A question on reversers

If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher than Vref, is it
acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude landing too far
down the runway?

Thanks in advance,

Ramapriya

No

Vref is 1.3 Vso and even at higher speed float is not a real
problem, you fly the pitch attitude to a firm landing and
deploy the spoilers. Most jet aircraft have a nose down,
negative wing angle when the nose wheel is on the surface.
You can "plant" a jet and keep it on the ground without the
problem of ballooning off the ground that most light
aircraft encounter.

If you are out of the proper position, the proper procedure
is a go-around.

BTW, it seems you are trying to learn about paining aircraft
(decoy) and how to "speak" pilot, is there any ulterior
motive such as passing a security check with a stolen
airplane painted away from a professional shop and flown by
a crew that isn't qualified?


wrote in message
oups.com...
| If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher than
Vref, is it
| acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude
landing too far
| down the runway?
|
| Thanks in advance,
|
| Ramapriya
|

wrote in message
oups.com...
If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher than Vref, is it
acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude landing too far
down the runway?

Thanks in advance,

Ramapriya

I just open the door and throw out the anchor. Works best on soft grass
runways.

Dave Stadt wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher than Vref, is it
acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude landing too far
down the runway?

Thanks in advance,

Ramapriya


I just open the door and throw out the anchor. Works best on soft grass
runways.

That is called a soft-field landing, right? You should use it on all
grass strips, not just the soft ones. Because you never know when one
may be soft, so just assume that and always use the anchor. Worst case
is that the grass runway is hard and it just bounces along behind you.
No hard as long as it doesn't wrap around the tail. :-)

On 24 Jun 2006 03:48:13 -0700, wrote:

If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher than Vref, is it
acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude landing too far
down the runway?

I've only allegedly worked on couple of different types of buckets,
all on biz-jets and they have had one thing in common.

The aircraft must have a weight-on-wheels signal present somewhere in
the logic circuit before the reversers will unlock or deploy.

Inflight, if a not-locked condition is detected, the reversers are
hydraulically driven to the stowed position and pressure is maintained
holding them there until the not-locked condition goes away.

Unless you are learning to fly the space shuttle:

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/pre...week5_sta.html

http://www.nasaexplores.com/show2_ar....php?id=04-067

http://www.aopa.org/pilot/features/9703feat.html

having the buckets out while flying is a RBT (really bad thing), but
I'm sure there are some exceptions out there.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/c-17.htm

TC

The props on the King Air will reverse in-flight as can the
Pilatus bushplane. There can be some interesting
aerodynamic effects. But very few recreational airplanes
have any sort of reverse. But I agree, jets require the
squat switch (unless there is a malfunction) to deploy
reverse.




--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

wrote in message
...
| On 24 Jun 2006 03:48:13 -0700,
wrote:
|
| If you float in above the threshold a fair bit higher
than Vref, is it
| acceptable technique to chance the reverser to preclude
landing too far
| down the runway?
|
| I've only allegedly worked on couple of different types of
buckets,
| all on biz-jets and they have had one thing in common.
|
| The aircraft must have a weight-on-wheels signal present
somewhere in
| the logic circuit before the reversers will unlock or
deploy.
|
| Inflight, if a not-locked condition is detected, the
reversers are
| hydraulically driven to the stowed position and pressure
is maintained
| holding them there until the not-locked condition goes
away.
|
| Unless you are learning to fly the space shuttle:
|
|
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/pre...week5_sta.html
|
| http://www.nasaexplores.com/show2_ar....php?id=04-067
|
| http://www.aopa.org/pilot/features/9703feat.html
|
| having the buckets out while flying is a RBT (really bad
thing), but
| I'm sure there are some exceptions out there.
|
|
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/c-17.htm
|
| TC

Jim Macklin wrote:
But I agree, jets require the
squat switch (unless there is a malfunction) to deploy
reverse.

I read recently the C-5 that crashed at Dover, DE had a #2 engine
reverser unstow right after takeoff. The crew attempted the approach
with full flaps instead of partial flaps per the POH and the sink rate
was too high to overcome.

Kingfish wrote:
Jim Macklin wrote:
But I agree, jets require the

squat switch (unless there is a malfunction) to deploy
reverse.


I read recently the C-5 that crashed at Dover, DE had a #2 engine
reverser unstow right after takeoff. The crew attempted the approach
with full flaps instead of partial flaps per the POH and the sink rate
was too high to overcome.


It was an "unlock" indication which is one step before an "unstow". They
shut down the engine in question to prevent an aysmetric deployment.. I
THINK i saw that they had pulled the opposite side engine (#3) back to
idle for some reason (directional control presumably... but I would have
thought the rudder would have enough authority for that..)..

I heard the full flap thing too.. but my version has them retracting
from full to some partial setting, and that the airplane was flying
below the stall speed for that weight and flap setting, and then simple
physics took over.

Dave

"Dave S" wrote in message
ink.net...
Kingfish wrote:
Jim Macklin wrote:
But I agree, jets require the

squat switch (unless there is a malfunction) to deploy
reverse.


I read recently the C-5 that crashed at Dover, DE had a #2 engine
reverser unstow right after takeoff. The crew attempted the approach
with full flaps instead of partial flaps per the POH and the sink rate
was too high to overcome.


It was an "unlock" indication which is one step before an "unstow". They
shut down the engine in question to prevent an aysmetric deployment.. I
THINK i saw that they had pulled the opposite side engine (#3) back to
idle for some reason (directional control presumably... but I would have
thought the rudder would have enough authority for that..)..

I heard the full flap thing too.. but my version has them retracting from
full to some partial setting, and that the airplane was flying below the
stall speed for that weight and flap setting, and then simple physics took
over.

Dave

The report also said that after securing the #2, they continued to
operate the #2 thrust lever instead of the #3 which was still operating.
Dead foot, Dead engine.

Al G.

wrote in message ...
On 24 Jun 2006 03:48:13 -0700, wrote:


having the buckets out while flying is a RBT (really bad thing), but
I'm sure there are some exceptions out there.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/c-17.htm

TC

Yup, you found it. The C-17 thrust reversers are certified as flight controls.