It's alright I'll push myself back…

It is an uncompressed .avi file so you need to ensure your software can play these. At worst you may need a divx plugin.

Unfort for me it only plays the sound and not the video!

Last weekend I was in BGI and just happened to have a Chanchangi Airlines 737 (http://www.chanchangi-airlines.com/) do a powerback next to us. I only had my phone with me so hence the poor quality but I hope you enjoy it as much as I did seeing it for real, depsite getting peppered with every bit of debris on the apron.

737 Reversing

Upload Video and Images – Putfile

Here’s the one showing the gravel kit and the vortex disruptors. I have a book somwhere with a picture of the engine I was thinking of. I will find it one day unless someone else beats me to it.

Gravel Kit

Bypass jets can’t power back as there is too much air flowing through the core of the engine. Only the fan air is bypassed. All the debris and FOD would be ingested which is not a great idea. It isn’t allowed on the 75/76 at all as per Boeing limitations.

Some 737-200’s had a special mark of engine that had an air feed around the engine nacelle to blow debris away anytime but particularly when reverse was applied. Not sure if it was for power back purposes but it was a common fit on African 73’s at that time. If I find a picture I will post it.

I’ve flew with Scot Airways from EDI-LCY twice and on both flights we have powered back at EDI.

It saves some time as you don’t have to diconnect a tug and bar from the a/c.

richard

They should have Wingmirrors if they are reversing back of stand 😀

Like the one on the trislander maybe?

As a pax have been on DC9 (NW + MD80 (AA) and 727’s (AA) that have pushed back using reverse thrust.

i’ve seen c-130’s do this, the loady sits on the ramp looking out the back, reverse out of the slot, ramp up, and drive off.

yeah my uncle used to do that he said the amercians were even better at it

I always wondered, the jets that power back have to burn a fair amount of fuel so wouldn’t the airline want to save that by using a tug or is it still cheaper without the tug.

In the simpliest evaluation a powerback is cheaper. A normal pushback requires purchasing a tug, paying for a ramper to operate it, a tow bar, fuel to run the tug as well as maintenance costs. The powerback only requires a few pounds of gas.

More realistic evaluation would consider possible FOD damage to the engines as well as FOD damage to personnel and equipment in the gate area. I think most airlines don’t see these risks as worth permitting powerbacks not to mention that most airports don’t allow them (since it’s their terminals and gates that will be blasted).

NIMBYs allmcc?

Edit – Not In My Back Yard’s DOH

I always wondered, the jets that power back have to burn a fair amount of fuel so wouldn’t the airline want to save that by using a tug or is it still cheaper without the tug.

Used to do it at MAN a few years ago on the J41’s. It was done to save money.
To push one back normaly takes three men and a tractor.
1. Bloke on headset(me)
2. Tug driver
3. Bloke to stop traffic behind aircraft
To do a power back it still takes three men as it was deemed necessary to have two blokes to stop the traffic. Since the two safety men always arrived in a tractor aswell it didn’t save any money at all!!!.
It was stopped a MAN because they were affraid of sand blasting any passengers walking out to other aircraft. They didn’t give a damm about me though!.
I didn’t have any quarms about doing it but loads of others did. Nobody though could give me a rational reason why they were un happy about it either, apart fron “It ain’t natural”!!!!!

Rgds Cking

I recall ATPs used to “power back” at BHD a until a few years ago – then the terribly noise sensitive NIMBYs complained about the racket and the practice ceased.

Yes, I can confirm at ABZ T3’s JS32/41s “power back” as it’s called.

We’d usually have a guy outside with a headset plugged into a jack in the nosewheel bay who we’d communicate with. Most turboprops taxi at constant rpm and just vary the blade angle to control speed so there would only be a small amount of propwash however the guy would be by the nose rather than in line with the props.

At the head of some of the Regional stands at the likes of MAN they do actually have mirrors on the stand head for this purpose…

I remember mirrors when I used to fly turboprops into MAN but they were orientated so that from the cockpit you could see the nosewheel in order to know when to stop the aircraft at the right spot when taxying in. I don’t think you could see behind IIRC.

Could be, so the mirrors may remove the requirements for Marshaller assistance onto the stand, but you would then require a marshaller for a Powerback? If this is required, from previous experiance, this would subject hthe marshaller to Prop-wash?

At the head of some of the Regional stands at the likes of MAN they do actually have mirrors on the stand head for this purpose…

I remember mirrors when I used to fly turboprops into MAN but they were orientated so that from the cockpit you could see the nosewheel in order to know when to stop the aircraft at the right spot when taxying in. I don’t think you could see behind IIRC.

The “Super-80″s of AA did it every time when I took a multi hop trip all around USA.

i’ve seen c-130’s do this, the loady sits on the ramp looking out the back, reverse out of the slot, ramp up, and drive off.