The infamous "pilot shortage" again...

Ok as far as the brakes go, it is true that an increase in pressure (how hard you mash those brakes) will increase temperature. However, that being said, the friction of those pads on that rotor will create ****tons of heat. Time is probably a bigger issue as they are vented, but the longer they are in contact the longer the internal temp will increase.

I would say that using brakes only might increase life 3-8% maybe, but increases the chance of a brake fire way more than that. Granted, reversers can cause damage to the engine as well, so it is a numbers game.

I would really like to see some statistics of mx cost using brakes only, max effective, min effective, with and without TR. Cause right now the argument is going a bit in the direction of "Well we can just throw up a brick wall at the end of the runway and hit that to stop. That'll lower the cost of the brakes!"
 
From what Ive seen passengers enjoy a smooth touchdown with easy braking and minimum to no reverse thrust used.

On the CRJ200 the reverse thrust is waste of time and decibles on runways 7000ft or more, unless the runway is contaminated or you land very long
 
Trip7 said:
From what Ive seen passengers enjoy a smooth touchdown with easy braking and minimum to no reverse thrust used.
Click to expand...

Passengers enjoy lots of things! Watched a Hawaiian 767 one day in HNL float about 3000' down the runway trying to make it a smooth one. Almost dragged its butt in the process! Thunk + SPOOOOOOOOOOOOL = Ticket to not ending up in the CP's office. :)
 
If I'm behind you, make the high speed and get off the runway! :)

I really hate sitting there wondering if some jet is going to efficiently get off the runway or roll it out to a convenient taxiway as I'm sitting there thinking "Crap, what is it.... Go-around, flaps 20, positive rate, gear up? Or is it..."

I think JFK tower will shimmy down and stab-out a crew if miss the high speed.
 
Doug Taylor said:
If I'm behind you, make the high speed and get off the runway! :)

I really hate sitting there wondering if some jet is going to efficiently get off the runway or roll it out to a convenient taxiway as I'm sitting there thinking "Crap, what is it.... Go-around, flaps 20, positive rate, gear up? Or is it..."

I think JFK tower will shimmy down and stab-out a crew if miss the high speed.
Click to expand...

That is another reason not to use max brakes. In ORD landing east on RWY 10 they what you to take M3(High Speed). M3 is like 9,000 feet down the runway. So guys go max brakes then have to add power to get down to M3. The same goes for 4R and the tower wanting planes to exit at S5.
 
Amazingly informative. The "Pilot Shortage" reference is for those who have realized that TR's are for people with legs to short to reach the brakes!
 
dasleben said:
Passengers enjoy lots of things! Watched a Hawaiian 767 one day in HNL float about 3000' down the runway trying to make it a smooth one. Almost dragged its butt in the process! Thunk + SPOOOOOOOOOOOOL = Ticket to not ending up in the CP's office. :)
Click to expand...

Saw a Southernjets A330 do the same with a go around in ATL.

Im talking about landing the RJ. If you need to thunk and spool in order to not run off the end of a 9000 ft runway....
 
Trip7 said:
Im talking about landing the RJ. If you need to thunk and spool in order to not run off the end of a 9000 ft runway....
Click to expand...

Naw, I hear ya. I just find it funny that what the passengers like often makes other pilots in the back cringe.
 
Did not have time to go through the entire thread, but already starting to see a shortage of CFIs in some locations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top