As an older 737 captain I got to do this a time or two where the tug for whatever reason wasn’t available. When you want to stop the rearward motion you simply reduce power and never, I mean never touch the brakes to stop. The aircraft can quite easily fall on it’s tail. Great memories and very glad I got the chance to do it.
@@TheTravesty2012 yes, the JT8D engine was in almost most aircraft from the 60's to 70's: 707, 727, 737, DC9, MD80 and the Navy they were called the J52 in the A4 and A6 aircraft. I was in AIMD Jet Shop on Carrier 64 Constellation and my first engine I worked was J52 :-) For those who do know what N1 is: N1 is the rotational speed of the low pressure (low speed) engine spool. Thank you @TheTravesty2012 for your post. Bobby
My dad used to work for AA he's retired now, but its funny that you guys filmed that footage at that gate in DFW my dad used to work at that gate. Who knows that's probably him doing the powerback signal to the pilot. Great memories of DFW.
Hello, most airliners can technically push-back themselves like this, using the reverse thrusters. The problem is that at 100% throttle, you still only get 15% of the reverse force, and this makes it too easy for debris to get caught and sucked up in the engine, it's not good for overall engine life, safety, it's noisy, etc. these airplanes can push back themselves because they're engines are high off the ground. Reverse thrusters can get close to 100% thrust in reverse when moving at high speeds, and many modern airliners now have reverse thrusters that simply use boundary layer effects disruption by venting are outwards, which doesn't really provide reverse thrust itself but instead causes a lot of drag.
It used to be done with planes with rear-mounted engines, which were common in the past. Now, it doesn't work with most airliners because they have wing-mounted engines.
Typically if the flight is close to the gate and there are windows they wouldn't normally do it just because of flying debris like small rocks or gravel,
These puppies were over engineered, testament of an era when engineers used to have free reign in designing aircraft. Today, it's all about saving a buck here and there, the Max, 787, 777X is a good example of the later. Kudos to the MC Donnell engineers
Dantram GB except for the dc-10 door issue they said “oh we will fix it please don’t issue an AD” and never fixed it and killed people. Lol. Other than that the md-80 is the “iron workhorse” of the aircraft industry.
Powerbacks are great to see! What's REALLY impressive is seeing a turboprop with fully reversible prop pitch doing it. I've seen the C-130 "Fat Albert" that accompanies the Blue Angels do a short field landing, coming to an incredibly fast stop, then leaving the engines running hard with the props in reverse, they back up in a tight semi-circle to face the aircraft directly at the crowd...when he brakes the nose gets light and it comes up a bit, then compresses the nose gear on the rebound...like it's taking a bow. Very cool!
Holy crap. Very neat. 29 years on this planet and I didn’t think planes had reverse. But they do.. they just take all that enormous engine power and just make it do the opposite of ‘normal’ function lol.
I lived in Rochester, NY from 1991 thru 2000. AA MD80s always pushed back like this if they were departing from one of the last couple of gates in the terminal wing.
I'm not sure all airlines authorized using reverse thrust for taxi back. Some of the problems are...Reverse thrust tends to throw a lot of debris (FOD) into the air because the exhaust is deflected to the sides, up and down. This debris can damage the engine itself, or other things on and around the aircraft or injure someone on the ramp. It is less of a problem for aircraft with tail-mounted engines, but that engine configuration is not used as much anymore in transport aircraft, as it is less aerodynamically efficient. The compressor might suck in its own hot exhaust gases. This might lead to temperature-induced damages in the last (high-pressure) stages of the compressor and health issues for passengers, since the air conditioning system works with bleed air from the compressor. Reverse thrust is rather inefficient on jet engines, so it uses a ton of fuel. The pilot also has to be careful using the brakes during power back...The main wheels are very close behind the center of gravity, so harder braking can lift the nose wheel, causing the pilot to lose control, and even causing damage to the tail if it hits the ground.
Funny thing is I work for American airlines. Flew from Houston Texas to Kansas City MO to see my girlfriend when she is home alone. Now we are married for LIFE 😂 Edit: happily married :3
Tried this with 777, 747, C-17, A320, Concorde, AN-225, but didn't work with the A380. ( no powerful enough cause only 2 of its engines have reverses ). Once brakes too hard on the C-17 and got a tailsrike lol.
Yes they are... Don't think the savings are that great as you need just about the same amount of guys during push back, perhaps minus the driver, and it takes just about the same amount of time give or take a minute... I guess you don't need a tractor...
The "Eighties" are awsome ! Very simple maintenance and it can take a lot of pounding, reliable work horse for AA long times! Im glad that had a chance to worked on the "Eighties"
This plane was just amazing. There's only two things in life that I regret. One is not having gone to a Motorhead concert while Lemmy was alive and kicking, the other is not having flown or be inside a MD80
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE SEEING THE POWER PUSHBACKS WITH THE GROUND MARSHAL AND CREW WORKING WITH COCKPIT CREW USUALLY ENDING IN A SALUTE TO CAPTAIN. PROFESSIONAL AND BEAUTIFUL SIGHT. THANKS! GREAT FOOTAGE.
Saw an AirTran pilot do this in MSY with a 717. Got his taxi clearance, backed out and even did a 90° turn like a sports car backing out of a driveway, then quickly forward taxied to the runway.
MR. Vegeta ultimately because an Air Carrier has to have a particular paragraph in their Operations Specifications authorizing using powerplant reverse for rearward taxi and almost no airlines have put that in their ops specs anymore, so doing it is breaking FAA regs. The reason why airlines stopped putting that paragraph in is more complicated but there is a pretty large danger of ingesting FOD on wing mounted engines, and even with centerline thrust engines like the DC-9/MD-80 it is loud, uses a lot of fuel, and is hard on the people and equipment on the ramp.
MR. Vegeta yes. Also beyond the fuel reversing itself uses, which is a lot, almost every airline has gone to single engine taxi, especially at busier airports where you anticipate a delay waiting for take off - this is also for fuel savings. That’s to say you begin taxi with one engine running, and then a minute or two prior to takeoff you start the second one. You’d have to start both engines to power back so you couldn’t do single engine taxi anymore.
I once asked a DC-9 captain if they could back up with their thrust reverse. He was a little surprised by the question and said it was probably possible but that it wasn't a part of their approved procedures.
Strange. Youve never heard of thrust reversers? Ever heard that loud noise after landing that slows the plane down called the engine? What’d you think that was?
CAPT: " ground crew, we're ready for push-back" TOW DRIVER: " guys !! hold on a sec, I'm finishing my first cigarette of the day, ughh, I hate this job" CAPT TO FO " hold my beer..." CAPT engages thrust reversers..
yes i miss those days but hey at least we have better tech and newer aircraft now but i sort of miss the OLD days, i mean then we had the friken Boeing 727, L-1011 DC-10 DC-8 DC-9 and more! man i miss them! im only 12 but my dad was born in 1966 so he got to experience the good ole days! he even took control of a Boeing 747 Early varient dude! aawwww the Good Ole Days...
I can see why they started using tugs for these aircraft for 2 reasons: 1. Very loud! 2. It rolled forward a bit too much to time it right. With that said, I love this! Classic Aviation is just amazing. So many great aircraft that are mostly gone.
I remember those planes MD80 I was there when they made him I work for McDonnell Douglas aircraft company. My job I took care of the has its waste and Hall all that to the hazard waste yard . One of the engineers let me aboard and see it they are a great plane.
Who ever is doing the CGI on these types of videos is really really good!! It’s nearly perfect... there’s a couple spots where the background doesn’t exactly line up where he removed the AirPort Tractor, but other then that it’s beautiful...
Doesn't work in X-Plane either tbh...pretty sure I"m using the "Rotate" MD-80 too. Flight sims just don't do most things accurately. They're good for approximation of many aspects of flight though
McDonnell Douglas were really virtuosos in aircraft design. It's sad that third party door malfunction (same type of door used in most other aircraft) put negative light on DC-10 and McDonnell Douglass out of of business.
Yes but the “gentleman’s agreement” to fix the doors between mcdonnel douglas and the FAA that was never honoured followed by an avoidable accident was the final nail in the coffin.
I'm told the practice stopped as much due to fuel costs as for the potential for debris on the ground to damage to terminal. Technically all planes can reverse on their own, it was just only ever allowed for fuselage mounted engines. Under wing engines had far too much of a chance to blow debris forward and then ingest said debris.
@Jake Hall Provided they're capable of reverse thrust yes. High bypass engines like on the 747 and any modern aircraft reverse the bypass air. On these engines the bypass thrust is far greater than the thrust from the engine core. That said it would be an even greater waste of fuel as not all thrust is reversed like with the buckets. Just because it's technically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
As an older 737 captain I got to do this a time or two where the tug for whatever reason wasn’t available. When you want to stop the rearward motion you simply reduce power and never, I mean never touch the brakes to stop. The aircraft can quite easily fall on it’s tail. Great memories and very glad I got the chance to do it.
Do a little wheelie, Especially in a 737-900
Presumably you can use forward thrust to stop.
Being a thrust reverser must be a very tough life
Aaand I found you again...
That plane is like I'm not gonna be late!
Pilot: ground AA ready for pushback
Grd: sorry there's a 20min delay on the tug.
Pilot: ...not today! Hold my beer!
🤣🤣🤣
😅 wow
Two things wrong with that statement....him having a beer in the cockpit and using thrust reversers to back out lol
Pilots can’t have beer
@@basimpsn 1950's air travel.
787: I need a tractor to pushback.
MD-80: iMmA jEs YeEt BaCkWaRdS
"That's been out of protocol since the 1980s..."
-Airforceproud95
you can alt f4
Blog ot
Exactly what I was thinking
Yep!
Ryan Booth BLOG IT SAUCE BOSS anyways is sauce boss with or without spacing i forgot for some reason
The buckets coming out never fails to amaze me. MCD made some seriously cool aircraft.
It's actually the JT-8D that's the cool part. This was done on the 727 as well
don't forget this was not just MD but Boeing 727 and 737, all had the clam shells :-)
Good Old times when nobody has cared about the gas prices!
apparently a plane sitting at the gate at idle for 10 minutes waiting for a tug is more fuel efficient? XD
Great plane the MD-80 too...
Gas is expensive now days
Actually, they are more scared of the baggage on the ground being flung around by the jets.
Wow 447 likes
When you wait for the tug but it never shows up: fine I’ll do it myself
Nate Lavoie and thats what she sad
187 Likes PogU
Yeah. Screw you dudes. I gots to go.ah can't wait no more
IGHT IMMA HEAD OUT
Just hold down left trigger. It's so easy.
Imagine what huge amount of force and heat are those engine covers supposed to withstand
THRUST ME :-) They are NOT putting full force on a Reverse. Ground Crews would be flown away, that was VERY MINIMAL. THRUST ME, LOL
60-70% most likely, still considerable power. I haven't flown an MD80 but that was far above idle N1.
@@TheTravesty2012 yes, the JT8D engine was in almost most aircraft from the 60's to 70's: 707, 727, 737, DC9, MD80 and the Navy they were called the J52 in the A4 and A6 aircraft. I was in AIMD Jet Shop on Carrier 64 Constellation and my first engine I worked was J52 :-) For those who do know what N1 is: N1 is the rotational speed of the low pressure (low speed) engine spool. Thank you @TheTravesty2012 for your post. Bobby
They’re protecting the engine and the debris.
"HEY GUYS THIS IS YOUR DAILEY DOSE OF INTERNET"
"Did you know there are some planes that dont need a push"
thatjokerperson LMAO
Honestly I clicked this video because I thought it was daily dose.
@@willies545 tbh me too
*suspicious leakfy voice 👀
@@notoriousbills right?! been saying this to my friends for a long time, and non of them hear it.
Love watching MD-80 land and take off too. So steep, so loud, so retrothrust.
Yup. Clearwater Airport by where I live has MD-80s going in and out all day. Still enjoy them
The steep take-off is called a*Viking Departure. *
don't forget this was not just MD but Boeing 727 and 737, all had the clam shells :-)
It's like, "hey those flight attendants, how many times do i tell you to sit down when i m backing up, can't see thru the rear view".
😂😂😂😂😂😂👍
Fahd Hassan 🤣
My dad used to work for AA he's retired now, but its funny that you guys filmed that footage at that gate in DFW my dad used to work at that gate. Who knows that's probably him doing the powerback signal to the pilot. Great memories of DFW.
that's awesome
@white zebra
Was it a girl plane or guy plane? 😆
@@rxonmymind8362 🚪👈there's the door, use it.
@@dominicjose1116
It was a joke. Lighten up.
@@rxonmymind8362 🤭
After 6 years YT suddenly wants to recommend this for everyone
same
And since we comment on this, YT probably was right. Nice plane though
Yup
RUclips: "Miss reverse thrusters yet?"
I have once more found this video, just after the retirement of the MD-80 by American. It will always be an awesome piece of history.
Hello, most airliners can technically push-back themselves like this, using the reverse thrusters. The problem is that at 100% throttle, you still only get 15% of the reverse force, and this makes it too easy for debris to get caught and sucked up in the engine, it's not good for overall engine life, safety, it's noisy, etc.
these airplanes can push back themselves because they're engines are high off the ground.
Reverse thrusters can get close to 100% thrust in reverse when moving at high speeds, and many modern airliners now have reverse thrusters that simply use boundary layer effects disruption by venting are outwards, which doesn't really provide reverse thrust itself but instead causes a lot of drag.
I never thought of that, GREAT POINT
It is perfectly safe to powerback if you know the proper marshaling signals. It was stopped due to fuel costs.
Christopher McKeithen also the crap all over the ground......
It used to be done with planes with rear-mounted engines, which were common in the past. Now, it doesn't work with most airliners because they have wing-mounted engines.
Typically if the flight is close to the gate and there are windows they wouldn't normally do it just because of flying debris like small rocks or gravel,
Thank you for the info
Yol especially the crap. Main reason.
These puppies were over engineered, testament of an era when engineers used to have free reign in designing aircraft. Today, it's all about saving a buck here and there, the Max, 787, 777X is a good example of the later. Kudos to the MC Donnell engineers
Dantram GB except for the dc-10 door issue they said “oh we will fix it please don’t issue an AD” and never fixed it and killed people. Lol. Other than that the md-80 is the “iron workhorse” of the aircraft industry.
L-1011 was a perfect example. THAT was the definition of overengineering.
Well actually the MD80 had its design flaws too
@@JustRememberWhoYoureWorkingFor elevator screw...
@@JoshuaSobel Alaska Airlines much?
Everybody gansta
Until plane begins to land backwards
Space X has entered the chat
One word .. Tenet
In GTA San Andreas you could fly backwards
SO FUNNY, AGAIN HUMANS AMAZE ME, WHAT A GREAT IDEA 🙂
I’d like to see him do a “K” turn.
3 point or a J turn?
@@zuestoots5176 i think he meant 3 point
I think he was like "kurwa" turn 😜
Zues Toots - US slang for 3 pt.
@@MalawijaSMITH ahh you're a hoot, Psmith !
Watch out, pilot, your reverse lights are gone! lol
Then the airline realised that “hey, we save fuel if we order a pushback” then they said “hey, we save fuel if we just retire the plane”
Experienced this first hand at DFW on a red eye. It was really cool, can't imagine what it sounded like in the terminal.
Thor LP same here I was a fueler at DFW it was very cool
When I was a kid I was on a plane that did that it was loud as hell inside the plane
MD80 was absolutely awesome. We need more of them now. Cheers!
Powerbacks are great to see! What's REALLY impressive is seeing a turboprop with fully reversible prop pitch doing it. I've seen the C-130 "Fat Albert" that accompanies the Blue Angels do a short field landing, coming to an incredibly fast stop, then leaving the engines running hard with the props in reverse, they back up in a tight semi-circle to face the aircraft directly at the crowd...when he brakes the nose gets light and it comes up a bit, then compresses the nose gear on the rebound...like it's taking a bow. Very cool!
L TR Video link? That’s sounds epic
Yeah I wanna see that
That is cool!
ruclips.net/video/Rd8M28g5_Z8/видео.html this is the link to the video in question.
excellent point, the turbo prop does the same thing by changing the pitch of the blades, SAME PRINCIPAL :-)
Does the pilot look in the rear view mirror or does he turn his head while reversing? 😁
Maybe he has a backup camera with parking sensors
Rear view cam
He does it with his sun glasses on. Smoking a joint while getting head from a flight attendant.
Yeah he even didn't turn his reverse signal
Definitely ground crews
Anyone still getting recommendations in 2019
Hi
Yeah. Wasn't this like 7 years ago? Lol
Me
Yup
Just got it
I got to fly in the super 80 many times as a kid in the late 80s early 90's and that was always pretty awesome to me. 💪💯
Love it! This is why the Dc9 and MD-80 are unique. You'll never see this happen today. Too bad they don't do this anymore.
don't forget this was not just MD but Boeing 727 and 737, all had the clam shells :-)
Well, you’ll never see it happen today because it’s out of protocol due to safety issues.
Holy crap. Very neat. 29 years on this planet and I didn’t think planes had reverse. But they do.. they just take all that enormous engine power and just make it do the opposite of ‘normal’ function lol.
I really miss the MD 80, it was and still is my favorite airplane
I lived in Rochester, NY from 1991 thru 2000. AA MD80s always pushed back like this if they were departing from one of the last couple of gates in the terminal wing.
I'm not sure all airlines authorized using reverse thrust for taxi back. Some of the problems are...Reverse thrust tends to throw a lot of debris (FOD) into the air because the exhaust is deflected to the sides, up and down. This debris can damage the engine itself, or other things on and around the aircraft or injure someone on the ramp. It is less of a problem for aircraft with tail-mounted engines, but that engine configuration is not used as much anymore in transport aircraft, as it is less aerodynamically efficient.
The compressor might suck in its own hot exhaust gases. This might lead to temperature-induced damages in the last (high-pressure) stages of the compressor and health issues for passengers, since the air conditioning system works with bleed air from the compressor.
Reverse thrust is rather inefficient on jet engines, so it uses a ton of fuel.
The pilot also has to be careful using the brakes during power back...The main wheels are very close behind the center of gravity, so harder braking can lift the nose wheel, causing the pilot to lose control, and even causing damage to the tail if it hits the ground.
matt8863 yes, exactly.
Wow you know your stuff Matt cool!
Yeah but it works.
Wrng no degree like jet boats
This has been out of protocol since the 80’s
When you have a long distance relationship, and she said that she is home alone...
Funny thing is I work for American airlines. Flew from Houston Texas to Kansas City MO to see my girlfriend when she is home alone. Now we are married for LIFE 😂
Edit: happily married :3
Alejo and Yanni 😂nice
Light why I have to
fine ill do it myself
@@AlakayTheLionRoarz That's Irony Sir 😂😂 Stay Blessed and have a happy married life together!
Absolutely... we can post a video of them flying backwards if you want...
good.. I'm waiting
😂😂
I was hoping the the pilot would continue down the runway and take off backwards :(
Guess they place he engine wrong
Without side mirrors? That’s reckless
Your comment's gold! Give us more!
That's for the return flight!
Lmfao 😅
Just shift to R, and then to D again
+38911bytefree +1 for the screenname. ;)
katie_incredible Ahhhhh ....the old days ... you now .. Cheers.
Only thing missing is back up alarms.
PEEP PEEP Peep peep
Beep Beep Beep!
Charles Ray lol
Lol
That would have to be a really loud beep....
Another reason MD-80's are badass. I'm surely going to miss them.
I've done this so many times in FSX. lmao
Tried this with 777, 747, C-17, A320, Concorde, AN-225, but didn't work with the A380. ( no powerful enough cause only 2 of its engines have reverses ). Once brakes too hard on the C-17 and got a tailsrike lol.
TheTexanFanMan haha me too
TheTexanFanMan me too but i do it on DC-10
TheTexanFanMan old russian way
CTRL+P
MAD DOG!!
I going to miss that plane.
I loved powerbacks when I was a kid. It signaled the start of my Disney vacations
I remember watching these powerbacks in Dallas as a child. Great plane! Will miss flying on them.
"That is out of protocol since the 1980's sir, you can alt+F4"
AFP95
Mad Dog, you will be missed.
Once you’ve experienced a power back on the ramp, you never forget it!!!! 😁✈️👍
YES! VERY LOUD and everything on the tarmac is rumbling and vibrating!
Yes they are... Don't think the savings are that great as you need just about the same amount of guys during push back, perhaps minus the driver, and it takes just about the same amount of time give or take a minute... I guess you don't need a tractor...
One of my favorite "Super 80" videos ever!!!!! RIP beautiful Silver Birds
why we love the old planes...
The "Eighties" are awsome ! Very simple maintenance and it can take a lot of pounding, reliable work horse for AA long times! Im glad that had a chance to worked on the "Eighties"
This plane was just amazing. There's only two things in life that I regret. One is not having gone to a Motorhead concert while Lemmy was alive and kicking, the other is not having flown or be inside a MD80
Juan Gallego There’s still some flying
Haha agree 100 💯 percent
That has got to be the coolest reserve thrust design
Sir why are you pushing back via Reverse Thrust that has been out of protocol since 1978 you can Alt+F4
-AirForceProud95
Imagine how loud this was for the passengers sitting in the terminal neat the classic Md80....
fuck the tractor !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i'm leaving !!!
feliccie andorro lmao
I died XD
LMAO, Nice Job
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE SEEING THE POWER PUSHBACKS WITH THE GROUND MARSHAL AND CREW WORKING WITH COCKPIT CREW USUALLY ENDING IN A SALUTE TO CAPTAIN. PROFESSIONAL AND BEAUTIFUL SIGHT. THANKS! GREAT FOOTAGE.
Perfect always wanted to see this in real life. great catch
Saw an AirTran pilot do this in MSY with a 717. Got his taxi clearance, backed out and even did a 90° turn like a sports car backing out of a driveway, then quickly forward taxied to the runway.
RIP to the AA MDs💔
That was freakin' awesome- thanks to whomever filmed that and to MD. Looked very "Thunderbirds".
We get fired if we do that these days.
Why is it because it’s putting unnecessary stress on The Engines? Or because you can run someone over ?
MR. Vegeta it allows debris to be sucked into the engine intake.
MR. Vegeta ultimately because an Air Carrier has to have a particular paragraph in their Operations Specifications authorizing using powerplant reverse for rearward taxi and almost no airlines have put that in their ops specs anymore, so doing it is breaking FAA regs. The reason why airlines stopped putting that paragraph in is more complicated but there is a pretty large danger of ingesting FOD on wing mounted engines, and even with centerline thrust engines like the DC-9/MD-80 it is loud, uses a lot of fuel, and is hard on the people and equipment on the ramp.
Michael Munson basically risk/reward
MR. Vegeta yes. Also beyond the fuel reversing itself uses, which is a lot, almost every airline has gone to single engine taxi, especially at busier airports where you anticipate a delay waiting for take off - this is also for fuel savings. That’s to say you begin taxi with one engine running, and then a minute or two prior to takeoff you start the second one. You’d have to start both engines to power back so you couldn’t do single engine taxi anymore.
Very good demonstration . Great video.
I once asked a DC-9 captain if they could back up with their thrust reverse. He was a little surprised by the question and said it was probably possible but that it wasn't a part of their approved procedures.
Chef black out Concorde girlfriend on board. Chief got tak code too nach 2.0 Italy France eaurpe
Savage beasts. I remember and love them.
OMG had no idea a plane could do that
well md80 rear mounted engines like md80 or props can do it. the real reason they stopped it is fuel prices.....
well, now you know
If you don't know now you know nigga
Strange. Youve never heard of thrust reversers? Ever heard that loud noise after landing that slows the plane down called the engine? What’d you think that was?
@@planeflight1202 just a question: the fokker100 were able to do the same?
Mad Dogs ----- Man, this is why I miss flying. I rode a bunch of MD-80's and DC-9's back in the day. Bad ass powerful machine!
CAPT: " ground crew, we're ready for push-back"
TOW DRIVER: " guys !! hold on a sec, I'm finishing my first cigarette of the day, ughh, I hate this job"
CAPT TO FO " hold my beer..."
CAPT engages thrust reversers..
That haunch turn was just as impressive.
Hot Damn! the good ole days of aviation!
yes i miss those days but hey at least we have better tech and newer aircraft now but i sort of miss the OLD days, i mean then we had the friken Boeing 727, L-1011 DC-10 DC-8 DC-9 and more! man i miss them! im only 12 but my dad was born in 1966 so he got to experience the good ole days! he even took control of a Boeing 747 Early varient dude! aawwww the Good Ole Days...
I can see why they started using tugs for these aircraft for 2 reasons:
1. Very loud!
2. It rolled forward a bit too much to time it right.
With that said, I love this! Classic Aviation is just amazing. So many great aircraft that are mostly gone.
I remember those planes MD80 I was there when they made him I work for McDonnell Douglas aircraft company. My job I took care of the has its waste and Hall all that to the hazard waste yard . One of the engineers let me aboard and see it they are a great plane.
Thanks for uploading this video
Newtons third law: *confused screaming*
Newton's third law would use this as proof. Nothing confusing about it.
That's so cool! I had no idea this was even possible. Thanks for the video!
MD80 thrust reversers are way cooler than modern ones.
The mechanism of that flap on the engine opening and shutting is extremely satisfying
“Russian Style”
-Swiss001
True slav....
So a Swiss 001 fan here
Hi
Ninja style
What up Korea001 and everyone you guys are right (I watch you Korea001)
Who ever is doing the CGI on these types of videos is really really good!! It’s nearly perfect... there’s a couple spots where the background doesn’t exactly line up where he removed the AirPort Tractor, but other then that it’s beautiful...
Tried doing this in FSX. No chance of movement :/
+MCHFacts you need the right add-on bro, the best MD80 for FSX by far its the leonardo SH MD80 "flythemaddog"
Isn't this use of Reverse Thrusters frowned on? Thanks!
MCHFacts make sure to turn off the parking brake
Doesn't work in X-Plane either tbh...pretty sure I"m using the "Rotate" MD-80 too. Flight sims just don't do most things accurately. They're good for approximation of many aspects of flight though
Tim - There was a time when AA was in labor cost cutting mode and fuel was cheaper. No tug crew, less labor.
Now that is some serious reverse thrust! I wonder how many miles be burned up?
This feature must cost extra at the dealership.
*slap roof of plane* This baby can turn on its own
It's used as added braking thrusting ln the opposite direction
CIA you must be fun at parties
@CIA SO KNOWLEDGEABLE
Proof that it's possible to blow your own sail.
Literally noone:
Airforceproud95: welcome to FSX Steam Edition
That’s soo awesome. I remember seeing this a lot at DFW and LGB when I was a kid.
There was a time when all the aircraft backed themselfs up with reverse thrusters
It's a safety Hazzard to back up a plane next to a terminal due to the amount of thrust going towards the building.
True!
You also risk tipping the plane onto the tail
@@troyellis4242 It's a risk worth taking... 😑
@Bilal Khalid Yes I haven't seen them do that sense mid 90"s
This captain rocks!!
Ramp agent: Sorry Capitan, you have to wait 30 min for the pushback.
Capitan: Not today, hold my tow bar.
Sweet! My fav jet design
Welcome to FSX.
It'snotaplane 32 and xp10 mobile
steam edition
Whoa. The fuel burn for the first 50 secs of that maneuver must be unbelievably high
haha true!
The engines are so loud I can't hear the beep beep beep beep.
The badasses way of getting out of gate. Respect 100
McDonnell Douglas were really virtuosos in aircraft design. It's sad that third party door malfunction (same type of door used in most other aircraft) put negative light on DC-10 and McDonnell Douglass out of of business.
Yes but the “gentleman’s agreement” to fix the doors between mcdonnel douglas and the FAA that was never honoured followed by an avoidable accident was the final nail in the coffin.
wahh
Tupolev.
When I see an md-80, I see a space shuttle cousin! The forward fuselage and cockpit windshield really resemble the shuttle
this piece of shit DC-10 killed the Concorde, never forget
First time seeing a plane backing up at this view. Awesome! 👌
Back in the early 80's, I've seen a TWA L-1011 powerback from the gate at FLL.
Thanks for the reminder of TWA and the L-1011! I remember flying on those from St. Louis to LAX. A blast from the past!
Jesus that sounds magnificent
That must have been AWESOME!
Nicely done...also NICE video!
We had a jumbo jet do that at Heathrow when he missed his marks, he nearly blew the terminal away.
I'm told the practice stopped as much due to fuel costs as for the potential for debris on the ground to damage to terminal. Technically all planes can reverse on their own, it was just only ever allowed for fuselage mounted engines. Under wing engines had far too much of a chance to blow debris forward and then ingest said debris.
@Jake Hall Provided they're capable of reverse thrust yes. High bypass engines like on the 747 and any modern aircraft reverse the bypass air. On these engines the bypass thrust is far greater than the thrust from the engine core. That said it would be an even greater waste of fuel as not all thrust is reversed like with the buckets. Just because it's technically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.
The only a/c ive seen at Heathrow to reverse off is a dash 7, they would never have allowed a 747 to do that, way too much ingestion.
@@jblyon2 There. You said it. "Just because it's technically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea". The biggest truth when it comes to engineering!
@Jake Hall Yes, all jet engines can reverse on their own. But it consumes way too much fuel to get it going backwards.
I used to see that all the time when I worked for McDonnel Douglas.
AliExpress: "We prowide a set of rear HD camelah and parking sensors for MD 80, only 100 bucks".
Wish offers them for 2$