Re: F-100 crash in Sao Paulo

Date:         12 Nov 96 13:58:53 
From:         niels@lofgren.demon.co.uk (Niels Sampath)
Organization: i b4 e xcept after c
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.2349@ohare.Chicago.COM>
           stephan@lac.inpe.br "Stephan Stephany" writes:

>
>Surely, as a twin engine aircraft it should have the capability to
>take-off using only one engine, but with the other shut down and
>not "braking" the aircraft. Reportedly, the plane took off and
>the right thrust reverser opened and closed *four* times (during
>the take-off run and the 100 ft climb).

Can anyone recall the Pacific Western 737 crash at Cranbrook BC
where a landing was aborted (snowplow still on runway), take-off/
go-around initiated, but a thrust revereser would not redeploy?
Why didn't it redeploy? Just wondering is same thing happened
re: TAM.
I have always wondered why F100s I have seen at LHR seem to taxi
around with one reverser depolyed. Does this save on brake wear?
Is it standard procedure? Could this have been a factor with the TAM?

--
Niels