Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airports That 'Ban' Thrust Reversers  
User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8432 times:

I was reading in an aviation magazine this week that Nice Airport in France ban the use of thrust reversers for aircraft landing there, unless exceptional circumstances arise. Apparently this is to reduce noise pollution to the surrounding areas.

Are there any other airports that have a similar ban (not including night-time bans)?


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePHLapproach From Philippines, joined Mar 2004, 1244 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8361 times:

LHR does from, what is it like 11:00pm to 6:00am, I can't remember. But they have a reverser's ban. For the minimal traffic that comes into LHR during that time that is.

[Edited 2004-06-06 03:43:56]

User currently offlineFLYSSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8148 times:

Thrust Reverser are banned at Paris-ORLY after 10:30PM.

User currently offlineSammyhostie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 8111 times:

"Are there any other airports that have a similar ban (not including night-time bans)?"

Didnt you read the last bit you two?!

"LHR does from, what is it like 11:00pm to 6:00am" - PHL approach

"Thrust Reverser are banned at Paris-ORLY after 10:30PM." - FLYSCC




User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8016 times:

Thanks Sammiehostie  Big thumbs up


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineBMAbound From Sweden, joined Nov 2003, 660 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7756 times:

BMA STRONGLY recommends aircraft not to use TR (which practically means one shouldn't). A note from the authorities also says that minimum flap setting should be used and a common procedure for GA planes is to remain above the glidepath.

Everything to reduce noise...

johan



Altitude is Insurance - Get Insured
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21654 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7654 times:

MUC also has a ban on them, I believe.


7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7569 times:

LCY  Big grin

Not that most of the aircraft that use it are capable of reverse thrust



No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
User currently offlineOmshanti From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7563 times:

*****MINIMUM FLAP SETTINGS???****** Is that sensible...I don't quite understand. Does not a regulation as such endanger the safety of the aircraft? Is that at all Logical?

Thanks

Omshanti


User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6005 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7379 times:

Not at all - it's usually airline specific whether pilots uses full flaps or not. On the Airbus series, you typically have a choice of either 3 or Full. And the 767, you have the choice between either 25 or 30/full degrees of flaps.

User currently offlineVxg From United States of America, joined May 2004, 102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7356 times:

However you'd think that if you were required to not use thrust reversers on the ground, you'd want to approach at the slowest possible approach speed for your aircraft. Doesn't this normally require full flaps? And how exactly does the flap setting reduce noise?

User currently offlineFrugalqxnwa From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 565 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 7154 times:

The minimum flap setting is probably meant as the minimum safe flap setting. They are probably trying to have planes coming in at higher speeds and at idle to reduce noise, although one would think the heavies would have a few problems with those restrictions. Try landing a 744 at max landing weight without using full flaps and without reversers (and please do it in Flight Sim instead of the real world, I do not want to get sued for some idiot taking this suggestion too seriously and trying it in the real world).

User currently offlineAOMlover From France, joined Jul 2001, 1305 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6865 times:

Nice ? are your sure ?
I've landed 4 times at Nice lately and the pilots always used thrust reversers, even at night.


User currently offlineDbo861 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 888 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6793 times:

He said minimum flap setting for GA aircraft. It shouldn't be much of a problem considering how many zero flap landings you must practice before you get your private certificate. On the smaller airplanes, it just means you have a faster approach and you remain in ground effect longer during the flare. Should be no problem for an experienced pilot. Those planes use up so little runway space that runway length shouldn't be a factor at a larger airport.

User currently offlinePlanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4124 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6764 times:

Can't aircraft use their brakes anyway? Isn't that the 'squeeky' noise you sometimes hear after an aircraft touches down. When i landed at SAN on a BA B777-200 we didn't use reverse thrust at all and that is a smaller runway to a lot of runways that take Triple-7's. Although i do remember turning off the runway over the piano keys so we must have used the full length.

I think BMABound is referring to GA aircraft when he says minimum flap settings. I've seen a lot of single props stop using less than 100m of runway.

-Stephen


User currently offlineDbo861 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 888 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6742 times:

I believe airliners usually use the full lenght of the runway on their rollout....especially big ones like 777s. And I'm pretty sure they use breaks simultaneously with reverse thrusters, but reverse thrusters are probably more effective and a prefered way of stopping because brakes will ware out pretty quickly if you only use them for slowing down after landing.

User currently offlineBMAbound From Sweden, joined Nov 2003, 660 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6597 times:

Regarding the question about minimum flap setting -

as a matter of fact, not only general aviation is encouraged to use minimum flap setting. Corporate pilots do the same (if able). The reason for using less flaps is that not as much power is required to move the ship forward (flaps in landing configuration create a whole lot of drag), thus reducing noise.

Vxg has a point about having less of a Vref with more flaps, but if the runway is long enough (5500 ft in BMA's case), each option, especially this one, is a viable one.

regards

johan



Altitude is Insurance - Get Insured
User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6548 times:

AOMlover

Nice ? are your sure ?

Here is a section of the article:

Despite its coastal location and because of the high density of residential development, Nice knows it needs to be a considerate member of the local community. In its favour is the fact that it is not a 24 hour airport and its operational procedures ensure noise is kept to a minimum. These includes using the seaward runway for take-offs, a ban on the use of reverse thrust (except when required for safety reasons) and limits on engine test running and APU use. As soon as DGAC (the French CAA) approval is recieved, new anti-noise measures are due to be introduced for arrivals to Runways 22L/22R, routing traffic even further out over the sea.

Hope this helps

Horus



EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6492 times:

I've noticed more and more pilots doing an "idle reverse" when they land, meaning the shells (or cowlings) that are used to redirect the airflow are still activated at landing, just the engine isn't powered up. this is probably what was going on with the poster who had mentioned he flew into SAN and didn't use reverse thrust...

My boss, who is a former TWA pilot, said that idle reverse is used in noise restricted areas as it still helps to slow the plane down versus not doing it at all..

-nate


User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6458 times:

SegmentKing, is that method effective?


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6394 times:

No... cause you need to use thrust reversers to help ya stop... otherwise using lots of braking action can cause a minor fire..

-n


User currently offlineAccess-Air From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1939 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5615 times:

Well I know that when I did my enthusiats flight on the EAL BAC 111-500 out of Bournemouth on 23 March 2002, I was expecting the thunderous use of Thrust reverse upon rollout but was sadly disappointed that none was used especially since every seat in the plane was taken.

I think Hushkitting and mandating that planes meet certain noise regulations is one thing but when cities mandate that airlines not use Thrust reversal just to pacify some self rightous bunch of snobs and endanger the lives of those onboard the planes then we have a serious problem. Thrust reverse is not only used for slowing the plane down but slowing it down FAST to clear the active runway, because if you are in a busy ternminal area like Heathrow or OHare or some other large airport, you usually have a plane barrelling down on your ass next in line to land.
Un-real!!!!!

Access-Air



Remember, Wherever you go, there you are!!!!
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5591 times:

And I'm pretty sure they use breaks simultaneously with reverse thrusters, but reverse thrusters are probably more effective and a prefered way of stopping because brakes will ware out pretty quickly if you only use them for slowing down after landing.


...considering what you claim in your profile, I should consider the emboldened quote a [not-so-well-played] joke, no?  Nuts


User currently offlineSacflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 371 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5144 times:

When airplanes are certified and the testing data regarding the minimum landing distance goes into the POH the bonus of using the thrust reversers is not included. The airplane is required to use a runway that will allow the airplane to stop without using the thrust reversers. In most cases, there is more than enough runway with spoilers, flaps, and up elevator, with moderate braking to easily bring the aircraft to a stop. Selecting the reversers without throttling up the engines removes some of the residual thrust making life easier on the brakes, like the attentuators do on the Citationjets. I don't think that brake fires are a real issue except after stops using maximum braking, unless there is some type of malfunction. Maximum braking stops are not normal and very uncomfortable for passengers and one would wonder why a plane is landing on such a short runway to require them.

I've heard that squeaky noise as well after a plane touches down, and I believe it has more to do with the action of the thrust reversers. The air whistles as the size and speed of the airflow changes around the reversers and cowlings.






I'm just happy that RR ratings can't be in negative numbers!
User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5045 times:

Frugalqxnwa,

I would hope someone flying a 747 is not an idiot. Big grin


25 Cessna172RG : I believe that I read somewhere on my Jeppesen approach plates once that Seattle-SEA asks that thrust reverser use is to be kept to a minimum, and I b
26 AirframeAS : SEA just recently became a noise abatement airport. So yeah, I think the T/R restrictions applies at SEA now.
27 Planenutz : I beleive SNA/Orange COunty John Wayne Airport maintains a t/r ban on certain commercial aircraft types (not all). This airport has always been a nois
28 JGPH1A : The last few flights I've had into NCE have not used thrust reversers - all were late evening arrivals (post 2300), so I don't know if the ban is just
29 SailorOrion : You cannot "ban" thrust reversers. If a pilot thinks safety requires it to use thrust reversers, (s)he will, not matter what any regulations say. Here
30 SegmentKing : at SNA, you will see almost EVERY plane use thrust reversers on landing (with exception of UA's Embraers & American's Saabs). There is just no way you
31 Post contains images Thrust : The only reason I would imagine "banning" thrust reversers for would be for doing powerbacks...as those clearly have many drawbacks. But if you don't
32 Post contains images Horus : Thrust, the ban on the use of reverse thrust is applied except when required for safety reasons. So you can fly with no worries
33 Vxg : SEA just recently became a noise abatement airport. So yeah, I think the T/R restrictions applies at SEA now. Woah when did this happen? I would have
34 Philsquares : First of all, you can land a 747400 at max landing weight and not use reverse thrust. No problems at all. Going into places like AMS in the middle of
35 Jwenting : There used to be restrictions at AMS where noise abatement was more important than aircraft safety. These were imposed by a former environment ministe
36 RayChuang : I think while not using thrust reversers can work on really long runways over 10,000 feet in length, I think thrust reverser use should be mandatory i
37 Horus : Though not an airport, I remember reading a few years back that Qantas pilots were adviced not to use their thrust reversers during landing but instea
38 Sovietjet : These noise restrictions that keep getting made are becoming increasingly lame. I mean seriously in today's quiet Boeing and Airbus aircraft, you gott
39 AirframeAS : Woah when did this happen? I would have thought the noise sensitive areas around SEA would be around Magnolia, Mercer Island and Bellevue - all of whi
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...
Signs For Airports That Are No Longer There? posted Sun Oct 8 2006 03:51:29 by Falstaff
Airports That Gained & Lost Airline Service Since 1990 posted Sun Jul 9 2006 23:37:56 by Vfw614
Canadian Airports That Lost Airline Service. posted Thu Jul 6 2006 19:36:25 by Bmacleod
Thrust Reversers? posted Mon Jun 12 2006 01:50:46 by WNCrew
Hub Airports That See Only One Airline posted Sat Apr 15 2006 21:01:52 by Mozart
Airports That Board/Deplane From The Right posted Thu Mar 9 2006 00:31:48 by IFEMaster
Airports That Need Air Service, Please Help! posted Tue Dec 13 2005 19:00:44 by Frontiercpt
Airports That Can Operate A380 posted Wed Jul 6 2005 20:08:56 by Aeroyu
European LCC Focused Airports That Didn't Work? posted Thu Jun 16 2005 11:32:11 by Joost
Airports That Have Outgrown Themselves posted Tue Apr 12 2005 04:41:01 by UA2162