Crashing on takeoff... how odd

Emily wrote:

Newps wrote:



Emily wrote:

How much

would a typical light twin pitch up on takeoff with the trim set like
that? I know myself, I usually ended up trimming down on climb
because the nose was hard to hold down (although I never flew the 76)


Then you started with too much nose up trim on takeoff.


I think I'm just wimpy, actually. I trim up in the flare, because it's
the only way I can land one-handed.

No, just set the trim for takeoff a little more nose down.





Every plane is different. Go out and try it yourself with whatever
you fly. Go up to altitude and slow down as much as possiblein a
takeoff configuration, then roll in full nose up trim and go to full
power. It'll get your attention but you'll have no problem.


Unless an engine goes out...but I'll probably try it next time I'm up.

If you lose an engine bring both to idle and get the nose down even faster.

On 27 Aug 2006 08:39:44 -0700, wrote:


Doesn't add up, does it? After all, if the engines are good and there's
no bomb going off, it should be pretty hard to crash an aircraft!

Ramapriya

After looking at the photo of the runway on google earth, I saw
something that I think is interesting on runway 26 compared to runway
22. The number markings for 22 are at the far end of the runway,
pretty much at the end of the taxiway such that you would have to read
the numbers from the side and as you turn onto the runway the numbers
would be off to the right of the aircraft. On runway 22 the numbers
are in front of the taxiway. After turning on to runway 22, you would
have the numbers clearly laid out in front of you, oriented correctly
with respect to your view down the runway and illuminated by the
landing lights.
I know that with the last night flight I did it was difficult to read
the numbers at night and even harder when you have to read them from
the side and no direct light onthem fromthe aircraft.
Just an observation and I am not saying that this would have helped
but I think it would be a good thing if once you are in position for
takeoff, you can see the numbers clearly in front of the aircraft. Or
at least as you are getting into position to cross over the numbers,
instead of having them off to the side some distance away.

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:45:42 -0400,
wrote:

On 27 Aug 2006 08:39:44 -0700, wrote:


Doesn't add up, does it? After all, if the engines are good and there's
no bomb going off, it should be pretty hard to crash an aircraft!

Ramapriya

After looking at the photo of the runway on google earth, I saw
something that I think is interesting on runway 26 compared to runway
22. The number markings for 22 are at the far end of the runway,
pretty much at the end of the taxiway such that you would have to read
the numbers from the side and as you turn onto the runway the numbers
would be off to the right of the aircraft. On runway 22 the numbers
are in front of the taxiway. After turning on to runway 22, you would
have the numbers clearly laid out in front of you, oriented correctly
with respect to your view down the runway and illuminated by the
landing lights.
I know that with the last night flight I did it was difficult to read
the numbers at night and even harder when you have to read them from
the side and no direct light onthem fromthe aircraft.
Just an observation and I am not saying that this would have helped
but I think it would be a good thing if once you are in position for
takeoff, you can see the numbers clearly in front of the aircraft. Or
at least as you are getting into position to cross over the numbers,
instead of having them off to the side some distance away.


I need to make a correction.. the second sentence should read
"The number markings for 26..."

After looking at the photo of the runway on google earth, I saw
something that I think is interesting on runway 26 compared to runway
22. The number markings for 22 are at the far end of the runway,
pretty much at the end of the taxiway such that you would have to read
the numbers from the side and as you turn onto the runway the numbers
would be off to the right of the aircraft. On runway 22 the numbers
are in front of the taxiway. After turning on to runway 22, you would
have the numbers clearly laid out in front of you, oriented correctly
with respect to your view down the runway and illuminated by the
landing lights.
I know that with the last night flight I did it was difficult to read
the numbers at night and even harder when you have to read them from
the side and no direct light onthem fromthe aircraft.
Just an observation and I am not saying that this would have helped
but I think it would be a good thing if once you are in position for
takeoff, you can see the numbers clearly in front of the aircraft. Or
at least as you are getting into position to cross over the numbers,
instead of having them off to the side some distance away.

You are correct (with your correction of the second sentence to RWY
26) but shouldn't there be illuminated signage for the runway
numbers?

Ron Lee

Newps wrote:


Emily wrote:

Newps wrote:



Emily wrote:

How much

would a typical light twin pitch up on takeoff with the trim set
like that? I know myself, I usually ended up trimming down on climb
because the nose was hard to hold down (although I never flew the 76)


Then you started with too much nose up trim on takeoff.


I think I'm just wimpy, actually. I trim up in the flare, because
it's the only way I can land one-handed.

No, just set the trim for takeoff a little more nose down.





Every plane is different. Go out and try it yourself with whatever
you fly. Go up to altitude and slow down as much as possiblein a
takeoff configuration, then roll in full nose up trim and go to full
power. It'll get your attention but you'll have no problem.


Unless an engine goes out...but I'll probably try it next time I'm up.

If you lose an engine bring both to idle and get the nose down even faster.

Thanks, I've practiced all that. Just try to avoid situation where it
could actually happen.

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:07:56 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:


You are correct (with your correction of the second sentence to RWY
26) but shouldn't there be illuminated signage for the runway
numbers?

Ron Lee


Absolutely. Right there at the hold short line. But crossing over the
the runway numbers might help as a second check.
But the signage and the runway numbers would not have mattered if the
pilot and co-pilot already had it set in their minds that 26 was the
correct runway.

Accorind to airnav both runways have lights...

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KLEX


The 22 has better lights, but both 22 and 26 have lights.

Paul

Greg Farris wrote:
In article ,
says...


Matt Whiting wrote:

It isn't that hard to overcome the trim on a 172. There are probably
airplanes where this isn't the case, but the 172 isn't one of them.

In theory, it should be possible on any plane. 14 CFR 23.677 (d) says:




Say that to the 130 souls who perished in the B-707 accident on takeoff from
Paris' Orly airport, due to an out-of-trim condition.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/...0603-0&lang=en

The B707 was not certified per 14 CFR 23. (It was most likely certified
under 14 CFR 25 or its predecessor).

I assume the earlier poster's "any plane" before he mentioned meant 14
CFR 23.677 (d) "any plane certified under 14 CFR 23. YMMV.

Emily wrote:

Not to mention the memory of the first officer.

Assuming the shock of the accident hasn't pushed the moments right up to
the crash out of his conscience mind.

--
Peter

Google earth will also let you notice the thresholds for both runways
are on the same line of sight from the tower.

Aen't all airline pilots required to operate from the field before they
carry passengers from it?

What an awful mistake, and a more awful price to have paid for it.