Triscl From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 138 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3167 times:
Flew a UA 762 LAX to JFK last Sunday, and the captain made a strange announcement before we left. He said that for those of us that fly frequently, the sounds after take-off might seem out of the ordinary. Reason: one of the breaks had been de-activated and they needed to let the wheels stop spinning for about 2 minutes after take-off before retracting the gear. He said it would be quite noisey for those 2 minutes. Sure enough, we took off and there was quite a bit of vibration, especially when they actually took them up. But then it was like, "aaaaahhhh".
Any insight into why they had "de-activated" the breaks or what that means exactly? Perhaps they needed to do it for the take-off roll? Landing seemed fine. They definitely breaked hard then, with more than just the reversed thrust.
LastBaron From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 290 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3076 times:
I was on an EI flight out of BWI to SNN a few years back on a leased MD-11 (named St. Brendan) and that thing had brakes so loud and noisy and full of shuddering, we all thought we should have detoured into Midas before taking off... they had to use the reverse-thrusters to get us to stop in SNN, which is unusual because SNN has a nice long runway.
RB211 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 632 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2941 times:
Thanks for the information. Thank god there is a place where airliner junkies like ourselves can talk shop. By the way, I hate the landings of 767's. It usually feels like they are ripping the gear right out of the belly on touchdown.
Airline photography. Whether they're fully clothed, butt naked, having issues or confused I'm taking pictures!!
Rick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2839 times:
In my previous airline yes, we only had the 752, 762 and 763 in the fleet and so all pilots were qualified to fly all three "types".
The type rating is initially 757-only, with the cross-qualification for the 767 (making it a 757/767 rating) permitted by successfully completing a differences course.
There is no currency requirement for flying the different types, we keep the CAA happy by simply doing alternate sim checks (757 then 767, etc....)
In theory you could fly the 757 for say 5 or 6 years, then step into the 767 and be perfectly legal to fly it. In practice this is extremely unlikely to happen. Even BY pilots at 757-only bases will take a 767 roundtrip across the pond at least once every year to keep their ETOPS currency, for example.
In my present airline all pilots are 733 and 73G rated (differences course again permits the latter). The common type rating means exactly the same applies, alternate sim checks and we're good on both (despite the fact that some bases are practically all 733 and others 73G).
When the Airbus arrives it will all go to pot
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2775 times:
Landing gear can be left down after takeoff for 2 reasons -
(1) Brake cooling... or
(2) Brake(s) deactivated - until wheel rotation as stopped...
In the 747, we can (like Rick 767 explained) operate with 1 or 2 brakes deactivated because of maintenance reasons.
Performance (takeoff and landing) is only predicated (for braking/stopping capability) on the use of wheel brakes and spoilers (speed brakes)... The thrust reversers, are NOT taken in account... they are just a "bonus"... An aircraft may be dispatched with one (or all) reversers inoperative, without reduction in braking performance considerations...
Cessna172RG From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2525 times:
On about every flight that I am on, the pilots always use reverse thrust. That's not only because I fly trans pacific a lot, but also within the United States. The only time I recalled reverse thrust not employed on a jet was on a Mesaba RJ85, as they don't have reversers!
Okie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3188 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2371 times:
On my limited ERJ140/145 experience 10-12 flights I have yet to hear the T/R's used. I even looked up the specs on the ERJ to see if they even had them. Obviously very good brakes, I had always assumed the use of T/R was to decrease wear and tear on the brakes. Also since I am off subject I can tell you there was never any doubt about the pilot setting the squat switch on landing on any ERJ I have been on.
Startvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2302 times:
Some ERJ operators have their pilots avoid using the reverse thrust to save on fuel. Sometimes the they kick the cans open though for the extra drag. I know American Eagle tries to avoid it on their ERJs and there are probably more than a few others. The few times i have been on a Continental Express ERJ they used reverse thrust though
SkydrolBoy From Canada, joined Sep 2003, 341 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2157 times:
The Dash-8's props go into reverse pitch on landing not feather, if the props went into feather you would get no stoping action at all.
Also Reverse thrust will not stop an aircraft completely it is only effective at certain speeds, that is why you will notice that the pilot will stow the reversers way before he has finished the landing roll. Also T/R's can be used to back up an aircraft but it is not normally done due to the reverse thrust blowing FOD forward and then being sucked into the intake of the engine, most airports do allow it but it is a company policy that prevents it from happening.