No touch and go's?

On Sep 4, 6:21 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
John Jones wrote groups.com:



On Sep 4, 4:35 am, B A R R Y wrote:
John Jones wrote:
In many airports out there, you'll find in the AFD in the comments

What exactly is meant by this?

Just what it says.

No T&G's means NO TOUCH AND GOES. G No T&G nights, means none at
night. One of my local fields allows them in one direction, but not the
other.

Doesn't it seem weird that an airport would prohibit a touch and go,
but a full stop/taxi back is perfectly allowed? I'm talking about one
single touch and go, not multiple ones.

If in doubt, simply call the field and ask.

Been there, done that. After being put on hold for about 20 minutes,
I'll get some desk monkey who doesn't even know what a touch and go is.

Why is this weird? If it is a noise problem, a full length take off
will place the aircraft higher at the airport boundary than one starting
further down the runway. The higher you are, the less noise on the ground
below you.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

In my experience, a touch and go gets you airborne faster than a
takeoff from a standstill.

In a touch and go, you land on the numbers, pull up the flaps, put in
carb heat, give the trim two flicks down, put back in throttle, then
after a second or two, you're climbing. All this takes less time that
what it takes to accelerate from a stop to rotation speed. In other
planes it may take longer I guess, but not at all in a C-152. Height
above departure end is, in my opinion, negligible (especially at a
longer runway such as KSAC)

Most student pilots.. with instructors on board.. cannot "land on the
numbers" and complete the required mantra to get every thing cleaned up,
pushed forward an airborne again as you describe..

Check the runway distance marker on a normal take off
and check it again on your touch and go..

Any guesses that you might be in the same place or maybe a little farther
down the runway?

BT

In my experience, a touch and go gets you airborne faster than a
takeoff from a standstill.

In a touch and go, you land on the numbers, pull up the flaps, put in
carb heat, give the trim two flicks down, put back in throttle, then
after a second or two, you're climbing. All this takes less time that
what it takes to accelerate from a stop to rotation speed. In other
planes it may take longer I guess, but not at all in a C-152. Height
above departure end is, in my opinion, negligible (especially at a
longer runway such as KSAC)

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:36:35 -0700, John Jones
wrote:

On Sep 4, 4:18 am, john wrote:
And I've seen them for overall length issues. My home airport is 2500
feet with 2-400 foot displaced thresholds so T&G would not be very safe
there.

Do you have an example of an airport that prohibits touch and go's
because of runway length issues? I know of a few 2500 foot runways in
my area that don;t have restriction, even though I agree it would be
rather risky to do a touch and go at those places...

Any respectable plae should be able to stop in a 1000 and be at least
several hundred feet from 1500...right over the neighbors who don't
like noise.

Roger

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:06:20 -0700, wrote:

On Sep 4, 5:18 am, john wrote:

And I've seen them for overall length issues. My home airport is 2500
feet with 2-400 foot displaced thresholds so T&G would not be very safe
there.

Some might have safety issues with touch-and-goes. Transport Canada
says that the touch-and-go is statistically risky and that numerous
accidents have been recorded during such operations. The pilot is
frequently distracted by cleaning up the airplane for the takeoff and
loses control, forgets flaps or carb heat, etc.

The theory goes that not only are they more risky, but that the
student is mainly getting pattern practice rather than true take offs
and landings. On a "touch-and-go" the typical mind set is not on
landing, but on getting back into the air without breaking something.
A true landing takes a mind set of landing the airplane, BUT what to
do if something goes wrong and a balked landing, or a go-around is
required which are not the same as touch and goes.
After he lost two rental planes the local FBO prohibited T&Gs in his
planes.

A touch-and-go in the Deb can be exciting. You ease the power in,
while the flaps are coming up and while holding at least 40# pressure
on the yoke to keep the nose down. Even with full flaps it'll
literally go ballistic and pass Vy in only a few seconds. The most
difficult parts are keeping it from trying to imitate a wheel barrow
and get retrimed properly with a trim wheel that is behind the panel
and above the bottom of said panel completely out of sight. You also
have to lean over which makes seeing out just barely possible for some
one around 5'8" or so. Typically I have to lean far enough the only
thing I can see is the panel and inside of the doors while adjusting
trim. Think of doing this at 60 to 80 MPH while close to the ground,
holding 40# of *push* against the yoke and not being able to see
outside. If you try to hold it on while doing this you are likely to
ruin a set of tires. If you wait for the flaps to come up before
easing in the throttle you have almost time and distance enough for a
full stop.

Roger (K8RI)


Dan

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:04:02 -0700, joe wrote:

On Sep 4, 6:54 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"joe" wrote

just ignore it
If the airport is a public use airport and receives federal money then
the local town/ city cannot place restrictions
on its use.
you as the PIC decide if you want to stop do a touch and go....
Our local airport tried that with some of the mechanic owners who were
servicing their own aircraft, telling them they can't work on their
own airplanes.

THAT is a totally different issue. I would assume (dangerous, I know) that
the FAA has approved the no T&G restrictions. Once that has happened, they
are part of the regulations, and a violation may be enforced.
--
Jim in NC

How is THAT a totally different issue? Is the town restricting it's
use? And no, the FAA most likley hasn't approved it.

Is it in the AFD?


So, say I go to that airport and do touch and go's? What FAR prevents
me from doing it? what could they violate me with?

A city can pass laws contrary to what they are supposed to. They can
violate you for any of them. Now, you would probably win after going
to court, and spending $20,000 or so. Then they appeal, which is going
to cost you the time to appear and maybe another $50,000. You may
need to be present for each hearing. If you work for a living this can
get both inconvenient and expensive.

Have you ever heard of some one getting violated for a touch and go?
ahh of course not.

IIRC It seems like there's also a stipulation for unpaid bills and
fines that allows them to take your airplane as collateral.


Most likely the town is trying to cut down on noise.
joe

John Jones wrote:

Doesn't it seem weird that an airport would prohibit a touch and go,
but a full stop/taxi back is perfectly allowed? I'm talking about one
single touch and go, not multiple ones.

It depends on the reason. For instance, the field I mentioned that
allows them in one direction, but not the other has close-in
obstructions and parked aircraft along the departure end of the runway.
The first T&G is no different from the rest. See the picture he

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

In the Airnav photo, you can T&G right to left, but not the other way.

joe wrote:

So, say I go to that airport and do touch and go's? What FAR prevents
me from doing it? what could they violate me with?

Whatever happened to respect for others?

If I'm not intimately familiar with the local politics and inner
workings of a field, I can't claim to know exactly why they don't want
T&G's. The statement can be a _request_ as much as it can be a rule,
but we don't know that.

Maybe there have been accidents. Maybe it's noise sensitivity. Maybe
it's some totally inane reason none of us would agree with.

If it's posted, shouldn't we respect it?

On Sep 4, 3:06 pm, wrote:
On Sep 4, 5:18 am, john wrote:



And I've seen them for overall length issues. My home airport is 2500
feet with 2-400 foot displaced thresholds so T&G would not be very safe
there.

Some might have safety issues with touch-and-goes. Transport Canada
says that the touch-and-go is statistically risky and that numerous
accidents have been recorded during such operations. The pilot is
frequently distracted by cleaning up the airplane for the takeoff and
loses control, forgets flaps or carb heat, etc.


Many years ago I lived in some apartments a block from
the Wood County airport in Bowling Green Ohio. Just past
the end of the runway that was more or less aligned with
our building was a deep drainage ditch and a low chainlink
fence, then an intersection where two streets made a tee.

I was watching a (presumably) student pilot doing touch and
goes on that runway one day when they touched down hard
in that intersection on the wrong side of the ditch from the runway
and then got airborne again in time to clear the fence.

I didn't realize before then how much travel there was in the
suspension in a Cessna landing gear. They practically
scraped the belly of the plane on the road. It literally
bounced back into the air.

Two years later someone took off from that runway with
four passengers and too much fuel, stalled, and dropped
into the apartments next door killing all four aboard.

--

FF

On Sep 3, 9:48 pm, John Jones wrote:
In many airports out there, you'll find in the AFD in the comments
section, "No touch and go landings", and/or "no practice approaches".
A few examples off the top of my head:

http://airnav.com/airport/ksachttp:/...m/airport/kcpm


It means no touch and goes, period. People really do not want a lot of
student pilot practice activity there during those hours. KSAC has
been a big AllATPs hub and those guys would do touch and goes 24/7
given the chance.

Sedona (KSEZ) used to prohibit all solo student activity, for good
reason. It has a relatively narrow runway with steep drop-offs at both
ends and squirrely winds. They used to get a lot of people missing the
runway. The runway is now 100' wide, but they still ask pilots to
avoid scenic flights below 6500' MSL.

On Sep 5, 4:50 am, B A R R Y wrote:
joe wrote:

So, say I go to that airport and do touch and go's? What FAR prevents
me from doing it? what could they violate me with?

Whatever happened to respect for others?

If I'm not intimately familiar with the local politics and inner
workings of a field, I can't claim to know exactly why they don't want
T&G's. The statement can be a _request_ as much as it can be a rule,
but we don't know that.

Maybe there have been accidents. Maybe it's noise sensitivity. Maybe
it's some totally inane reason none of us would agree with.

If it's posted, shouldn't we respect it?

The reason I brought the issue up is because just about every night I
fly cross country with one of my students to this airport that has a
24 hour cafe. We leave at sundown, since it's relatively easy to get a
plane scheduled for such a long flight. Over the weeks, I've kind of
developed a routine of instrument approaches to have my students do.

Theres this one approach that I want to add to my routine (ILS 2 @
SAC), but they have a noise abatement policy that states "no touch and
go's, no practice approaches". All I want to do is shoot the ILS, put
the wheels down, add power, then depart somewhere else. I'll even do a
full stop

When I first read it, I thought they just meant they didn't want
people buzzing around in the pattern multiple times, nor did they not
want people constantly jamming in the throttle at DA multiple times,
for hours on end. When I asked other pilots that they thought, they
all agreed that it meant simply "don't land here at all at night"

The way I see it, if they didn't want anybody landing there at all
after dark, they'd bluntly state in the noise abatement policy "no
transient activity after such and such local time". The way it's
worded now, you can land and do a full stop/taxi back without any
trouble. So why would they allow you to do one full stop, but not one
touch and go? Even if you want to argue that one touch and go creates
more noise than one full stop/taxi back, it is enough to justify
banning them all together?

So would I be in accordance with the noise abatement policy if I just
did one ILS, land, then quietly depart? The way I see it, I'm not
making any more noise than a transient that decides to land there,
taxi off to get fuel, then departs again.