BOACVC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 628 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 7 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4981 times:
With the recent discussion of the EK a/c incident in Australia, where the aircraft had a very very long takeoff run, would it have been possible for the pilot to deploy thrust reversers in addition to brakes to try to stop the plane from going past the runway edge if needed ? Would brakes be effective at all ? If thrust reversers are not allowed in that (take-off) configuration, what options would he have had if he had to stop due to some significant issue such as loss of an engine, or some problem, apart from the one issue of mis-configured weight of the aircraft.
I realise that any abrupt stop would be catastrophic for the aircraft itself, but would this be better or worse than the alternative: lift off the runway and struggle to climb and then ... crash down ?
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6506 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4975 times:
Reverse thrust can be used in aborted takeoffs, I believe. I think the big question is airline procedure...some may like it, and some may not. In the end, one would imagine they will take a rule-breaker if it means saving the passengers and a/c...
Tb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1983 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4922 times:
It depends on the airline. If you read the recent final report of the Kalitta 747 over run in Brussels, they probably could have stopped it by the end if they had deployed the T/R's. Per Kalitta Air RTO procedures, they are to be used. Why they weren't used isn't known but there are a lot of variables so it's hard to say. If they had 3-4 more seconds to assess the situation and think of pulling 1+4, it may have worked but of course, hindsight is 20/20.
On the other hand at my company we were taught not to use them on an RTO in the Lear 20 series. We did not "Arm" them for takeoff since they apparently had a mind of their own sometimes, they are hydraulic and had to be armed in order for them to move when the sub-throttles were pulled back. The thought was that if you switched them and 1 didn't arm and you got in a hurry and pulled back on both, you would have an asymmetric deployment and really had a directional problem in addition to the RTO. They have since been pinned due to an AD so it's a non-issue. Fortunately I have not been involved in any high-speed aborts in my type aside from the sim. We just do max-braking until stoppage is assured as well as deploy the air brakes and at the Captains discretion, pull the drag chute. We do not have T/R's installed.
WILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9320 posts, RR: 74
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4852 times:
We use thrust reverser as well for RTO's. The thrust reverser are most effective at higher speeds. The slower you get the less effective they are. But the brakes are the main thing you use to slow the airplane down.
It is impressive how good the brakes are.
EcuadorianMD11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4596 times:
Quoting WILCO737 (Reply 10): The spoiler kill all the lift so that all the weight of the airplane is on the ground and the brakes can work just perfectly.
Now in a car, if I hit maximum brake at a speed of (for argument´s sake) 140 km/h, my car goes haywire..........it will either spin around (perhaps unlikely in a plane) or veer off to the right or left. Not necessarily, but you know what I´m getting it, right? Behavior is hard to predict in circumstances like these.
What can you say on the stability of planes in case of emergency braking!?
Have you done some involuntarily off roading yourself perhaps?
I never had a real RTO - Thank god. but the stability is pretty good (in the simulator). Even with an engine failure you can keep the airplane on the runway with the rudders or the nose wheel steering at lower speeds.