Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Strange Landing + Comment On Photo  
User currently offlineJckat2 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 7 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4292 times:

Hi all,

This afternoon I was at Montréal Dorval Airport and I saw a A330-300 landing with just the left engine thrust reversed. The Airplane seemed to go very slowly an I didn't hear the sound that normally make a full throttle during thrust reverse. The landing was very "soft".



Full size at http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/CGHKX060806.jpg

The airplane stopped with no problem.
Who can explain me this landing ? Is it normal ? There was wind coming from the right of the airplane, is it possible that the engine did not revert to compensate ?

What do you think of the photo ? All comments are welcome.

Jean Christophe

[Edited 2006-08-07 06:58:40]

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4278 times:

Inversion? I assume you are talking about Thrust Reversers

And no, thrust reversers are not required for the plane to land, and aren't even factored into the landing distance equation. I don't know what the MEL for the A330 says about flying with one reverser inoperable, but it is also possible it went MX in flight.

As for the photo itself, the quality looks like it will be a problem, especially the grain.

Harry

[Edited 2006-08-07 06:51:43]


Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineJckat2 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4273 times:

Thank you Harry,

Yes I was talking about Thrust Reversers. If should find a better dictionary and take english lesson  Wink
But in this case, is it possible that when just one thrust reverse is working it can "unbalance" the airplane and make it going out of the runway ?

J-C


User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4257 times:

Quoting Jckat2 (Reply 2):
But in this case, is it possible that when just one thrust reverse is working it can "unbalance" the airplane and make it going out of the runway ?

I doubt the force would be strong enough to steer the plane off course, and it would be nothing the rudder and steering couldn't handle.

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineP51 From Germany, joined May 2002, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4228 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It's also possible they just used the reverser at idle power. Nevertheless the aircraft can be handled quite good with one working reverser during touchdown and rollout. I also noticed a deflection of the rudder...

Josef


User currently offlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2391 posts, RR: 24
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4226 times:

Quoting P51 (Reply 4):
It's also possible they just used the reverser at idle power. Nevertheless the aircraft can be handled quite good with one working reverser during touchdown and rollout. I also noticed a deflection of the rudder...

Idle reverse will open the reverser door/buckets. In this case the reversers are likely locked shut due to a malfunction and subsequent deferral under an MEL. It is not at all uncommon!


User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4226 times:

Thrust reversers should work together and not singly. It will give the pilot some severe problems on landing as, if he was unaware that one was not working, he would have one engine trying to reverse and one at full throttle trying to go forward.

If he was aware of the problem, however, he could, in theory, just use one and not power up the opposite engine. But this I think is highly unlikely. The correct action would to be to dispense with thrust reversers completely and land using spoilers, flaps and brakes.

As for the picture, that doesn't look right to me. Shouldn't the thrust reverse ring go all the way around the engine cowl? That actually looks as if something were open rather than the TR system.

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11953 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4217 times:

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 6):
As for the picture, that doesn't look right to me. Shouldn't the thrust reverse ring go all the way around the engine cowl?

The appearence of the TR system varies from aircraft to aircraft.

B737

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christian Galliker



A330

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alexander Watts


Edit: Should rather have said that the TR appearence varies from engine to engine, as these two pics of A330 shows:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nicolas St-Germain
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pascal Gaudreau



Thom@s

[Edited 2006-08-07 08:44:30]


"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4198 times:

Indeed Thomas, you are right. However, the opening on the aircraft in question is just on the lower RH side. Even under normal circumstances this will give an unbalanced flow. Which is why I queried that it was actually a TR component.

But, as none of the aircraft I currently deal with has thrust reverse, and the last aircraft was the Nimrod some 12 years ago, my memory may be a tad rusty. Big grin And systems may have improved somewhat!

Be interested to get to the bottom of this though.

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11953 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4192 times:

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 8):
However, the opening on the aircraft in question is just on the lower RH side.

Get your reading glasses out Skids...  Wink

If you look closely on the large version of the image in the thread starter, you'll notice a small "tap" underneath both engines. Look just behind the "tap" on the engine to the right. Looks like part of the TR on the other side of the engine to me. In other words the reversers are working as normal on the engine to the right.

But if I'm mistaken, it wouldn't be the first time.  Smile

Thom@s



"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2070 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4175 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Jckat2 (Thread starter):
This afternoon I was at Montréal Dorval Airport and I saw a A330-300 landing with just the left engine thrust reversed. The Airplane seemed to go very slowly an I didn't hear the sound that normally make a full throttle during thrust reverse. The landing was very "soft".

Seems like normal operation with one thrust reverser inoperative; the inoperative thrust reverser was probably deactivated (locked) by maintenance for whatever reason and operational procedures would have the crew activate the reverser normally at idle thrust thus no sound from the engines spooling up at higher thrust.
As Harry said correctly the deceleration effect of thrust reversers are not considered in the calculation of landing distances and thus this kind of landings with only one open t/r are "normal" operation and nothing to be worried about.

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineQ330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4159 times:

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 6):
Thrust reversers should work together and not singly. It will give the pilot some severe problems on landing as, if he was unaware that one was not working, he would have one engine trying to reverse and one at full throttle trying to go forward.

Not on an A330. Reverse thrust is activated by pulling the thrust levers back past idle. If I'm not mistaken, the levers will not move past reverse idle until the reversers are fully deployed (in this case the buckets open), so it wouldn't be possible for one engine to be going forward at full throttle in a situation like this.

-Q



Long live the A330!
User currently offlineJckat2 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4047 times:

Thank you all for answer.

I just improve the image, so the first link does not work any more.



Full version : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/C-GHKX060806.jpg

But now the question is : If the crew did know that one engine was damaged or locked for maintenance and it is not possible to use thrust reverser if both can work, why did he tried to use it ?
I personnaly think the problem appeared at landing and the crew just did not know that before. Do you think I'm right ?

J-C

[Edited 2006-08-07 15:40:33]

User currently offlineF4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4010 times:

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 6):
If he was aware of the problem, however, he could, in theory, just use one and not power up the opposite engine. But this I think is highly unlikely. The correct action would to be to dispense with thrust reversers completely and land using spoilers, flaps and brakes.

It is not common, thanks to good mechanics, but landing with one thrust reverser deferred isn't a problem with yaw. I have done it in the CRJ with no adversities. Thrust reversing is not figured into the performance data because if there is a rejected takeoff for engine problems, there is no thrust to reverse on the malfunctioning engine. Likewise, landing single engine.

Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA



Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
User currently offlinePavvyben From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3997 times:

Quoting F4wso (Reply 13):
Thrust reversing is not figured into the performance data because if there is a rejected takeoff for engine problems, there is no thrust to reverse on the malfunctioning engine. Likewise, landing single engine.

 thumbsup 

The PIC obviously still wanted to use the other engine to slow down, compensating with the rudder which can be seen. Ive seen this on a 737 coming into LHR before.


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2070 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3986 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Jckat2 (Reply 12):
If the crew did know that one engine was damaged or locked for maintenance and it is not possible to use thrust reverser if both can work, why did he tried to use it ?

Maybe because, like in some other planes, activating the thrust reverser also deploys the liftdumpers (spoilers), should they not deploy automatically when touching down. By not activating the thrust reversers, even if they know one doesn't work, they would deprive themselves of this additional security measure.

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlinePavvyben From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 15):
By not activating the thrust reversers, even if they know one doesn't work, they would deprive themselves of this additional security measure.

Spoilers deploy as soon as the wheels touch the ground. Remember that some planes quite often don't use reverse thrust, just use the autobrake and spoilers. Quite often you will find a plane rolling out without reverse thrust just at idle throttle (well quite alot of BA stuff).


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2070 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3884 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Pavvyben (Reply 16):
Spoilers deploy as soon as the wheels touch the ground

Yep, but sometimes they don't for whatever reason and there are planes which, as a backup, deploy them "manually" with the activation of the reversers in case they do not deploy automatically.

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlinePavvyben From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3871 times:

Well if you want to deploy them manually, you pull the lever next to the throttle quadrant on a Boeing aircraft at least, an Airbus is fairly similar to. There is a detent on the 747 in which you can pull it to a certain point during flight to slow the aircraft down, for example when given a speed restriction. Then "Up" when you are on the ground, which the FO makes sure that has happened. If not, they will do it. And if they don't do this very quickly, you hit the TOGA button on the throttle and go around  Smile or they can just increase the autobrake on a Boeing or Airbus, from MED (Airbus) or 2 (Boeing) which is normally used to MAX (Airbus) or 3-5 (Boeing) which will increase braking on the wheels.

[Edited 2006-08-07 23:52:02]

User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2070 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3853 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Pavvyben (Reply 18):
Well if you want to deploy them manually, you pull the lever next to the throttle quadrant on a Boeing aircraft at least, an Airbus is fairly similar to. There is a detent on the 747 in which you can pull it to a certain point during flight to slow the aircraft down, for example when given a speed restriction. Then "Up" when you are on the ground, which the FO makes sure that has happened. If not, they will do it. And if they don't do this very quickly, you hit the TOGA button on the throttle and go around or they can just increase the autobrake on a Boeing or Airbus, from MED (Airbus) or 2 (Boeing) which is normally used to MAX (Airbus) or 3-5 (Boeing) which will increase braking on the wheels.

I guess someone's been playing too much MS Flight Simulator...  Embarrassment

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlinePavvyben From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3847 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 19):
guess someone's been playing too much MS Flight Simulator

hehe, or knowing a few BA pilots helps  Smile


User currently offlinePaparadzi From Malaysia, joined Jan 2005, 202 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3749 times:

There is no problem using he thrust reverser only on one engine as long as there is no slippery runway or strong crosswind. You should open up the operative TR slowly to give you time to counteract any yaw with the rudder.

I've landed the 737 with single reverser many times before.



Rules are made for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.
User currently offlineJckat2 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3595 times:

Thank you all.

Finally the photo was rejected because :

"The image quality of these photo(s) does not meet the very high standards
of Airliners.Net."

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ions/big/20060812_C-GHKX060806.jpg

Some advise to make it good enough for Anet ?

Thank you

J-C


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Please Comment On This Photo. posted Tue Oct 17 2006 07:49:58 by Ferrypilot
Comment On A Rejected Photo, Pretty Please? posted Tue Sep 6 2005 16:14:49 by SNATH
Strange Lines On Photo Prints posted Wed Jun 30 2004 01:51:50 by Airplanetire
Opinion On A Photo posted Sat Sep 23 2006 03:46:08 by Acontador
Opinion On Photo - Softness posted Wed Sep 20 2006 23:39:58 by Eadster
Update On Photo Ban For CDG And LBG And Airshow 07 posted Tue Sep 19 2006 04:26:21 by CcrlR
Advice On A Photo posted Fri Aug 18 2006 13:34:54 by Sfilipowicz
Hooking Up A Good Deal On Photo Equipment Buys. posted Thu Jul 13 2006 07:02:03 by BO__einG
Opinions On A Photo posted Thu May 11 2006 07:27:22 by Maiznblu_757
Advice On A Photo? posted Fri Apr 21 2006 20:26:44 by Jran225