Liedetectors From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 360 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2326 times:
Hey sports fans!
I was sitting in my office today and i notice a Gulfstream G-IV and a Falcon Jet of some kind (and no it wasnt an F-16) taxi by and they had the TRs extended. They were clearly taxiing for T/O as they did soon after, so dont tell me that the pilots didnt retracted them after landing. My question is why were they taxiing with them extended?
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12276 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2292 times:
It is common to adjust your taxi speed with the thrust reversers deployed. Occasionally a commerical aircraft will do it. I have seen the TRs deployed here at DFW for airplanes going downhill after crossing one of the taxiway bridges here.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31775 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2141 times:
Taxing speed can be reduced with T/Rs & not using the Brakes too.In the Early 90s.Damania Airways,a Pvt Operator had instructed their Staff on Min use of Brakes.Their 1st B737 Brake change appeared after Three months.
Citation501SP From United States of America, joined May 2000, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2102 times:
It is pretty common on Gulfstream G-IVs, Falcon 2000's, and Citation X's.
The Engines have a surplus of thrust at idle, enough to still accelerate the aircraft once rolling. So rather than ride the brakes, one side's "buckets" will be put to the wind. Thus saving riding the brakes. Or if going down hill both sides are put out.
Besides it looks great. I love the big buckets on the G-IV's.
Fly707 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2044 times:
May be because the engines are high from ground ( rear section ) .
In other types such as Boeing 767 or airbus 300 engines are so near from ground . Using TRs on these types may cause sand, small stones suction, that will cause engine damage .
Using brakes would be much more cheaper than using TRs during taxing .
777WT From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 879 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1995 times:
Quoting Fly707 (Reply 6): Using brakes would be much more cheaper than using TRs during taxing .
Not on most coporate jets. They have brake temp limits for takeoff shall a RTO is needed.
I've seen Gulfstreams use T/R at HPN. Just idle thrust, no additional thrust off idle, otherwise you would hear it roar with it deployed.
If the brakes gets over the limit, then that will cost you time and fuel waiting for it to cool down (idling in the runup area), possibly adding mess to the ground traffic if there are other a/c in line waiting to take off.
Thrust reverse doesn't shorten engine life if it's just deployed but not off idle. Add power while in thrust reverse will considerably shorten the life due to increased EGT.
As for most airliners, they use idle thrust reverse to conserve fuel and engine life unless it's really needed.