at other airports, I will always open the reversers, but how much I wind them up will depend on where the turn off I need/want is.

 

[Baronman]

I agree with your assesment....Even though I'm just a gear jockey I see a lot of captains bury the TRs, some even pop them out 5 seconds after touchdown only to spool them up all the way at about 70 kts with about 6,000' of RWY looking us in the face. Our procedures however state that idle reverse should be used unless previoulsy briefed.

Of course there are certain circumstances (ie wet rwy) or the crappy 145-ER brakes that heat up in summer when it makes sense to spool'em up.

Maybe they haven't sat in the back lately, it's really anoying sitting in rows 17-19.

 

[J32driver]

We don't use anything more than idle reverse at Air Willy unless the runway is under 6000 feet.

Yeah... I was wondering about the brakes on the -80s as well. Seems like when you're coming to a stop... the whole airplane shakes like a dog sh1tting razor blades!

 

[Strikefinder]

cheaper than brakes....

Tell that to the folks that manufacture the several million dollars worth of propulsion on your aircraft.

I've been told that full reverse is EXTREMELY hard on most jet engines. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use it if you need to, but a half empty aircraft landing in daylight on a dry 10,000 foot runway is not "needing to".

 

[pacsky72]

Eagle is only on runways 7000' or less or contaminated runways/caps discretion. Brakes work just fine, or idle reverse if ya want.

 

[flatspin7]

Xjt just put guidance about reversers in the CFM... They want us to pop the buckets and use brakes go into reverse only if you need it.

 

[Stealthh21]

Tell that to the folks that manufacture the several million dollars worth of propulsion on your aircraft.

I've been told that full reverse is EXTREMELY hard on most jet engines. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use it if you need to, but a half empty aircraft landing in daylight on a dry 10,000 foot runway is not "needing to".

How is it hard on the engines? I have been told the opposite. Of course it could depend on the engine. I heard that Jet Blue doesnt use mush reverse either. But using alot does get loud, and may be uncomfortable on the PAX in the back! I learned and have been told that its much better on the brakes, which in the long run will be replaced more, if you use thrust reverse. What I hate, and I have noticed this alot flying on the airlines is the TRs get deployed for like a second or two, then stowed, then the pilot slams on the breaks.

I agree, long runway nice day land long. In some cases. Try doing that a IAD and see how many go around fly by your head!!

fly safe!!

 

[CitationLover]

Tell that to the folks that manufacture the several million dollars worth of propulsion on your aircraft.

I've been told that full reverse is EXTREMELY hard on most jet engines. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use it if you need to, but a half empty aircraft landing in daylight on a dry 10,000 foot runway is not "needing to".

please educate me regarding this. we're just redirecting bypass air and spooling the engine up.

 

[73belair]

please educate me regarding this. we're just redirecting bypass air and spooling the engine up.

Agreed.

 

[Strikefinder]

How is it hard on the engines? I have been told the opposite. The effect of Using reverse thrust is negligible.

What I've been told by the Embraer representatives is that use of deep reverse is very hard on engine components. What I was told was that it was "about three times as bad as a full power takeoff" (we typically use a reduced, or "ALT" takeoff on the Embraer 145). The best reason I can think of is FOD ingestion, since if you've watched an aircraft going slowly with reverse thrust, you'll see all kinds of you know what flying into those fan blades that gets blown up by the thrust going in the "wrong" direction. Also the pressure on the reverser doors (depending on what type you have), etc. I'm certain there are more reasons.

Furthermore, the implementation of "minimum reverse thrust" procedures by the cash-strapped airlines implies to me that there is some consensus that use of reverse thrust is hard on the engines.

Don't get me wrong, aircraft brake pads are expensive and all. I don't downshift when I stop my car, though, since the clutch is more expensive to replace than a $15 brake pad.

I agree, long runway nice day land long. In some cases. Try doing that a IAD and see how many go around fly by your head!!

Of course there are places where more aggresive use of TRs is required (though even in IAD, I scarcely need to use the TRs past idle to get stopped quickly, and several of our aircraft have no TRs installed and I've never had anybody behind me in IAD go-around).

I would never imply that there isn't a reason to use TRs in certain circumstances. Simply because you landed on a 10,000 foot runway but you want to prove that you can get off in 3,000 feet is not a good reason to dig deep into reverse until you're passing ten knots while locking the brakes from touchdown. Even if it's not hard on the aircraft, it's hard on the people in the back who paid your salary that day, and that's enough reason for me.

 

[CF34-3B1]

Helps keep the BTMS numbers in the green on short turns.

 

[DoinTime]

The best reason I can think of is FOD ingestion, since if you've watched an aircraft going slowly with reverse thrust, you'll see all kinds of you know what flying into those fan blades that gets blown up by the thrust going in the "wrong" direction.

Having max reverse going at taxi speeds probably isn't a great idea but maintaining a good forward airspeed keeps the inlets clear of any redirected air. Judging by the number of powerbacks that NW utilizes it cant be to hard on the engines anyway.

 

[wahoo250]

they wouldnt make it if it wasnt supposed to be used.

 

[blzr]

You guys ever use the TR's during taxi? (just the bucket, no reverse). We used them for the last brake cycle and got 300 more landings out of our brakes than before. 'Course we only weigh 24k as opposed to 50-60k.

 

[wahoo250]

You guys ever use the TR's during taxi? (just the bucket, no reverse). We used them for the last brake cycle and got 300 more landings out of our brakes than before. 'Course we only weigh 24k as opposed to 50-60k.

used to fly for a corp company where the brakes were hardly ever used. same thing was observed heavier airplane also. they say you cant taxi on the 145's with tr's but how many times do you see g4's and so on do it with essentially the same engine mounted the same distance from the ground. i think its all bs. you can say dont pressurize an airplane because its stresses the airframe. where do you want to stop overanalyzing. The worst thing to do to a car engine is to start it in the morning, WTF?

 

[CitationLover]

our company limits max reverse to 75kias from it is idle.

i know some bizjets have to taxi with one or two buckets out when taxiing downhill to avoid overspeeding.

yes on the crj the brake temps are about 3-4 units cooler with reverse and little brakes versus brakes only. besides i do not want to feel any heat from them while i do my walkaround. nice and cool checking out the mlg assembly with reversers!

 

[Strikefinder]

You guys ever use the TR's during taxi? (just the bucket, no reverse). We used them for the last brake cycle and got 300 more landings out of our brakes than before. 'Course we only weigh 24k as opposed to 50-60k.

The question is this: how long did the engine last by doing it?

Of course you'll increase brake life by using TRs. That goes without saying. The question is that over the life of the plane, are you going to still come out ahead if the engine is replaced a year earlier?

It may vary by engine type, aircraft type, and the type of operation. There may be some operators who benefit more by using TRs than brakes or vice versa. I don't have hard numbers for you, other than what the manufacturer has told me, and I admit that doesn't make my evidence any more than anecdotal. Again, the way I look at it is the same way I drive my car: that I downshift multiple times to help my car stop, and it will, undoubtedly, increase my brake pad life. However, I'll have to replace the clutch sooner, which is much more expensive and labor intensive. So rather than downshifting, I just put the shifter to neutral and use the brake pads.

As an aside, our procedures preclude me from using TRs during taxi. When I flew for another company, both their manufacturer and the company policy was to never use TRs during taxi unless an emergency dictated its use.

they wouldnt make it if it wasnt supposed to be used.

Just because it's on the aircraft doesn't mean you should use it on every landing, or to its fullest potential. My engines have 110% power available, but we typically use 90% for takeoff. Why? It saves engine life, for a negligible loss in safety buffer. That doesn't mean I wouldn't use absolute firewall power when it's necessary, but I limit use of full power until circumstances where it is necessary to take advantage of it.

TRs are put on aircraft as another method of stopping the aircraft, particularly effective on slick or icy runway surfaces or in the case of brake failure or asymmetry. Yet the landing numbers for my aircraft are calculated without even putting them to idle reverse thrust, much less full reverse. Just because they are installed does not mean that the manufacturer intended their full use at every possible opportunity.

Again, I use reverse thrust in a number of circumstances. When landing in EYW, for instance, or on 26 in PHL. Or when traffic is crawling in behind us in LGA. Or on icy or slippery runways. I don't, however, run the thing at full power in reverse on a dry, 10,000 foot runway with nobody behind me. Again, cost aside, I don't like having my head buried in the seat back pocket in front of me as I occasionally do when riding in the back. I would hope that anybody with enough training to be sitting in a jet airplane could come up with a better reason to do something than "it's there."

 

[wahoo250]

agree 100 percent. didnt mean it that way but i have flown with captains at my present company that will comment on the fact that i even pop them. then they jam on the brakes to show that you dont need them to stop the plane. this was on a 10000 ft strip with no one behind us and my intention was to slow the airplane without using that much brake or reversers. a combination of the two, reversers at higher speeds and brakes at lower speeds will definately improve anyones technique when both are used in moderation. brakes are a lot more effective as more weight is transfered from the wings to the wheels. again i agree with your last post.

 

[blzr]

Strike, we use the buckets, not the actual reverse. By alternating buckets on taxi, we don't risk overheating them, and by not using reverse, no rise in ITT or rpm, we shouldn't be hurting the engine so long as we are moving foreward.

I do agree that they shouldn't be used on every landing, but the other guy complains that we are costing the boss money by using the brakes. I just can't win. Anyway, my POH doesn't say anything one way or the other about TR use during taxi.

 

[dav8or]

If you want to see how bad it is for the engine watch the ITT the next time you bury them. Pop the buckets at TD and use the brakes.

 

[Kaman]

I would think it would be more prudent to preserve your brake/tire life by using a combination of reverse and brakes. This is an important consideration if you are doing alot of quick turns, and you are doing high brake energy roll-outs on a hot day. Also, every landing is has a different set of variables that constantly change even for the same runway/same day.

 

[trip]

The company says use revervse not the brakes- and they pay the bills!

 

[Cardinal]

I think airline passengers, after 50 years of antiskid, spoilers, and reverse, are used to being deccellerated.

Use an approriate level of decceleration for the circumstances, as dictated by common sense. Passenger comfort will follow. Yet on the dark and stormy night MY comfort is much more important.

 

[BlackPilot628]

We use full reverse on the E170 on every landing; unless you're landing on a 8000 runway and the terminal is upwind of the landing runway.
The brakes on the E170 have a bad problem of heating up and 1 out of the 4 Overtemping to the point it locks up and/or begins to smoke.

 

[inthewind]

When I was at Indy it was near full reverse until 80 kts idle by 60 and the Capt would close the buckets when down to taxi speed. I found that by cracking the reversers just above idle while the nose was still in the air this kept the nose from slamming down since the engines are above the wing.
In the LR-35 that I now fly we often land on runways that are less than 5000' and since we tanker as much fuel as we can from home we are sometimes near max landing weight. In those situations I always use max reverse because I don't want to taxi up to the pumps like SWA did in BUR.