If you look at the central engine exhaust, there is a ring over the end. Is this some sort of reverse thrust? I have never seen this before, I know a similar mechanism is used on the Saab Viggen but I wasn't too sure.
Dogfighter2111 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3623 times:
I think this is just the entrance to the engine. Don't hold me to it, but if you see A320, it is roughly the same, but the panels come out of the sides.
TupolevTu154 From UK - England, joined Aug 2004, 1989 posts, RR: 36 Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3607 times:
Meister808 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 968 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3525 times:
Is that clamshell large enough to catch some thrust coming from engines 1/3? I would think that if it was that would cause pretty bad vibrations or something, since ou have the air from the middle engine going forward out of the reverser, but the air from the outboards is still going back...
-Meister
Twin Cessna 812 Victor, Minneapolis Center, we observe your operation in the immediate vicinity of extreme precipitation
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 41 Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3323 times:
Just for the record, the slightly more technical terms for the three different thrust reverser types pictured above are "clamshell" or "bucket" reversers, "petal" reversers, and "cascade" reversers, respectively. Petal reversers are basically just a variant of cascade reversers and their operation is essentially the same.
HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3151 times:
Can someone explain why they stopped using bucket type reversers, and why they stopped reversing all the exhaust, instead just reversing the bypass exhaust? Just curious, as it seems that reversing all the exhaust would definitely work better.
A350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1098 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3147 times:
Can someone explain why they stopped using bucket type reversers, and why they stopped reversing all the exhaust, instead just reversing the bypass exhaust? Just curious, as it seems that reversing all the exhaust would definitely work better.
The bucket type reversers get in close contact to the hot, aggresive exhaust gases. For that reason, they have to be made out of expensive and heavy material, wear out fast and cause high maintenace cost.
At modern high-bypass-ration-engines, the contribution of the core stream to the overall thrust is small, and by reversing the bypass only you overcome the probs mentioned above.
But as a child I was really impressed seeing the bucket typews on a 732
in action
A350
Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
Pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3015 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3107 times:
Also, modern braking systems and the materials used allow for much better braking and elimate the need for reversers which also add noise. Thrust reversers aren't taken into account for aircraft performance data so they are just a bonus.
Trans States newer EMB145s don't have reversers and that comes at a savings of 700lbs per aircraft and two fewer mechanisms to maintain.
OpsGuy From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 57 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2956 times:
There a few Corporate aircraft that use Buckets, I know that GIV-V's use them and I am pretty sure beechjets and the Falcon 2000's do too. I see them all day long at the airport, but its late and my mind is drawing a blank right now. I love to take pictures of the G-V's when they test the reversers while taxing out, its a pretty neat site from behind!
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 41 Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2952 times:
Another contributing factor to the relative nonexistence of bucket/clamshell reversers nowadays is that, as turbojets have made way for turbofans and engines have gotten bigger overall, bucket/clamshell reversers become much larger, heavier, and more costly devices. Add to those detrimental aspects the possibility of the reverser elements hitting the ground due to their size and you can understand their relative unpopularity these days. Still, bucket/clamshell reversers are one of the most effective reverser types available.
Jetstar From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1471 posts, RR: 12 Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2925 times:
The Falcon 50 and 900 models are tri-jets, like the 727 but have only one bucket type thrust reverser on the center (#2) engine, both outboard engines have no thrust reversers.
Sponsor Message: 
From UK - England, joined Aug 2004, 1989 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1098 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 968 posts, 
From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2131 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
