Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DC-8 And Reverse Thrust Use In Flight  
User currently offlineTtailsteve From United States of America, joined May 2006, 106 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7776 times:

I remeber reading an accident report in the distant past, I think possibly Eastern Airlines where the crew averted an accident and recovered the aircraft by using the in-board thrust reversers in flight. Why and When were the Dc8s allowed to use thrust reverse. Anyone recall this specific incident?

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN8076U From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 425 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7752 times:

DC-8s could always use reverse thrust in flight (except for the first one, in the beginning, I'll explain below). This was because of the fact that it does not have spoilers than can be used in flight to slow it down (it does actually have spoilers, but they are for use on the ground only). Depending on which particular model it was, power settings up to full reverse thrust could be used on all four engines in flight, or idle reverse on the outboard engines and full reverse thrust on the inboards.

The first DC-8 that flew at the beginning of the flight test program did not have any thrust reversers at all at the time. It did have "fighter" style speedbrakes in the back of the fuselage. They were found to be completely ineffective, and so were not installed on any further production aircraft. Thrust reversers were later installed on this first aircraft, along with other various upgrades, and consequently, on all further DC-8s.

Chris



Don't blame me, I don't work here...
User currently offlineANother From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 7516 times:

I remember this, landing in ATH in the late 70s. CP Air DC8-43 (can't remember which Empress). The captain warned us that he was about to do this - apparently he was given a direct approach and needed to lose altitude fast. We did!

[Edited 2006-07-03 19:10:57]

User currently offlineJJMNGR From Brazil, joined May 2004, 1018 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 7505 times:

And as far as I know it is possible to apply reverse just on engines number 02 and 03. Am I correct?

User currently offlineN8076U From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 425 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7423 times:

Quoting JJMNGR (Reply 3):
And as far as I know it is possible to apply reverse just on engines number 02 and 03. Am I correct?

Yes, you can use just #2 and #3 if you want to. According to pilots that I've talked to, using just #2 and #3 reversers in flight is what they usually do if they do it at all. Apparently, it is a somewhat harsh event to experience...

Chris



Don't blame me, I don't work here...
User currently offlineBrowntailWhale From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7321 times:

The way it works is this, with the gear up, only #2 and #3 can be reversed. They can go up to max thrust. With the gear down all four can be reversed up to max thrust

User currently offlineRG828 From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 582 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7175 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Those DC-8 pylons must have been made from cast iron to withstand those forces.

Amazing stuff.



I dont know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone
User currently offlineIrobertson From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 601 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7104 times:

Quoting RG828 (Reply 6):

Might be one of the reasons so many are still going... a real amazing plane... If airline manufacturers could really master this fuel efficiency thing, they should really consider making planes that are similarly strong with potential lifespans that match it or better. If Douglas could do it in the 1950s and 60s, we should be able to do it now.


User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2062 posts, RR: 20
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6995 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I experienced many a flight on DL's DC-8-50's when the reversers were deployed in flight. I used to try to get the window seat by the seat next to #2 or #3, just so I could watch the action! It really got your attention, and it was VERY effective!

Those old Pratts really danced around in the nacelles----I can hear them now------------awesome!



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineMontanaFL From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 99 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6866 times:

This isnt about the DC-8 which I loved to fly on but on the site "Flight Level 350" is a video of a C-17 using the two inboard engines in reverse to do a "tactical decent" from 20, 000 to 11, 000 - 13, 000 fpm. The author stated that the shaking was from the reverse thrust in flight. Hope the link below works. Rather interesting.

http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircra..._Untitled_Aviation_Video-5025.html



I miss those DL L-1011's
User currently offlineRG828 From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 582 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6806 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 8):

Those old Pratts really danced around in the nacelles----I can hear them now------------awesome!

I bet they did!
Despite the fact this inflight-reversing is a well-known DC-8 trait, I have never seen an action shot of it.



I dont know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone
User currently offlineN8076U From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 425 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 6705 times:

Quoting BrowntailWhale (Reply 5):
The way it works is this, with the gear up, only #2 and #3 can be reversed. They can go up to max thrust. With the gear down all four can be reversed up to max thrust

Actually, what you wrote does not apply to all DC-8s, and is not true regarding any of the 60-series and older DC-8s that UA had. Perhaps what you said applies to the 70 series with the CFMs? Here's a breakdown of the models I have information on:

THRUST BRAKE LIMITATIONS--IN FLIGHT

--The -10 series, with JT3C engines could go to max continuous power on all four, regardless of the gear position.

--The -20 and -30, with JT4A engines could go to max continuous power on #2 and #3, and had mechanical stops which limited #1 and #4 to approx. 31% of max continuous power (gear up or down) until there was weight on wheels, at which point #1 and #4 could go to max continuous.

--The -40 I have no information about. Sorry RR fans...

--Most -54F, and all -61, with JT3D turbofans could use #2 and #3 up to max continuous. On #1 and #4, no reverse with gear up, limited to idle reverse by mechanical stops with gear extended. With weight on wheels, #1 and #4 could to go max continuous.

--All the other -50 series not covered above, and all -62 with JT3Ds could use #2 and #3 up to max continuous, #1 and #4 were locked out of reverse, even with gear down, until there was weight on wheels.

--I have no info for the -63 or any of the -71/72/73.

--Max speed for extending ejectors and/or using thrust brakes: 390kts.
--Max speed for retracting ejectors (JT4A): 250kts.
--Thrust reversers must not be used in flight below a speed of 200kts.
--Wing flaps must be completely retracted for all inflight thrust brake applications.

FYI, all this information was taken from a UA DC-8 flight manual.

Chris



Don't blame me, I don't work here...
User currently offlineCf6ppe From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 339 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6488 times:

Great job Chris, listing the DC-8 THRUST BRAKE LIMITATIONS--IN FLIGHT.

It has been more than thirty years since I had the pleasure of working on the DC-8's.

One of the things that I remember was that the squat switch for reverser operation on the ground was on the nose gear. There were many pilot write-ups for not being able to get reverse thrust due to landing on the main gear and keeping the nose up in a draggy configuration, but not as effective as having the reversers at maximum allowable power during the landing roll out.

The series -63 had the same reverser configuration as the -62 series. I presume that the -63 had the same limitations as the -62's.

One of the main in-flight uses of the DC-8 reversers was to be able to keep the engine power slightly above idle - approx. 1.05 or 1.06 EPR - so that the generators would stay on line in descent. If one kept the power in forward thrust at those power settings (to keep the generators on line) the aircraft descent speeds were higher and the descent took longer.

The DC-8 fleet that I powerplant engineered over consisted of fourteen ea. -21 series, three ea. -51 series, seventeen ea. -61 series and six ea. -63 series.


User currently offlineXaphan From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6422 times:

I was non-reving on a DL DC 8 61 inbound to ATL on descent when #2 and 3 went into reverse. Looking out the window (I was seated toward the back of first class) I saw a Southern Martin 404 breaking through the cloud cover directly below us, close enough to be considered a "near miss". I said a silent prayer of thanks to the Douglas engineers who designed that feature.

Another exciting feature of the engines was the starting. They had a real Banshee's scream, especially on a cold O'Hare night!


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6315 times:

Not sure about the thrust setting limit, but several times on AC DC-8-40s I experienced in-flight use of the thrust reversers. Captain would always come on and advise people that there will be some noise and bumpy flight for a couple of minutes -- and there was! Like being on an elevator.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
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...
What Spoilers Do The 747-400 Use In Flight? posted Sat Feb 10 2001 22:37:40 by SAAFlight202
DC-10 Water Bomber In Use In CA Fires posted Sat Oct 28 2006 01:42:00 by Nbgskygod
QF To Trial In-flight Mobile Phone Use posted Tue Aug 29 2006 04:08:48 by HKGKaiTak
Air France Says "oui" To In-flight Cell Phones Use posted Sat Jun 3 2006 21:48:43 by LH492
Do All Airlines Use Reverse Thrust Breaking? posted Mon Oct 24 2005 04:13:26 by ANZ772
FAA: Ban Of In-Flight Cell Phone Use Will Remain posted Fri Jul 15 2005 18:00:52 by PHLBOS
A 380 In Flight Bar And Amenities W.r.t. 747 posted Wed Jan 19 2005 02:02:32 by Mirrodie
What Gates Does B6 Use In LGB And OAK posted Mon Jul 5 2004 04:30:43 by HpB737100
Thrust Reverser Deployed In Flight? posted Wed May 26 2004 22:16:14 by Jblake1
Airbus 320 And 321 Series In Flight Journals posted Sun Apr 4 2004 06:58:50 by FlightLover