Perhaps the engines were left in idle reverse only? It appears that the left engine TR is locked out, which is why the right engine TR deploys alone. The pilots would definitely be aware of the locked out TR, but they pull the TR levers anyway out of procedural habit.
Regards, JetMech
JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
Nosewheel steering + rudder. You can easily pull full reverse thrust on one engine and none on the other and have plenty of directional authority to stay on the line you want (absent a vicious worst-case crosswind). Reverse thrust is only a fraction of full forward.
vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 6515 posts, RR: 29 Reply 4, posted (4 months 11 hours ago) and read 2552 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 3):
Nosewheel steering + rudder. You can easily pull full reverse thrust on one engine and none on the other and have plenty of directional authority to stay on the line you want (absent a vicious worst-case crosswind). Reverse thrust is only a fraction of full forward.
For some reason, I thought that using one reverser wasn't recommended or approved or something - i.e. if one reverser is nonfunctional, you don't use reverse at all (obviously that may also depend on the airline).
I might be thinking of something else, though, so I'd appreciate corrections!
The spirit of Massachusetts is the spirit of America!
wilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8009 posts, RR: 83 Reply 5, posted (4 months 11 hours ago) and read 2543 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 4): For some reason, I thought that using one reverser wasn't recommended or approved or something -
You should try to use symmetrical thrust. But maybe the #1 reverser didn't open. That happen. And then the other is open and you should only use idle reverse and during high speed you only need a little rudder to steer the airplane with the rudder pedals. When getting slower you need more or you should close the reverser and use the brakes only.
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 4): i.e. if one reverser is nonfunctional, you don't use reverse at all (obviously that may also depend on the airline).
If you know that prior departure, yes. Then the reverser is deactivated.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 11032 posts, RR: 72 Reply 6, posted (4 months 11 hours ago) and read 2540 times:
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 4): For some reason, I thought that using one reverser wasn't recommended or approved or something - i.e. if one reverser is nonfunctional, you don't use reverse at all (obviously that may also depend on the airline).
I suspect it varies from aircraft to aircraft. You may be thinking of a procedural thing on some Boeings...if you go to pull both reversers on a normal landing and one of them doesn't deploy, the interlock will prevent that thrust lever from going any farther into reverse. In that case, you're not supposed to just blindly pull the remaining reverser up individually.
However, if you've got a reverser locked out or you've had a failure earlier in the flight that disables one reverser (the QRH will tell you this) then it's acceptable to land and use the one operative reverser.
I think, but am not positive, that the differentiating factor is whether or not the flight crew knows they're going to have differential reverse thrust before they actually land. As long as you know and can compensate (nose wheel, rudder, and differential braking) it doesn't seem particularly difficult to execute and is certainly within the capability of most airliners.
Larshjort From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1041 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (4 months 10 hours ago) and read 2529 times:
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 4): For some reason, I thought that using one reverser wasn't recommended or approved or something - i.e. if one reverser is nonfunctional, you don't use reverse at all (obviously that may also depend on the airline).
I might be thinking of something else, though, so I'd appreciate corrections!
At my airline the MEL for the CRJ200 allows only 1 thrust reverser to be deactivated. But then on that aircraft the engines are fairly close to the centerline.
Alias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2190 times:
Quoting Larshjort (Reply 7):
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 4):
For some reason, I thought that using one reverser wasn't recommended or approved or something - i.e. if one reverser is nonfunctional, you don't use reverse at all (obviously that may also depend on the airline).
I might be thinking of something else, though, so I'd appreciate corrections!
At my airline the MEL for the CRJ200 allows only 1 thrust reverser to be deactivated. But then on that aircraft the engines are fairly close to the centerline.
/Lars
The CRJ200 is very easy to control with one reverser deactivated and the other at full reverse. It doesn't take much rudder correction in a light wind to keep the aircraft on centerline of the runway. The engines being near the centerline of the aircraft and the overall short length of the aircraft make it quite docile in asymetric thrust situations like an engine failure on takeoff or single reverser operations.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 3302 posts, RR: 25 Reply 10, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2161 times:
Every jet transport plane I have flown, has been allowed to fly with one reverser inop. You still use the other one, and I have never had a problem with directional control.
An extreme example (in the simulator) would be an engine failure just before V1. Both are selected to max reverse in the rejected take-off, of which of course, only one is actually producing reverse thrust.
It can be a handful, especially on a contaminated runway, or with a max crosswind on the "bad" side, but normally you can keep it close to the centre-line.
Two more swords and I am queen of the Monkey People!
737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 317 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1919 times:
One note on the MEL for the B737, per the procedures the thrust reverser handle for the inop. reverser is wired in the down position so deployment isn't/can't be attempted. The operable reverser is usable.
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2372 posts, RR: 15 Reply 14, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1626 times:
Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 13): Wasn´t the TAM A320 crash at Congonhas partially attributed to a defective thrust reverser?
This was known by the pilots before T.O as well.
Yes, but only indirectly. In trying to avoid using the failed reverser, they also failed to retard the thrust lever to idle after touchdown, something you must do on any FBW Airbus, reverse thrust operative or not. Not doing so meant the engine spooled up to high forward thrust (as commanded by thrust lever position) once autothrust disengaged.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
Airbus_A340 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1552 posts, RR: 24 Reply 15, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1476 times:
As CCA has said, the A330 has no limitation with single engine reverse.
If one is deactivated, we can use the working engine up to full reverse- procedure is to pull both the reversers. I have had a thrust reverser fail on me before and have despatched many times with one inop and the asymmetry only requires a little input on the rudder pedals.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 165 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 141 posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2445 posts, 
From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8009 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1041 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2002, 639 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2011, 359 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2372 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
