I was watching a clip of an American Eagle Embraer 145 landing at DFW and there was no reverse thrust when they landed. The guy wrote that they don’t use that on the embraers. WHY??? Heres the clip.
If you have a long enough runway, then why bother? Reverse thrust isn’t even factored into the equation when determining landing distance, anyway. Wheel brakes are the main braking mechanism.
Possibly to save gas? American is big on that.
It may save fuel but you have to counter that savings with the additional wear and tear on the break system.
I find it hard to believe that American Eagle does not use thrust reversers. Maybe at an airport such as DFW where the runways are long but at many of the airports they fly to the runways aren’t that long.
The person that said that on the video overview said that it’s the ERJ’s that don’t use them maybe other aircrafts in there fleet use them?? But then again I think that there fleet is a ERJ’s some props though I just don’t know what kind they are.
I flew KRIC-KPIT-KCLE aboard USAirways around 1997. At the time, they flew F-28s to their markets that were just large enough NOT to be served exclusively by USAirways Express and their fleet of turboprops. Anyhow, I thought something felt different about the landing in KPIT, but I wasn’t quite sure exactly why. I thought about it, and my suspicion was confirmed when my second flight (both F-28s) touched down in KCLE: They didn’t use the thrust-reversers on rollout. Although it seemed somewhat remarkable, I simply assumed that they obviously didn’t need them for these smaller jets landing on runways designed to handle heavies.
I’ve also witnessed some Atlantic Southeast Airlines (aka Delta Connection) CRJs landing at KCLE either without using reversers or being the quietest jets I’ve ever heard(They were at an angle and distance that didn’t allow me to get a good visual of the engines) .
Yes, you might even break the brake system
If the runway is 7000’ or longer then company SOP is not to use R/T (so I’m told). I assume this applies only when braking action is reported “good”.
Yea theyre probably just thinking with the fuel in mind.
The BAe-146 is a rj that doesn’t even have reversers but uses an extra spoiler. It’s called the whisperjet.
Actually, above and beyond the fuel savings, the ERJ-145 has carbon brakes and contrary to logic and steel brake characteristics, higher energies cause the brake to wear LESS - a little known fact know about carbon brakes… There is sitll a chance of wear and tear through oxidization due to the higher temperatures, but new technology in anti-oxidants prevent this from becoming a big factor… HOWEVER, all that being said, the bottom line is fuel as most operators are power by hour/landing and whether the brake wears more or less is fairly insignificant…
I believe this is true for other a/c types operated by a number of carriers. I’ve been in 737s and DC9s, for instance, landing in KAMA on rwy 04 with better than 12,000 feet remaining after touchdown (total rwy length is 13,500 feet) routinely with no R/T applied. Combine this long runway with a low level of traffic (i.e., usually no one on short final behind you) and relatively few taxiways on which to leave the main runway, and roll-outs without R/T are not uncommon.