Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BAe 146-200 Reverse?  
User currently offlineSK A340 From Sweden, joined Mar 2000, 845 posts, RR: 2
Posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1437 times:


Some months ago I downloaded a BAe 146-200 to my flightsimulator but it didn't have reverse on it's engines. I therefore searched the net for one that had and flew with it for a while.

Now, a week ago, I flew with one of Braathens-Malmöaviation's BAe 146-200 (Stockholm-Malmö-Turin and Turin-Stockholm) and I noticed that it didn't reverse during landing.

Doesn't the aircraft have reverse or was the runway long enough to use without reverse?

Great plane anyway.


/Micke

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFuturepilot2b From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 137 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1365 times:

The BAe-146 does not have reverse thrust on any of it's engines.

User currently offlineDC-10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1349 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...

User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3509 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1341 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.

Ha det!


User currently offlineCSA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1334 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.


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...
BAe 146-200 Flying For Austrian? posted Fri Jan 30 2004 18:16:09 by Konrad
How Are Air Canada Jazz's BAe-146-200's posted Wed Jul 24 2002 04:04:04 by ContinentalEWR
Difference Between Avro RJ 85 And Bae 146-200 posted Fri May 19 2000 19:06:35 by Laurent P
Ryanair's B737-200's + Bae 146's posted Thu Dec 11 2003 19:53:17 by Aircraft88
Range Of 737-200 & BAe 146 posted Mon Nov 20 2000 21:17:19 by Cody
BAE- 146, A318, 737-600, 717-200 posted Tue Dec 22 1998 05:20:46 by United777
Fate Of BACON's 4 BAe 146 After March 07? posted Sun Nov 12 2006 23:45:46 by Vfw614
What Airlines Has Operated BAe 146/ Avro RJ & 737? posted Sun Oct 22 2006 04:33:29 by 747400sp
Titan BAe 146 At Northolt posted Fri Jul 21 2006 21:02:40 by Lhrneighbour
BAe 146 Freighter Conversions To Restart? posted Tue Jul 18 2006 22:18:43 by A342