DC-10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
These aircraft were never fitted with reversers...They have those massive airbrakes built into the tail cone and spoilers that span the upper wing surfaces...there is really no need to fit the engines of this sort of aircraft with the additional weight and complexity of reversers...
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3504 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (14 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1229 times:
Tjenis! (I guess)
As you might have noticed, the plane didn't have much speed on landing. It deploys the rear airbrake a moment before touchdown, partially to slow it down, and partially to let the plane go into that steep dive that makes the plane able to land wherever it wants to. So, the plane has no need for such a thing as a thrust reverser.
CSA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1222 times:
One of the reasons for BAE (today's AIR) to go for that option was that it makes the aircraft a lot quieter than a a reversing aircraft, which makes it suitable for airports with special noise restrictions such as BMA and LCY. If it was fitted with reversers I wouldn't bet they would have got permission to fly on either BMA or LCY.