Pilot Asked to Break Rules | ATC vs Pilots

[@Mike_delta80]

The controller earned his Golden Towbar award that day. Good job on the pilots for not getting suckered into doing something they shouldn't

[@alexormulea]

I'd say bad job on the pilots for even pressuring each other like that

[@74gear]

is that a term controllers use?

[@Mike_delta80]

@@74gear yes, as well as other....more "colorful" euphemisms. But, Golden Towbar is widely accepted as the unofficial official term

[@viliamklein]

@@74gear why aren't the planes towed to the runway all the time? Why rely on jet engines to push a plane on the ground instead of a tug?

[@NoTAtchoum]

@@viliamklein much faster, not even for speed but also a tug has to connect and disconnect which takes time... Also would need many many tugs, other workers for no reason, waste of time and money (for the airport)

[@JonJoshJakeClag]

Hey Kelsey, I’m an ex-Envoy E175 driver … not sure if anyone has advised you and followers yet but … Envoy definitely does NOT permit TR reverser operation in it operations manual, I have no idea why the Envoy crew even offered it to ATC as an option but I suspect they did a quick looky-lookup in the ops. manual and changed their minds 😜

[@CaptSlog]

It sounded almost like sarcasm, which atc took as a serious suggestion.

[@avocadoexploits7875]

@@CaptSlog if they said that sarcastically they should get fired. Sarcasm and flying do not go together well...

[@johnyoung9649]

Is the prohibition due to engine wear, fuel use, or just danger backing? Or something else?

[@dzlockhead]

@@johnyoung9649 Ask Air Florida Flight 90 why you don't use a thrust reverser on the ground to reverse a plane.

[@johnyoung9649]

@@dzlockhead that was really icing related.

[@Flies2FLL]

ONE word for dealing with ATC: "Unable". Problem solved-

[@ArielCacha]

Hahaha you made me spit my cafe

[@nameunknown007]

Hahha this is too funny

[@thatguy7085]

Problem NOT SOLVED… I was VFR, in Class C airspace, controller tells me to turn right to 350,, I looked, and a cloud was there, I said “unable”… She asked again and I again said “unable”… this third request sounded panicked and there was a Boeing announcing he was “with them and climbing out of a large commercial airport”… I a flash I announced compliance and turned to the heading… A large Boeing was about to exit a cloud in front of me. I decided the cloud was much softer for my little C182RG than becoming a bug on the window of a Boeing. Yes, sometimes Inadvertent IMC is the best choice.

[@Flies2FLL]

@@thatguy7085 That's nonsense. If you were that close to a cloud you were not adhering to FAR required VFR cloud separation distances. And if I were you I would delete your post because if the FAA figures out who you are you've just set yourself up for an FAR violation, the FAA nails pilots from posts/videos on KZbin all the time. By the way, inadvertent IMC penetration by non-instrument rated pilots kills dozens of pilots [and their passengers...] every year.

[@Flies2FLL]

......Get your shit together!

[@oddtom]

Thank you for taking the time to make these. I'm a baby dispatcher for a regional airline, so I don't get a lot of the pilot perspective, but it greatly helps me better understand the tools and people you have to deal with. I can 100% confirm that both ATC and pilots from the majors know that we're new and will occasionally try to take advantage of that for their convenience.

[@ClearedAsFiled]

You have a GREAT job....

[@korbell1089]

ATC:"I double dare you!" Delta:"I double dog dare you!" Envoy:"I Triple dog dare you!" Narrator:"Shwartz created a slight breach of ettiquette by skipping the triple dare and going right for the throat."

[@alexandergalfano3187]

LMFAO

[@jblyon2]

Spirit: "Hold my beer"

[@datwutup2]

@@jblyon2 LMAO

[@mephistounderwood4917]

yes, the do-deca dare times infinity cubed!!!!! (do-deca is a multiple of exactly 20, such as the famous do-decahedron, also known in the P'n'P gaming world, as the 20-sided die.) Nice one! Nerd dare etiquette. I love it! Just don't get a bunch of immature nerds going, because it can keep escalating for hours, as they show off their mathematical acumen...........Nerd fight! LOL.

[@wigwuck]

Good reference!

[@InopGauge]

Pushing out a 737 a couple of days ago on an ice-covered ramp and we were concerned about traction. Capt said they could throw on the reversers for us if we needed a little help to get going. We were surprised by this because we didn't think they were allowed to use reverse thrust on Wing mounted engines (except for landing of course) but he claimed that they do it periodically in SLC when there is ice and snow on the ramp.

[@KimonFrousios]

Maybe they were less worried about ingesting debris if everything is frozen. There is also an element of how high above ground the engines are. Newer smaller jets with big engines low to the ground would never reverse, but older large jets might have enough clearance that the risk for them is low.

[@RajKoona]

Last time they did a powerback on a 737 in snowy conditions, the plane ended up in the Potomic. It was an Air Florida Flight 90.

[@imxploring]

@@RajKoona And a guy named Lenny was a hero that day!

[@maggus999]

I'm guessing they'd be "fine" with it in idle reverse. It would kill the forward thrust pushing opposite to the tug at least, which might be enough to get you what you need, without too much danger of ingesting anything.

[@ThatSB]

@@RajKoona no, that wasnt the last time they did a powerback on a 737 LMFAO

[@graham_explores]

Can we just thank Kelsey for keeping us entertained even when he has a giant job? And have you ever flown to Minneapolis international airport?

[@Saml01]

It's a big lift but someone's gotta do it.

[@maverickmissile801]

Mhm

[@gryphon10]

He makes money doing this

[@BlueberryWizard]

there is immense downtime being a Pilot, you could even hold a second job in most cases. ( i mean obviously you can't because of stand by, but you catch my meaning.)

[@Valspartame_Maelstrom]

no

[@nowknow]

Delta Tug 2: My day to shine has finally come!

[@dereksmith1803]

American used reverse thrusters to push back off the gate at DFW all the time when they were running the Super 80's. It was much quicker than waiting for an available tug and hooking up and disconnecting after pushed back. I think there's actually a couple KZbin videos showing the procedure. I only know this because my father was manager of ramp operations there for about 15 years and so I traveled non rev quite a bit as a child and I thought that was so cool when they did it. Also, it's worth noting that the Mad Dog had high mounted engines in the rear, not low slung under wing engines like I suspect the Envoy was, so FOD wouldn't have been an issue back then.

[@kenbrown2808]

@Night Rider plus, planes with tail mounted engines had a lot less risk of picking up debris off the ground than planes with engines under the wings.

[@nonamesplease6288]

I remember flying out of Detroit once in the 90s. There was a terminal where all of the jets were using reverse thrusters to back out of the gate. We were in a DC 9, and the rear engines seemed to lend themselves to this procedure.

[@madog1]

Flew in a few MD-80's, and 90's.

[@Slugg-O]

I'm not sure of the airplane but they did when I flew out of there. The pilot made an announcement stating it was not the norm but allowed and faster than getting a push back.

[@philconey11]

Reversers throw FOD and thrust at the terminal and damage stuff/hurt people. That's the main reason it's prohibited.

[@FolgoreCZ]

"I'm going to file a report." is that guy's equivalent of "Do you know who my father is?"

[@NorthwestStringing]

in this case the father is KLM

[@3storiesUp]

@@NorthwestStringing In this case the controllers at Shannon don't care who your dad is :)

[@CrazyTaxiDasher]

I found your videos, and for the longest time I’ve had irrational fears of flying. Watching your vids has made me so much more knowledgeable about the actual risks/ going ons in a plane to the point where I’m no longer scared of getting on planes and now I’m excited to identify the planes I’m on and learn more about them. Thank you for sharing.

[@sopcannon]

look up mentour pilot he goes into crash investigations and what went wrong BUT also what was done too prevent it happening in the future.

[@MrNicoJac]

Indeed, Mentour Pilot will probably help reduce those fears too 👍🏼

[@homomorphic]

There's nothing irrational about *having* a fear of flying, because flying *is* inherently dangerous, but by understanding the many layers of mitigations that are used in commercial aviation you can likely come to a place where you accept that those mitigations are sufficient such that it is very unlikely that anything bad will actually happen to you. Planes do crash, just like cars crash, but most people accept the (far less rigorous) mitigations used with cars. Personally, I think the irrational people are those who *aren't* afraid of driving in a car, rather than those that *are* afraid of flying.

[@MrNicoJac]

@@homomorphic Rational people recognize they will die one day. You can only mitigate your risks. In that sense, rational people would ALWAYS take a plane _rather than_ a car. EVEN if they had to pay extra, the reduced risk might still be worth it, lol (well, at least with bigger airlines; small/regional companies can have very different safety records) So, depending on how pedantic a mood we're in, we could say that fear of flying _is_ irrational, especially since most of those people are less afraid of getting in a car, even though that's a more unsafe way of travel 🙃

[@homomorphic]

@@MrNicoJac absolutely, but the fear is perfectly rational so long as one is afraid of both planes and cars. If one happens to be independently wealthy and live on your own island, then it is perfectly rational to expose oneself to neither risk as they are risks (no matter how small).

[@terrymiller552]

I was on a flight a couple of years ago waiting to depart the gate, when the pilot announced that there were no tugs available to push back, so he was going to use the reversers to back out from the gate. He said that he wanted the passengers to know why he was spinning up the engines. Went well with no problems.

[@bambicrandi]

If something happened to the plane, then that would be on the pilot. The reason you wait for a tug is because it’s not like backing up a car. You can’t physically see behind you. He willingly put everyone at risk for convenience. I would have been anxious as hell if I was on that flight when all that was happening. Pushbacks can visually see where they are backing the plane to, and they have wing walkers with them who can tell them to stop or if the taxiway is all clear. I’m glad it went well, but it could have easily caused a lot of damage.

[@N9830G]

Were you on an RJ or MD-series? Aircraft with tail-mounted engines can and do perform powerbacks because the risk of FOD ingestion is much lower than on wing-mounted engines. It used to be really common practice in the 1970s and 80s with DC-9s and MD-80s but fell out of favor over fuel costs and noise.

[@terrymiller552]

@@N9830G Probably an MD series, but I was just a dumb passenger.

[@N9830G]

@@terrymiller552 Nah man, unless you're an aviation nerd they all look the same. I've picked my wife up from the airport and ask her what kind of plane she flew on and she'll say, "umm....Southwest?" Joke's on her, she unwittingly answered my questions as they only fly 737s. See? This aviation nerd thing is a real problem.

[@williamb1880]

@@bambicrandi Of course, of course, of course he had wing walkers before doing this along with personnel connected on headset at the nose gear area that were watching and providing directions to the pilot and were authorized by ramp control (if doing so on a controlled ramp).

[@lolmitlachen]

Coming up 😎

[@brucewortmann6835]

The Direct WEED was funny. A pilot friend told be about once having to ask ATC for a "vector to HECTOR".

[@Czechmate823]

Hello Capt. Kelsey, for many years flying in New England, I remember backing away from outr gate using thrust reversers - especially on the DC-9 on US Airways. On one day, we were packing out from Pittsburg heading to Syracuse when one of the engines shot fire towards the front of the plane. While the pilots were able to engage the fire suppression system ulimately, I was told by a flight attendant to open my overwing exit door which I did. We all exited the palne safely, but now when I am asked if I am "wiiling and able" to assist from the exit row, I always answer willing & "experienced". The flight attendants love it!

[@drewsoraci5368]

Someone else posted this..

[@TheDriftingStig]

@@drewsoraci5368 This comment is the original one. Lol's comment was only posted after this, where they took this comment and re-posted it for more recognition and subscribers

[@You.Tube.Sucks.]

I'm REALLY not trying to be "THAT" person, but as someone who has also flown around New England a fair amount because I am from Boston, I had a good, light-hearted chuckle at your comment. You mention "many years flying in New England" then almost immediately mention two places that are not in New England. Pittsburgh is in Pennsylvania, Syracuse is in New York, and neither PN nor NY is in NE :)

[@You.Tube.Sucks.]

P.S. Clever username & thank you for your willingness to help others (then and now).

[@lupo_aim]

LMAO 😂 „wingwalker sounds super gangster“ had me laughing hard😅

[@AV8R_Surge]

PPL rookie.. still learning: first time hearing about Ocean crossing tracks. You're videos are fun, but also informative. Thanks Kelsey!

[@74gear]

glad you enjoy them AV8R!

[@MeppyMan]

Helicopter pilot here… can’t say I know much about them either. If I lose sight of land it’s a really bad day! :)

[@ilsavv]

@@MeppyMan So, keep the coastline in sight!

[@MeppyMan]

@@ilsavv that’s usually the idea. My point was about how we don’t fly these transoceanic routes :) Also some exceptions: oil rig work, flying off ships, rescue work, etc.

[@queeny5613]

Awesome

[@apromero911]

The "confusing" part about the oceanic crossing issue to me was that ATC+KLM seemed to be aware of it and ATC was trying to offer them an alternative before they reached SUNOT. The conversation starts off with ATC telling them they're estimating KLM will reach SUNOT at 15:26 and basically saying KLM needs to slow down or they're going to have to give them a dogleg (to delay arrival at SUNOT)... KLM responds back that their aware and working on it. Presumably some time passes (its clearly a different controller) and KLM is now arriving at SUNOT at 15:26 and ATC is saying... "well you didnt slow down and you didnt take the dog leg so now here are your options. You can take FL390 for track Charlie or you can take FL370 or 380 on track Delta" Its at that point that KLM gets upset with ATC. They seem to later confirm that their "working on it" didn't actually resolve the arrival issue as they start talking about NorShuttle accepting the clearance at 15:22 so they have 4 minutes almost 5 minutes separation (15:22 + 00:04 = 15:26) which to me suggests KLM was in the wrong and their argument that its "not going the way of our clearance" is incorrect as ATC advised them they should not arrive at SUNOT at 15:26. Ultimately, it seems they should have accepted the dog leg from the first controller

[@MrXtachx]

I dont know much about jets at high altitude but would S-turns or a hold at SUNOT be an option for them? Even if they dont do the entire hold and just did a 360 that should give them 2 minutes (maybe longer for jets no idea but longer is better in this case). Looks like Norshuttle is crossing at 23 and they needed a 4 min separation. KLM was gonna cross at 26 so a circle would take it to 28 giving them an exact 5 min separation. (This is a question to @74 Gear as well)

[@apromero911]

​@@MrXtachx I'm also not a jet pilot flying at altitude, nor doing Atlantic crossings for that matter... but a hold at lower altitudes generally adds at least 4 minutes (1 minute to turn 180 outbound, 1 minute to fly outbound and 1 minute to turn 180 inbound before flying 1 minute inbound), even if we cut off the outbound/inbound leg and said to do a 360 its 2 minutes at standard rate turn to complete a 360. At higher altitudes, this would actually be increased as the ICAO hold standards say "standard rate or 25 degree bank, which ever requires LESS bank" and above 14,000 feet they can "hold" at 265kts which would exceed the 180kts at which you can do a standard rate turn AND hold 25 degrees of bank or less, so a hold in that scenario is even longer due to the longer turns. Honestly just the act of slowing to 265kts from cruise at 500kts would probably have added the extra minute needed but the plane wont accelerate from 265kts to cruise speed instantaneously, so a hold or other major speed adjustment which would probably muck up the timing and separation of the aircraft behind KLM. S-Turns could theoretically work but they'd have to be really shallow s-turns as a result of the airspeed and probably would be difficult to build enough separation as a result. I dont want to say S-turns are risky, especially when they're as shallow as the s-turns would have to be for KLM, but they do require more precaution and are a lot more work. I'd also be surprised if they'd be allowed by KLM's ops manual. I'd also note that passenger comfort factors come to mind in both scenarios as well. Holds, especially at altitude and enroute, are increasingly uncommon, as are regular or prolonged turns and changes in direction that occur outside of the initial climb and/or final descent so either maneuver is likely to catch their passenger attention. KLM would have been far better off just accepting the dog leg.

[@pcpolice7937]

Thanks for that clarification. I was really confused as to what was going on there

[@joshuaseagrave5714]

@@MrXtachx holding at SUNOT is definitely not an option. At high altitudes, holding is extremely inefficient and takes a long time, and because the north atlantic runs at such a high capacity it would create huge delays for everyone following the KLM. The "dog leg" *is* S-Turns, that would have been preferable but the pilots declined them earlier saying they'd get their crossing time back and didn't, the end result being that there likely wasn't time or room for a dog-leg. Ultimately the KLM pilots put themselves in that position. A note on timing: I'm not sure when that clip is from but up until very recently (mid-2020) 10 minutes was needed between aircraft on the same track at the same level as a baseline, reduced if the preceding aircraft is faster. Unless that Norshuttle was absolutely booking it, 4 minutes is just not going to cut it. Nowadays, with ADS-B and stuff they have a minimum of 17nm, off the top of my head. I'm not a Shanwick controller so take that with a pinch of salt, but those guys are magicians with how they fit so many airplanes down the tracks with such tight timing tolerances and such high capacity. It's impressive stuff.

[@expansionone]

wasn't it the arrogant attitude of a KLM pilot that caused the largest air disaster in aviation history in Tenerife?

[@CaptainConstand]

1 million subscribers coming up this year 💯💯💯

[@kkulgang89]

Sir. I have no idea how I JUST found this channel, and I have no interest in becoming a pilot, but I am a huge fan! I love your humble attitude but also confidence in your knowledge and even though I work in a completely different field, your demeanor is exactly what I admire to be :) I love your clear explanations and just loving every bit of all your videos so thank you!!!!

[@technole]

Hearing Envoy say they can throw the reversers on gave me a stern pause. I'm like this doesn't sound like a situation in their ops manual where they can just freely use the reverser without wing walker guidance, and since they are on a taxiway that person should just drive a tug out there, and thankfully that is what happened.

[@drdave1947]

He was probably a reservist pilot on the C-17

[@StrokeMahEgo]

@@drdave1947 reservist? Nah...he was a reversist.

[@charlescraft7169]

Bruh, as an ATC myself, if a pilot told me they'd toss on the reverse thrusters, I'd pause and say no, against airport ops. 🤣 I've been so lucky to not have a golden tow bar and gridlock the airport. I've been close, but I've worked it out and got things rolling. As for saying ATC was pressuring the pilots, you have to remember, our perspective is extremely different from yours on the ground. Ramp, well, ramp is ramp (not ATC, not apart of the agency US ATC works for. They're hired from the airport itself as city employees. ATC is Federal) and yeah, again, that controller earned his golden towbar, he was just trying to get things unlocked as fast as he could and tows take forever. He should have just accepted it, and got that moving. He could have also very likely had a supervisor making him ask all those questions a million times. Been in that boat myself too with a sup using you as a puppet, it gets very uncomfortable for the controller already in a bad situation.

[@dcltdw]

The part about the Atlantic tracks was really interesting! Would love to see vids going into more depth about that (or Pacific or other big crossings - not sure if mountain ranges ever qualify for something like that).

[@ronia3181]

I want to hear stuff from El Paso Intl. Airport. It's about 1 mile from Biggs Army airfield, and 10 miles from Juarez (MX) international airport, plus it's just East of a mountain range. I know a military pilot and per her, she says flying in is always interesting because of the three different overlapping airspaces. PS: we get to see the Super Guppy a lot as it's based in El Paso, and it's the only one left flying.

[@You.Tube.Sucks.]

Mentour Pilot talks about the Atlantic tracks often.

[@Flies2FLL]

I'm a 767 FO for a major cargo airline and literally, the words coming out of Kelsey's mouth were exactly what I was thinking. Bright minds think alike, I guess. That KLM pilot was an asshole! Sorry.... Great video!

[@michaelhoffmann2891]

Though in his defense not quite on the same level of asshole-ness as that infamous KLM pilot who said "Vi jaan!"... (or possibly "vi gaan", I can never get Dutch gutturals right)

[@chris54231]

Any chance you will be covering the Trevor Jacobs plane crash video? Would like to know your opinion on the matter. Thanks for all the amazing videos!! I am a nervous flyer, but your videos help me feel more safer when on a plane!! Cheers!

[@flyflorida2001]

Insurance fraud, pure and simple.

[@KevinZ.000]

I don't think he'll file an insurance claim, it was all for KZbin views.

[@KingLouis420th]

@@flyflorida2001 view fraud, plain and simple. No insurance company is going to see that video and say oh yeah claim approved, when it’s as deliberate as that

[@BsKB1000]

@Robin No point on talking about such a c*ntbucket. Hopefully the FAA finds him guilty, YT kills his account and he has to take some serious life-lessons from it.

[@MultiPetercool]

“He’s not being rude, he’s just being Dutch.” -Sam Obisanya from Ted Lasso. 😜

[@pikekeke]

We're not good at subtlety

[@amythechocoholic5761]

I've got a Dutch friend who legit says that lol she mentions pretty often that a Dutch characteristic is brutal honesty bordering on rudeness 😂

[@MrNicoJac]

@@amythechocoholic5761 We consider it rude to waste someone's time or lie to their faces. It's a matter of perspective 🙃

[@amythechocoholic5761]

@@MrNicoJac understood. I'm a lot like that, too, but unfortunately most of my country doesn't really agree and I risk an ass-kicking. Best to just just mutter under my breath and roll my eyes.

[@MrNicoJac]

@@amythechocoholic5761 Oh, I wouldn't say the Dutch way is perfect, either... If both sides are talking cloaks and daggers, but know exactly what it means, that can work too (and just appear more civilized). But when you combine a direct Dutchie with a polite Brit, things can go hilariously wrong! In short, as long as both sides use the same perspective, everything is fine, regardless of which perspective they adhere to. But mixing up two perspectives....

[@MagicCookieGaming]

These videos make me feel so much less stressed about talking to ATC (about to start my PPL) because I get to see the wcs of my imagined issues and see that they're resolved in a professional and rational manner, but also how the ATC is there to help and not to make it difficult, it's just a conversation. Thanks Kelsey! :D

[@LeoJthe747]

Kelsey thank you so much for taking your free time to upload videos, you’ve taught me so much and I’m so happy your a KZbinr!

[@74gear]

thanks for watching Leo

[@Straightahead101]

@@74gear do a review on the Trevor Jacob plane that he intentionally crashed

[@You.Tube.Sucks.]

@@Straightahead101 Please, no! The guy is an idiot who wanted more fame. Don't give it to him. Just call him the idiot who crashed a plane for attention and move on.

[@NikolaiUA]

The standoff episode was hilarious start to finish, but what came to my mind listening to Kelsey is that either way a report and paperwork must be filed, it's just who's gonna do it (envoy, delta or ground). I mean, it's really a minor thing, but someone instantly runs into paperwork... and this paperwork thing is runnable into for a multitude of nuisances, I guess, just about anything is paperwork

[@enigmawyoming5201]

Who needs to do paperwork when Kelsey has already detailed the incident with live communications and commentary? Just send an email with the link to this video…. ;)

[@NikolaiUA]

@@enigmawyoming5201 Right =))

[@vunu.]

i love ATC vs Pilots! thanks for doing what you do kelsey!

[@74gear]

glad you like it ci

[@vbscript2]

Not sure about Envoy's procedures and I agree that they're banned at most airlines today, but powerbacks used to actually be quite common, including at major U.S. airlines and really not that long ago. It used to be common for both Northwest and, as I recall, American, for example. It was typically the aircraft with tail-mounted engines that were approved for powerbacks, since FOD wasn't as big of a concern with those. For example, it was very common with the DC-9/MD-80 family and 727 family aircraft at least as recently as the late 90s and probably at least somewhat into the early 2000s. There's no regulation against it, it's just up to each airline's rules. As such, ATC doesn't necessarily know what each airline's rules are and a pilot saying that they could do it could certainly be interpreted by the controller as meaning that that airline's rules allow it.

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

It is usually a UNION rule, not an aircraft operation rule. In Miami it was ALPA honoring the agreement IAM had with Eastern that stopped the practice of "power-backs" from the "Outer Gates".

[@vbscript2]

​@@stay_at_home_astronaut My understanding is that it has to be explicitly allowed by - and have procedures spelled out in - the airline's OpSpecs in order for it to be allowed. The OpSpecs are indeed airline operational rules (OpSpecs = Operational Specifications) and must be approved by the FAA, at which point they effectively take on regulatory status. I don't doubt that union negotiations are involved in the development of the OpSpecs, but it is the latter the ultimately governs what is allowed from a regulatory perspective. Of course, there could be an agreement with the various unions to simply not do a practice that is allowed (but not required) by the OpSpecs, but union rules can't allow what the OpSpecs don't, nor ban something required by the OpSpecs.

[@ThePwig]

When I was a frequent passenger on American MD-80s and Northwest DC-9s (and even AirTran 717s), I experienced power pushbacks many times in the 90s.

[@comandanteej]

I had a powerback "experience" on a US regional flight in, I think, 2015. I was really surprised as I had no idea that such a thing was even possible.

[@sharoncassell9358]

There's always room for botching the back up process but when there are low hanging fruit low engines there's more chance of picking up dirt & rocks FOD into the intake.

[@pjhaebe]

When I worked at SJC we had gates at the end of the terminal we'd do power backs out of. The other gates we'd blow the windows out of the terminal if we powered out of. This was when the dominant aircraft was MD80/88's.

[@kenstreet1769]

You did a fantastic job of explaining how ocean tracks work. Way better than I could of

[@eliaskount9610]

Premium content as usual. As a pilot, there's a lot to learn about how cruical a personality of a pilot can be to conduct safe and efficient operations. We just learned from 2 examples of pilots holding their ground where they should, and others holding their ground where they shouldn't. The right mindset, personality and temperament of a pilot, would be a great content for an entire video! Keeping the blue side up meanwhile!

[@hoopslaa5235]

‘PART TIME’ 17yr airline Ramp agent Ape here. Had to stress part time here for the exact reason you’re implying pilots are stuck up pretentious little brats of a child man. How dare a ground crew look them in the eye and ask to pitch in on work load and get this flight moving and efficent! How dare they! You’re welcome pilots, now sleep on that. 🙄🙄🙄🤦‍♂🤦‍♂🤦‍♂ You guys and gals should be ashamed of yourselves.

[@jmichaelcarbonniere9549]

I suspect that at least some airlines have power back options buried somewhere in the books somewhere but at a minimum you need 3 guys on the ground... 2 wing walkers and a flagman. One wing walker cannot possibly see both wings at the same time and the flagman is there to watch both wing walkers and tell the pilot where to go. Doing so in an aircraft with wing mounted engines is not the best idea as it just cleans off all the loose junk on the taxiway! Cheers, jc

[@TimothyChapman]

"loose junk". Hmm...

[@OlavSurlandHansen]

I am sure you will get to 1M subscribers. Today's video is a good example why. Thanks for your excellent work (with your videos, and - I am sure, as a pilot)!

[@You.Tube.Sucks.]

Excellent prediction. Looks like roughly one year after your comment, Kelsey only has 12k to go.

[@kylewilson5662]

Hello. I just wanted to say that your videos help me. I want to go to Europe one day but I didn't really like flying. But you Mr Kelsey creating your videos and explaining things are helping me overcome my irrational worries. So thank you! Also, my childhood friend is a pilot, so you give me things to talk to him about :D . Love the videos! I hope you had a good Christmas and new years!

[@homomorphic]

Broken lights, new tires, repairs, reports? None of that happens when I run over the lights in flightsim 😀

[@Jjengering]

Kelsey you always make awesome videos, but I would absolutely love to hear your coverage on air accident investigations at some point! Currently hour building to go for my CPL now... Seeing your videos keep me motivated! Thanks.

[@DARBQ]

You know what personally find frustrating. At the end of every video you say if wanna see more of this or that then check out these videos. I get all excited then I realize I have already watched them. Oh to be that viewer that is newly introduced to your channel, the good old days. Thanks for all you do! Awesome channel! You should consider taking a week off and show us the entire video that you did where you played all the characters. Thx

[@philipsmith1990]

I'm a little surprised that you found the idea of using the reversers in this way so dubious. I've been retired for 20 years but I was a pilot with a major international airline and a technical rep with our pilots association as well as IFALPA. In the 90's in my airline there was discussion of how powerback which was what we called it could be safely accomplished if necessary. Although there were opinions against it was pointed out that a US airline, I can't remember which, had carried out more than a quarter of a million departures at, if I remember correctly, Atlanta. So we developed a procedure for it although it was seldom used.

[@jamesf4405]

If it was Atlanta, and a quarter million departures, then it had to be Delta.

[@timharris6595]

Retired controller here. American used Powerbacks everyday on their MD80/88's where I was working in the 90's and 2000's.

[@bruceyboy7349]

"You can send it to someone who's probably not going to care" 🤣

[@robertkelly9015]

For all the Kelsey haters: The name is unisex, from Old English meaning "Ships Victory". Kelsey and 74 Crew is awesome.

[@e1123581321345589144]

I was in a traffic collision once when one driver signaled another that he could go and this guy without looking came off a ramp straight into us. Nobody was hurt thankfully, but both vehicles were damaged and we had to spend the next couple of hours filling out insurance papers and waiting for a friend to come pick us up, cause the car wasn't going anywhere after that. Bottom line is, never rely on anyone else to tell you where you can of can't go. Always check for yourself and if you're not certain, stay put.

[@pussydestroyer87]

Traffic directors make me nuts. I know they're just trying to be nice but it's not your job to direct traffic. Just get to the intersection and do what you're supposed to do.

[@clarkchambers9992]

Both commercial flying and working in air traffic control sound like a nightmare.

[@hoopslaa5235]

Try being below wing and daring to even look a pilot or FA in the eyes let alone ask them to be a team player 🤦‍♂🤦‍♂🤦‍♂🙄🙄 my god, how dare they…

[@2405jacko]

I've seen a C 130 once at an airshow at my local airport reversing into a parking spot. It was very interesting, they shut down the outboard engines, 1 and 4, and just simply reversed. It was really neat to see, I was only about 50 feet away.

[@pjhaebe]

Wait until you see a C 17 do it on the active. Super cool 👍

[@2405jacko]

@@pjhaebe I bet it is.

[@Markle2k]

The military are more concerned with the utility of an aircrew being able to be autonomous rather than keeping maintenance low. And they have high-mounted wings and engines.

[@Tom-jz8xj]

@@pjhaebe where'd u see it?

[@pjhaebe]

@@Tom-jz8xj last November at the Fort worth airshow

[@clwatts]

We had an Air Tran pilot back out of the gate at ATL one afternoon. Conversation overheard was that the tugs were all busy taking care of Delta flights. That was an exciting time in the cabin.

[@frankg8946]

We would reverse thrust out (727) of the gate in the 80s. My next airline allowed reverse (727) out of one specific gate till mid 90s. Backing up with underwing mounted engines is never a good idea, FOD. For non pilots, we don’t have backup mirrors. If Envoy backed up, it might have cost the Capt his job.

[@vbscript2]

Northwest routinely did powerbacks from gates on their DC-9s and 727s at least as recently as the late 90s, perhaps into the early 2000s. I seem to recall American doing that, too, but I might be wrong about that. I definitely remember Northwest doing it all the time, though.

[@blessedbethecurse]

@@vbscript2 Yeah, I *definitely* saw Northwest powering back from gates with reversers on their DC-9s in the 2000s.

[@suem6004]

How could you not have back up cameras? You really need to have cameras 360 so you can know what is going on in space and time.

[@mattgilson1405]

@@suem6004 Why? Planes don't go backwards. The only things an airliner needs to see they can see out the front.

[@frankg8946]

@@suem6004 it’s not a car or boat. A large jet is not designed to go backwards. When an large jet is moving rearward it’s via a tug and large ground crew. Even when powerbacks were commonplace Boeing said the airplane can “technically” powerback but we rather you didn’t. In the case of Envoy with underwing mounted engines, it’s never allowed- due to FOD ingestion. Imagine telling your chief pilot, hey boss I powered back allowing Delta to proceed to their gate, do I get a pat on the back. CP: I’m sure your future employer will give you that pat on the back but here you’re getting a kick out the door for trashing $30M in engines.

[@PinkHusky433]

Yeah, for Trans-Oceanic flights, it is always easier to change altitude... I remember when I was relaying ATC clearances for those flights in Northern Quebec/Canada, and most would chose a FL change, instead of a track change.

[@stygiangeist8224]

Didn't think I had that big an interest in aviation till I realized I've been watching Kelsey more and more this week. Thanks for making it interesting and informative to listen to!

[@balisongman07]

Really neat to learn how precise and careful the Atlantic crossings are. I mean I figured they took it seriously but I didn't grasp how seriously

[@S.Clause]

What makes this even more comical is ATC is in a building somewhere looking at a computer screen. The tower doesn’t say a thing because the aircraft aren’t lined up for takeoff or landing. Ground Ops is like , awe hell no. 🤣

[@StrokeMahEgo]

Tower and ground control are usually in the same building (the tower) and can see the airport through the windows.

[@bambicrandi]

I’m on maternity leave right now, and I miss work so I’ve been binging your videos. Airplanes are so amazing to work with.

[@lisaross6364]

The pilot being asked to reverse should GIVE ATC a phone number to write down so ATC can talk with the chief pilot of their airline.

[@vbscript2]

It was the pilot who offered to powerback. ATC just approved it if able. There is no regulation against it, so, for all the controller knew, Envoy's operational rules might have allowed it. As Kelsey said, the controller doesn't know what your airline's rules are and the FAA itself has no rules against it, so the controller didn't necessarily do anything wrong.

[@ClearedAsFiled]

LMAO.......

[@erikhonan5748]

Love your channel. Dad was a pilot, I’ve ridden jump seat when eastern airlines was around so waaay pre 9/11….but just for your information, they USED to use thrust reversers out of gates. Don’t know if you knew that. But it’s true. Great job, love your channel big time.

[@ZSn1p3r0]

The dysfunction between the pilots, ramp crew, and controller here is just unbelievably hilarious. I don't know if I'd have believed it if it wasn't for the captured audio.

[@garygonzalez7437]

I am new to watching your videos, but I have learned a lot about flying and pilots! I enjoy the conversations between the pilots and tower. I fly back and forth from Detroit to St. Louis for work every 2 weeks, on a flight home to Detroit a couple weeks ago, as I was exiting the plane, the pilot was standing in the cockpit door, I said 'Great landing, nice spool!' I could hear him chuckling as I stepped off the plane as he thanked me...too funny...keep up the great work Kelsey!!

[@kevtheis]

I remember being on an AirTran flight out of ATL years ago and it seemed standard procedure for them to throw the reversers on to back out of the gate, but at least they were 717s and had marshallers.

[@Torbjorn.Lindgren]

The basic DC-9 layout (DC-9/MD-8X/MD-9X/B717) has it's engine mounted high and far back, using reversers for pushback or taxiing are MUCH safer on aircrafts with engines placed like that instead of under the wings - much less chance of FOD and that ignores the wear it puts on the engines and the fuel used. AFAIK one of the wear factors for many jet engines are the number of "high thrust" cycles and if they use it for push-back they've likely either increased the number necessary for the flight by 50% or 100% depending on whether thrust-reverser are used during landing or not. Yes, engine hours also matter and so do many other factors but my understanding is that for short-haul engine cycles can often be the limiting factor so greatly increasing it might mean more frequent service and it doesn't make money during that time. Thrust reversers use during landing often doesn't reduce the landing distance that much (though in some cases it can matter) but it drastically reduce the amount of heat dumped into the break assmbly and waiting for the breaks to cool down sufficiently (has to be able to handle a high-speed abort!) can actually be the limiting factor for turn-around on shorter flights - especially budget airlines that specialize in the absolute shortest turn-around possible. Basically they've calculcated that keeping the airliner on the ground longer at each stop costs them more than the more frequent engine overhauls (including being grounded during the service). The calculation is likely different for long-haul flights because the turn-around time for those are much longer so the brake heat isn't a factor anyway. I also expect this was a considerable number of years ago (at least 7 since it's AirTran), there's a good chance you won't see planes using thrust reversers to push back today even if you look only at those that fly planes with high/back mounted engines for many reasons (FOD risk, engine wear, cost of fuel and so on).

[@rilmar2137]

It used to be a standard procedure way back, but now it's forbidden - mostly because of the fuel usage and the wear on the engine, as far as I know

[@kevtheis]

@@Torbjorn.Lindgren oh exactly! Low mounted engines are a recipe for disaster for fod when it comes to that! It was probably 17 or18 years ago that I was on that AirTran flight. The last one I was on did use a tug for pushback, probably 15 years ago!

[@Markle2k]

@@Torbjorn.Lindgren E=1/2 M*V^2. Taking 40 knots off the top of the touchdown speed is worth a lot more than the next 40 knots, or the bottom 40 knots.

[@faithlifeworshipcenter460]

I used to fly AirTran out of Dayton, Ohio a lot back in the 90s. They never backed away from the gate using tugs. They always used the reversers. They were flying MD-80s and 717s.

[@kurtbuck3275]

I have backed up 727s, and I've been on DC-9s where they reversed out of the gate. But it's only a good idea with tail mounted engines, under wing is not a good idea, there's a good chance of sucking something in the engines.

[@flugjung]

The E-Jet SOP specifically forbids it. FOD ingestion is the main issue.

[@fuzzy1dk]

@@flugjung afaiu there is also a risk of the tail hitting the ground if not careful with the brakes

[@mikehawk1673]

I saw a c5 back up using TR’s one time 😂

[@jessepuppy01]

Have been out of internet range for a while. Have missed you so much,....I'm binging today! Yay! So great to see you Kelsey!

[@CaptainConstand]

The full Atc convo on the envoy and delta,, the controller gave the two planes clearance on the same taxi way and realized it way too late thats why there is commotion overthere..

[@DiamondPaintWithDiamondDave]

Weed Airport has the most gorgeous view of Mt. Shasta...its situated right at the base of Shasta running parallel with I-5...been there many times as a truck driver.

[@WayneM1961]

I wish I could find it for you Kelsey, but there is a pilot V controller video on here whereby a controller is asking a BA pilot on the ground of course, to "make a turn, there is small plane but you should clear it with your wing" to which the BA pilot replied "if you seriously think I'm going to put my wing over the top of a smaller plane you really do need to look for another job"! I think that was a way of telling the controller that would be a highly dangerous manouvre and not one his company would approve of. Happy New Year and happy landings

[@Markle2k]

If you are putting your wing over the top of another aircraft, that aircraft is going to be dangerously close to your jet wash. That could be lethal to the occupants of the smaller plane as it goes flying earlier than expected, and its flight path could intersect with the larger aircraft as well, causing damage that grounds the airliner.

[@wendyjaa]

I love how Envoy and Delta were basically like two kids saying, "Nuh nuh, you first!" 😂

[@meganproffitt424]

My exact thoughts 🤣 I’m like, “those 2 are children”

[@kallewirsch2263]

Hi Kelsey. First of all: nice channel, I love it! Then: I have now figure out, how crossing the Atlanitc works. And I wondered: How does crossing the Pacific work? Is there a similar system in place?

[@74gear]

pacific is a lot easier and relaxed compared to the Atlantic.

[@321captain3]

The Pacific has specific routes, but most of the time you get a clearance that has a small part of the route, and then what they call “Random” route after. It is much more relaxed for sure, mostly because there isn’t as much talking on the radios.

[@jaredmulconry]

That info about the trans-Atlantic tracks isn't something I had encountered before. I figured that they would be a thing. Thanks for giving me my daily dose of learning.

[@mattguey-lee4845]

I've experience a power back procedure on a DC-9 when flying Value Jet. Some others mentioned doing this in derivatives like the MD-80, MD-90 and maybe 717?. Also note this was airport dependent they would do it a some airports and not others with the same aircraft. I've never see it done with low mounted engines or even smaller RJ with tail mounted engines.

[@jblyon2]

A lot of airports banned the procedure before the airlines did themselves. It was very easy for debris on the ground to be blown at and damage equipment on the ground and the terminal. While it was normally safe from an engine perspective for aircraft with tail mounted engines to perform a power back, it uses a good amount of fuel. Fuel is expensive so airlines don't want pilots doing it. Aircraft with wing mounted engines just have too high of a risk of damage from debris to attempt the procedure, though any aircraft with thrust reversers can do it. I have to imagine it is significantly less effective on high bypass engines vs low bypass engines with bucket reversers though.

[@cindychurch925]

I learn so much from your videos. I am not a pilot and do not plan on being one... Not even playing a pilot on tv (ha ha) seriously, it is so entertaining and educational. I really want you to thank you for all this great content.

[@aniruddhamitra6871]

I think on your next ATC VS Pilots video, you should include the audio clip of how the "17 yrs old female student pilot landed her plane after losing the right gear" Love your aviation content❤👍

[@TheRealPlato]

agreed, that is probably the best work I've heard on any ATC recording

[@napalmstickylikeglue]

Old.

[@W3CRTinWV]

Kelsey - During the summer of 1992 my wife and I were leaving Nashville TN on an American Airlines MD80. The pilot backed the plane out from the terminal with the thrust reversers. I believe this was common practice at this airport at that time as I saw another American plane do the same thing from the next gate just before ours backed out. I do not remember seeing any tugs at the American gates. It was a strange experience to be sitting in the aircraft, have the engines start up and expect the plane to start moving back with a tug only to then hear the thrust reversers engage, the engines spool up, and the plane move back under its own power. Granted that practice may have changed later on.

[@geoffquickfall]

Back in 1974 in Canada my father authored a 250 page report on the feasibility of powering off the gate using reverse for the 727, 737 and DC 9. This was at the request of Air Canada, Canadian Pacific Airlines and Pacific Western Airlines. The need for this procedure was at airports without tugs that were serviced by said aircraft. The study involved McDonnel Douglas and Boeing engineers, test pilots and powerplant producers. Under specific conditions (ie no gravel operations), clear of men and materials, wing walkers and etc the procedure was approved. Today, flying the 787 I ran a sim exercise. All up weight, brakes set to 0 (off) and feet on the floor. That is, at touchdown, fully loaded all up weight and absolutely no braking and using ONLY reverse, the aircraft stopped in 7000 feet (airport elevation 340’, paved runway 9000 LDA). As an experiment, with engine N1 at 20% in reverse thrust mode: the aircraft easily started to back up. THIS WAS DONE in SIM. Cheers, Geoff Quickfall 27000 hours; DC10, 737, 757, 767, 777, 787. 5000 hours on float planes.

[@Shade01982]

From what I've been told, reversing was taken out of procedure not because it couldn't be done, but because on occasion dangerous situations would arise?

[@geoffquickfall]

@@Shade01982 that is true! FOD such as gravel could injure ramp personnel. Being human there is always a chance of an incident. In Whitehorse, British Columbia the mobile gate is very long, such that a 737-200 could power forward and turn to clear the terminal. If the nose of the 737-200 does not hit the terminal building then the wings will not. That applies to the 737-200 and 100 ONLY😉 I use the 737-200 as an example as that of the era for power back at smaller uncontrolled airports with minimal ground support. In Canada this would frequently involve uncontrolled and unsupported strips and gravel kit 737s; another project my dad was involved with in conjunction with Boeing and PWA. Cheers!

[@12345fowler]

And how do you know that particular data point was qualified in the sim package ? As you know there are many things not correctly and certified even in the most realic sim package today. Stall beheviour is one, actual landing behaviour is another, I'm pretty sure the reverse on ground for taxi was not part of the certified data as well. Too costly to do for no gain in training.

[@geoffquickfall]

@@12345fowler: you are absolutely correct. That may not have been a certified, correct, representation of the actual reverse on the aircraft. It was anecdotal. however, having flown the 787 for 4000 hours I noticed that it was the most effective reverse of the aircraft I have flown. The reverse on the 787 is so effective, the stopping distance on the QRH performance sections compares extremely favorably to the aircraft that I have flown which were allowed to to reverse off the gate, (B737-200). The stopping distance portion of the reverse thrust in the SIM is, however, is a well proven and correct simulation of the aircraft and as such is a useful tool when used in comparison to the QRH performance data stopping distance or WAT charts or whichever system you employ to calculate stopping distances. So again, you are correct, the reversing of the aircraft versus the reversing of the aircraft in the SIM may not be a direct function comparison, but in my experience, (as useless as that anecdotal evidence is) there is no reason to doubt the ability of the aircraft to ‘back up’ using reverse. The question is, why would you do it. And again, without actually talking to CAE technicians, the stopping power of the reversers during the slow down phase of the sim after touchdown is realistic. As a complete loss braking may be an unexpected event; the reverse simulation is an extremely accurate 1 to 1 comparison to the actual aircraft.

[@kurtak9452]

I remember as a kid at SMF the Air Cal Super 80's used to back out of the gates with their buckets as well. It was cool to watch.

[@thomasbezencon2121]

9:50 Had Ops9 told them they had enough room, guided them, and then they hit something following Ops9's guidance. Would envoy have gotten in any trouble? I'd suppose no, given that the whole purpose of a wingwalker being there is that he has better visibility and can maneuver you more accurately, but I'm not sure.

[@Hartbreak1]

Most probably they still would’ve gotten into trouble for taking an unnecessary risk as there was still a safe option available (the tug). Airlines aren’t fond of pilots that take unnecessary risks.

[@immikeurnot]

Pretty sure the pilot in command is ALWAYS responsible for the operation of their aircraft, no matter what ATC, OPS or whoever else not sitting in that left seat might say. See Kelsey's video about the collision warning system on aircraft. Doesn't matter what ATC might be saying, when that system says "climb" or "turn" or whatever, they do it. Safe operation of the aircraft is 100% the responsibility of the two people in that cockpit. 100%, no excuses.

[@StrokeMahEgo]

@@immikeurnot yup. PIC is PIC. Responsible for safe conduct, bottom line.

[@MTGeomancer]

@@immikeurnot The TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) rules where an RA (Resolution Advisory) is always followed instead of ATC came about because a DHL 757 and a BAL TU-154 collided in mid-air because DHL followed the RA from TCAS while the BAL followed ATC instructions. (Unrelated to TCAS but an interesting if sad fact a Russian family member of a victim on the BAL flight tracked down the ATC controller and murdered him infront of the controllers wife and children. He served less than 4 years in jail for the murder, and upon returning to Russia was hailed as a hero by the government and awarded a medal.) A similar incident happened a year and a half earlier in Japan, but the collision was narrowly avoided since one of the plane's pilot visually saw the other airplane and maneuvered away, it was still such a violent maneuver that 100 passengers were injured. Everyone across the world is now told that a TCAS RA is obeyed above all other orders.

[@muskiet8687]

I remember flying to an airport where no towbars were available to push back a 757. I managed to talk the pilot (I was the flying spanner for this particular series of charter flights) into a powered pushback where he used the reversers to back the plane onto the taxiway. It was interesting! We've never done one before because we've never been to an airport that didn't have a towbar for a 757 or A320 (they can use the same one) and we really didn't have any other options. We did have the advantage of having several ground observers guiding us, pilots of a plane cannot see anything behind the plane so that same decision on a taxiway without any guidance whatsoever would be difficult. Rule nr 1 for one for a powered push is: "DON'T TOUCH THE BRAKES!".

[@lelandv1969]

Hey Kelsey, for that past several years, many large airports no longer use marshallers, but rather an automatic parking system. Could you explain pretty much how it works? Is it similar to sector lights on an approach to a marine port? What about distance to ensure the front gear is parked in the correct zone? Just curious.

[@pjhaebe]

Yup..kind of like a stoplight arrangement. Sensors give a direction and a stop light adjusted for lineup

[@paulebelmesser2699]

Hi Leland. Captain Joe. Did a video on this called how Planes park. About 9 or 10 months ago. If you want to cruise over to his site,

[@lelandv1969]

@@paulebelmesser2699 yes...found it... many thanks !

[@74gear]

I would say its less than 10% of the places I go to but it just tells you how far you are to stop and directs you left or right thats it. But someone still needs to be there to chock the tires, bring the stairs etc so people are still needed to do a lot of tasks within minutes of parking.

[@carloS-jy1fl]

@@74gear Hey Kelsey, have you looked at trevor jacob incident?

[@florida_drone_dude]

Kelsey, I fly with KLM as a passenger quite a lot and I can tell you that I really like their product and I can speak positively about their pilots and crew in general as I have never had any issues but I have noticed, as a frequent flyer on KLM, that some of their aircrews love getting heated in certain situations. For example, some time ago I was taking a really early morning flight on KLM and the ground staff in this particular origin city happen to be third party contractors (not KLM employees) and apparently that morning the ground staff were half asleep loading baggage, cargo and finalizing the manifest which caused the flight to be delayed a few minutes. Upon pushback the captain or FO came on the PA and instead of just apologizing for the delay as most aircrews do in situations like this the person on the PA decided to mention that the reason for the delay was because the ground staff at this third party firm were apparently half awake that morning and taking their sweet old time. Another time, same origin city and also on KLM we were holding short of the runway waiting to taxi into position when an aircraft had some mayday call which I think did not materialize into a real emergency but it caused ATC to shift their focus to that aircraft for a few minutes and after ATC resolved the situation and came back the controller gave 2 other aircraft landing clearance and told our aircraft to wait for those aircraft to land which caused the captain to come on the PA to announce a further delay and that ATC was to blame because it allowed 2 aircraft to land from their national carrier airline, of course highlighting the "national carrier" part. I think KLM pilots just like to get rowdy and start beef on the PA whether its talking to passengers or to ATC as was the case here haha.

[@laratheplanespotter]

Kelsey: got a video for ya Lara: starts playing it Lara 2 minutes later: gets distracted by 3 aircrafts in the sky above her house…

[@jimdaway1965]

Love the channel and summaries. Thank you! And, as always, I get a chuckle when I remember the "boiled owl" comment from way back!😁

[@tomriley5790]

I thought that the reason for not using the reversers to back up was that the reversers on aircraft with underwing engines (most modern ones) will kick up FOD/anything from the ground which could then be ingested by the engines. Aircraft like MD-80/727 have high engines in order to avoid this and so were able ot reverse safely (i don't know what aircraft were involved here). I didn't feel the controller was putting a burden on the pilots he was simply clarifying that there was no way to get out of the situation without brining the tug out so he could get the tug brought out. The ramp controller was really cheeky to say there was lots of room if there wasn't - OPs was a star for jumping in and getting the tug. KLM pilot was a d!£k...

[@veramae4098]

Tangent: SpaceX put thrusters up on the nose of the Starship, so when it lands on moon it will kick up least amount of dust. Moon dust is both very fine, and sharp edged as knives. That's gonna be a problem in future. [sigh] Too bad they can't just spray all that dust with water to settle it down. [grin] More tangential: NASA is offering a $10,000 prize to anyone who can figure out how to unload Starship cargo (on the moon) efficiently. [scratching head] In future I suppose they'll be cranes and ramps to be rolled up and all kinds of equipment, but the Lunar Space Port is a little underequipped right now.

[@Markle2k]

@@veramae4098 The tendency to dig a hole is scaled by some exponential power, so it wasn't such a big deal with the LEM. But with Starship it would dig a big uneven hole that would rarely be level. The other thing is that those bits get accelerated to orbital velocity and become a hazard to other operations Moon-wide. Unless the thing is accelerated to escape velocity, it will return to the Moon's surface, somewhere. They (NASA, ESA, etc.) are actually looking at ways to create landing pads using the regolith, and either energy to fuse it, or some substance that can turn it into concrete.

[@watsonwrote]

I've driven through Weed, CA. It's very small but many of the shops are decked out as you might imagine lol

[@bhawkpilot4714]

Power back. Power back operations prohibited. After having a minute to think and breathe and without more peer pressure, they knew what they initially offered was wrong. Common sense and SOP prevailed.

[@rilmar2137]

And maybe after getting slapped on the wrist by the captain

[@321captain3]

The thing is that even if power back operations were allowed by their airline, it never would be approved without having a marshaller there to provide guidance and insure safety.

[@tntfreddan3138]

That "You First" part kinda reminds me of of some encounters I've had. I'm a truck driver and if someone tells you to go somewhere and even if he says that others have done it before you, you can refuse if you're not comfortable with it. A 10 meter truck with a 14 meter trailer with drawbar doesn't really turn on a dime. The truck itself has a 13 meter turn radius but you have to be careful so that you firstly don't hit the drawbar against you rear under driving bar and, if you have to reverse and fold the entire truck and trailer (you turn as sharp as you can, reverse and turn the other way so that the drawbar and front axles of the trailer are pointing 90° from your truck and 90°from the trailer, so the truck has turned around but the trailer is still pointing forwards) you have to be careful of the same thing and to keep in mind that the rear of the trailer will also go the opposite direction of where you're actually going. So if you've folded and you have the trailer parallell with the truck, and you practically have the trailer right outside your door, the rear of the trailer will head away from the truck.

[@MsJubjubbird]

Could you do something on crossing the Pacific? That's probably a huge endeavour

[@flyflorida2001]

Surprisingly, much easier than the Atlantic. The NAT Track system is much more involved and moves daily. For the most part, Pacific routes are fixed and less communication involved.

[@TomDoingItWrong]

When I was in the USAF a bazillion years go, we used to fly Republic out of ATL when going TDY to either Tyndall or Eglin AFBs on the Florida Panhandle. Republic always backed out of their gates using TRs on their DC-9s. I have often seen C-130s using reverse props to back-up; one time was runway distance at an air show when they were demonstrating STOL capabilities. I don't think I would try it without someone on the ground watching the tail and in communication with the flight deck.

[@zhvonte]

I remember years ago an airline pilot got fired because he asked if he could take a smoke break on a plane, and after he was told no, he did it anyways. Having a cigarette in the cocpit. This was yearsr ago when they ust banned smoking on planes. But, these airline pilots are often so arrogant, makes me cringe. Thank god for people like Kelsey to help counter balance that.

[@P_Jag]

Often?

[@adamweb]

Kinda like people now with masks and vaccines!

[@reesewhitworth]

Watching your videos has been a great resource during flight school! It would be fun to have you as a CFI!

[@veppington]

You never fail to make my day Kelsey :)

[@Bugdriver49]

Kelsey is correct about reverser use.....but there are exceptions. There have been airlines, using DC-9s, that backed out from gates using their reversers instead of being pushed back by a tug. DC -9's have their engines mounted up higher than Boeing 737....so less chance of FOD (Foreign Object debris ) ingestion.....BTW "FOD' ingestion is the main reason to NOT use reversers anyplace but on a runway. jus saying.... :^)

[@metatechnologist]

I have to disagree with Kelsey on this one. "Wing walker" *is* gansta!

[@lonesparrow]

One of the most entertaining parts of the flight too if you have a window seat... love it when they put some funk on it

[@efperee]

Heard this ATC before, but love the pilot context to it, makes so much more sense now

[@MeppyMan]

Fun fact: the real reason that jets aren’t allowed to back up using reverse thrusters, is because you can’t hear the reversing beeper.

[@ClearedAsFiled]

LMAO.....

[@thebeddoctor4273]

Kelsey seems like the coolest guy to hang out with. Wing walker totally sounded so cool and gangster.

[@nukers1234]

It's like us truck drivers, at the end of the day we are responsible for the vehicle and what's happening to it when in our hands.

[@Wizzardgirl]

Been a dog's age, but back in the long, long ago, using reversers was how planes got off the gates at MDW. This was the early to mid 1980s for you young whippersnappers. Thank god some things changed for the better. One time on a flight from MDW to MSP .. in December WITH snow on the airport .. that was how we got off the gate. Thank god I was young and stupid back then and had no idea what kind of disaster that could beget!

[@davebartosh5]

Hey, Kelsey! That's interesting that reverse thrusters are not normally permitted for taxiing. Why is that? FOD issues, I'm guessing. Probably a good way to FOD your engine.

[@P_Jag]

Mostly due to the high stress it causes, a lot of wear and tear and fuel burn. That’s the reason for our airline. Also with longer aircraft, managing your speed is too tricky as you’re using a high power setting which makes fine tuning impossible, this means if you make a slight misjudgment and need to brake hard it could tip the aircraft but it’s mostly for the first reasons.

[@davebartosh5]

@@P_Jag Yup, thanks. Of course you can't see where you are going, too. haha

[@flugjung]

Basically FOD issues. Embraer’s SOP forbids it specifically.

[@pb3616]

PSA (Pacific Southwest Airlines) used to operate MD80 aircraft up and down the west coast of the USA. Their aircraft would taxi into a gate and shut down the engine on the gate side and leave the other running, passengers would deplane, others would come on (open seating) they would close the door and reverse out of the gate onto the ramp, then close the reverser and move down the ramp and start the other engine on the taxiway. Their business was all about quick turn and maximum aircraft utilization.

[@driver288]

I’ve experienced this on an American flight out of New Orleans. Mind you this was back in the days of the Mad Dog, 2001, and they as you know, have tail mounted engines so less risk for debris. But the female captain reversed out of the gate without a tow truck. Only time I’ve had it happen to me. Cool experience though! So I guess it at least was allowed on that aircraft type…

[@VE1PS]

Late ‘80s, early ‘90s this was SOP to DX a DASH-8 off the gate at CYHZ with QK. Taxi ahead 2 feet hit the brakes and reverse pitch then the ground crew walked it back. I’ve heard of DC-9s and 727s doing the same “back in the day” but risk of FOD ingestion on newer engines seemed to end this. There was always a risk of the terminal’s windows being damaged too.

[@DIYAllied]

Hey Kelsey, I'd love to hear your take on the Trevor Jacob debacle. Great content as always. Thank you.

[@max-jx5ne]

Trevor Jacob

[@Stitchwitchstitch]

Ooof. Whenever I hear “KLM”, I think of the Tenerife collision and crash. I’d like to learn to fly, but I’m not sure I have what it takes to be any kind of pilot! It’s probably a job that one shouldn’t do unless they’re absolutely passionate about flying. It’s an amazing feeling being in the cockpit and seeing that sky all around you though. I got to go check it out once, when I was a kid. ‘96, I think- halfway into the flight, flying from London to Toronto. The sun was coming up and the sky was beautiful- the clouds carpeted the sky below us, far as you could see.