Is “Reverse Taxi” approved at Envoy?
 

I subscribe to a YouTube channel that does clips of interesting aviation events. Today they posted a clip of 2 airplanes ending up nose to nose on a taxiway in CVG. During the events of trying to figure out how to get the airplanes clear of each other, one of Envoy pilots made a suggestion that caught me off guard. They said “There might be enough room for us use to use reverse thrust to turn around if no one is directly behind us”. Is that an authorized procedure at Envoy?

Here is a link to the clip:

https://youtu.be/OsaMex39HSs

Is this CNN fishing for more stories?

Saw that on YouTube as well and had the same question.

Prohibited, and I've tried it in the sim, doesn't work.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Ope Captain took the mic away from the FO

AA's MD-80's were approved for powerback off the gate...

athats because the MD-80s, DC-9s all were approved power backs.

Why not call out the TOW as a first option? Barely ANY (MD80) A/C are approved for TR pushes heck even the crew wanted a wing walker with em. Might as well get a tug out at at that point.

edit: But it would be hilarious to see a Delta and Envoy tug RACING to the taxiway to see who gets pushed first.

Thanks for that tidbit kid, looks like the FAA has to buy off on it too...

OPSPEC C065, POWERBACK OPERATIONS WITH AIRPLANES.

A. C065 authorizes the use of powerplant reversing systems for rearward taxi operations. Before issuing C065, the POI must determine whether the operator meets requirements discussed in AC 120‑29, current edition. Airplane types (M/M/S) authorized for powerback operations must be listed in C065. Airports where powerback operations are authorized must also be listed. If the POI and/or operator determine that restrictions to powerback operations are required at certain gates or ramp areas, the restrictions must be described (adjacent to the airport name) in the “Restrictions and Limitations” column. OpSpecs worksheets provide a template for listing authorized airplanes, airports, and restrictions.

Kudos to the envoy crew for standing firm and not attempting to un-screw the situation they weren’t at fault for. Whether reverses are approved at envoy or not(doubt it) they made the correct decision and were professional about it the entire time. Trying to play nice guy and hanging a hard right and then rolling into the grass goes on the pilots record not CVG ground.

I just loved how after everyone told them to make a 180, that ops guy came out and said there’s no way they have room. Good job on the crew for standing their ground and doing it the right way.

Off course, that applies to any 121 carrier. The point I was trying to make was that the DC-9 series aircraft were designed to be able to power backs. Very common occurrence up until the 90s.

I remember watching AirTran do them with the 717 all the time in ATL until around 2004.

If you do that and even tap the brakes you'll put the tail in the dirt, right?

Well thats why for powerbacks the crews were instructed to keep their feet on the floor during it.

There is a pilot at Envoy whose father infamously stood a Dash 7 on it’s tail when he tried to back it up. It had quite dramatic effects. Not sure if there was any damage or not when the nose slammed down.

TBH though, IDK if the son even knows about it. Probably not one of those stories you’d be too proud to tell about.

Yes it's legal and used to be common if you have the right airplane. If nobody trained you to do it, then I wouldn't waste time digging in the book for authorization because you're not going to find it. One of those things that if you have to ask...

Unless things have changed, power backs are not authorized at Envoy.

The FO will be flowing to mainline soon!

Actually he won’t flow. He will be hired off the street as a direct entry captain at mainline.

Doesn’t look like they attempted to power back, someone mentioned it then ATC asked them to do it and they said no.

The FO made a comment on frequency, and as required by our FOM, the CA coached him that it is not approved. The FO now knows it is not an allowed maneuver.

No-one tried to back up a plane using reverse thrust.

The 175 can actually fly in reverse because of how powerful the engines are.

Its not the power, its the location of those engines.
#underwingenginetime

The SNJ is PFM!

You clearly didn’t fly the crj. .85 all the way, baby!

737-100/200 at Continental regularly powerbacked as well as the 727, DC-9, and MD-80. The 737-300 and higher are restricted due to FOD. AirTran power backed the DC-9 and 717s into the mid 2000’s as did AA (MD-80)

You missed the jest in my post.
there used to be some people who thought flying 175s was more valuable because the engines are under the wings :)

The old JT8s with buckets werent as suspect to FOD damage as the lower hanging high bypass ratio engines.

Jumpseating once in a DC9 that powered back, I asked this question, and was told that it was an urban legend. Kind of makes sense, as a proper CG will be always be ahead of the main gear.

Ground lead was never allowed to give us the “Stop” signal while backing. Instead, it was a “come forward” signal that he/she would give if we needed to stop immediately while powerbacking. With our feet on the floor, the captain would close the reversers and add something like 1.2 EPR(DC-9/717) to stop backwards movement and come to a stop. Nighttime power backs were always interesting. It is like those runway turnoff lights on the Douglas (they had a momentary push in type action and were placed on the forward fuselage) were designed for the wave off signal at night during power back/taxi clearance. Was fun while it lasted.

Can't speak to the DC9, but the E-2 would stand on its rear if you hit the brakes backing up. Especially if wings were folded giving you a very aft CG.

Height of CG factors into the tendency to stand on tail, not just fore-aft.

If your CG is only 1 foot forward of the MLG, but the CG is 4 feet ABOVE the rotation point (tire on single axle, truck pivot on a double axle truck), any braking applied via wheels above about 1/4g will start the nose up, and as the nose goes up, the distance from the CG to pivot decreases, further reduces the 'put nose back down' moment and will eventually hit the point where it will sit on the tail no matter what you do.


We stopped rearward motion by taking props out of reverse.

Add in heavy deck motion and it would get interesting.


Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Good info, CX500! Thanks.