A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A question on reversers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 26th 06, 05:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A question on reversers

Walt wrote:

It was very interesting just getting the C-5 into contact position, but
what was more interesting was when we'd practice a break-away. The C-5
would employ their thrust reversers and pretty much disappear.



Wow. And there evidently doesn't appear to be a maximum thrust limit
for deployment of the reversers either

Ramapriya

  #2  
Old June 26th 06, 01:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A question on reversers

wrote:
Walt wrote:

It was very interesting just getting the C-5 into contact position, but
what was more interesting was when we'd practice a break-away. The C-5
would employ their thrust reversers and pretty much disappear.



Wow. And there evidently doesn't appear to be a maximum thrust limit
for deployment of the reversers either

Ramapriya


This from the ancient memory area of my brain, so all appropriate
cautions should be exercised . . .

I seem to remember that years ago (perhaps a few decades) that I was
reading a Pilot Report in Flying magazine. The author was on final
approach in a Turboprop Commander (690?) and placed his hands on the
throttles with his fingers in position to pull the unlocks that would
have permitted him to pull the throttles back through into reverse.
The manufacturer's rep in the right seat immediately rebuked the author
and cautioned him not to touch the unlocks while airborne. I guess the
manufacturer thought that this would be a really BAD thing.

I miss the days when Flying's pilot reports were many pages long. It
seemed they were written more by test pilots and less by the folks in
marketing. I guess one reason maybe how long the magazines can have
access to the planes. One the editors commented last month, that in
the old days they would have the plane for a week and they would fly
them long distances. I recall some months back, a pilot report on the
Flight Design CT2K, where it seemed that the author declined landing
the plane because of bad crosswinds. A safe decision that I agree
with, but I remember thinking: "Sheesh, didn't they have enough time to
fly to another field or wait for better weather the next day?" Telling
us how a plane behaves in the pattern and during landing strikes me as
a matter of prime interest.

Blue skies to all . . .

John

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lyc. O-360 cylinder question JB Owning 13 November 27th 04 09:32 PM
Handheld battery question RobsSanta General Aviation 8 September 19th 04 03:07 PM
A question on Airworthiness Inspection Dave S Home Built 1 August 10th 04 05:07 AM
Question Charles S Home Built 4 April 5th 04 09:10 PM
Partnership Question Harry Gordon Owning 4 August 16th 03 11:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.