Take-off practices and procedures...

Hey guys,

I'm sure this has been discussed in this forum before, but a rather
detailed google search back didn't come up with anything concrete, and
I have been wondering about it.

All of the recent discussion of take-offs has had me wondering - how do
you do it?

There are 3 "official" procedures outlined in the FAA Private pilot's
manual-

Standard Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate smoothly to Vr, put the
aircraft into Vy attitude, let the plane climb away on its own.

Short Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate quickly to Vr, put
the aircraft into Vx attitude, let the aircraft climb away on its own,
drop the nose and take Vy attitude as soon as passed obstacle altitude.

Soft Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate to Vr, pull back
firmly to get the aircraft into ground effect, then lower the nose
again once in ground effect and let the aircraft accellerate to Vx or
Vy, depending upon whether or not there are obstacles to clear.

Simple enough.

However, my instructor, and several of you guys use a technique not
listed above-

"popular" takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate to Vr, pull mains off,
lower nose in ground effect, and accelerate to Vx or Vy as necessary in
ground effect (even on a hard surface runway) before climbing away.

Its basically a flaps-less soft-field takeoff even on firm runways.

My instructor gives several reasons for this takeoff-

1- Air is better than the best oleo strut, smoother takeoff for
passengers.
2- The plane accelerates faster in ground effect (without the wheel
drag)
3- It allows you to crab into a crosswind sooner, getting you out of a
draggy slip condition.
4- Less wear on both the struts and the tires.
5- Its absolutely essential at high DA altitude airports
6- It gets you in 'practice' for short-field takeoffs (the only
difference between your normal takeoff and the short field takeoff is
flap setting)... I.E, they're nothing special and nothing to worry
about.

The FAA manual lists the primary danger of "premature liftoff" as
power-on stall and the risk of the aircraft settling back onto the
runway... This makes sense, but honestly even in my underpowered little
cherokee, once I get the mains off and I'm set up in ground effect,
sink doesn't seem to be an issue- she seems perfectly happy to "hover"
down the runway building speed. I would imagine there might be a risk
if a ham-fisted pilot doesn't ease the elevator-pressure back enough
and climbs out of ground effect too early- but that takes no more
finesse then a coordinated turn - its just a simple pilot skill that
quickly becomes second nature.

So if the 'hybrid' takeoff above really does have all of these
advantages, why isn't it 'recommended' per the FAA handbook?

How do you guys do it?

Just looking for some guidance from the more experienced pilots on
here

-Scott

After getting my students finished up with all the PTS landings I
always go out and do "family landings" with them.

-Robert

So if the 'hybrid' takeoff above really does have all of these
advantages, why isn't it 'recommended' per the FAA handbook?

How do you guys do it?

I've found that on a hard surface runway (in a Cherokee), between the
time I start rotation to the time the wheels lift off, I've already got
flying speed. I've done the "lower the nose to accelerate in ground
effect" thing but I don't get more than a few seconds of that before I'm
already past climb speed. On a short field, every second matters, but I
expected more of a difference.

The Cutlass (C-172 RG) POH says, for high altitude, to lean to best RPM,
and (if I remember right) use a notch or two of flap. But the odd thing
is that the POH says to hold the wheel back during the takeoff roll,
rather than let the airplane accelerate on the ground first. The
airplane will start to take off and gently bounce on the runway a few
times as it builds speed.

Seems to me this is wasting energy somewhere.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

EridanMan wrote

Standard Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate smoothly to Vr, put the
aircraft into Vy attitude, let the plane climb away on its own.

YES

Short Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate quickly to Vr, put
the aircraft into Vx attitude, let the aircraft climb away on its own,
drop the nose and take Vy attitude as soon as passed obstacle
altitude.

YES

Soft Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate to Vr, pull back
firmly to get the aircraft into ground effect, then lower the nose
again once in ground effect and let the aircraft accellerate to Vx or
Vy, depending upon whether or not there are obstacles to clear.

NO....The following is from the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook 5-10

TAKEOFF ROLL
As the airplane is aligned with the takeoff path, takeoff
power is applied smoothly and as rapidly as the powerplant
will accept it without faltering. As the airplaneaccelerates,
enough back-elevator pressure should be
applied to establish a positive angle of attack and to
reduce the weight supported by the nosewheel.
When the airplane is held at a nose-high attitude
throughout the takeoff run, the wings will, as speed
increases and lift develops, progressively relieve the
wheels of more and more of the airplane’s weight,
thereby minimizing the drag caused by surface irregularities
or adhesion. If this attitude is accurately maintained,
the airplane will virtually fly itself off the ground,
becoming airborne at airspeed slower than a safe climb
speed because of ground effect. [Figure 5-9]
LIFT-OFF
After becoming airborne, the nose should be lowered
very gently with the wheels clear of the surface to
allow the airplane to accelerate to VY, or VX if obstacles
must be cleared. Extreme care must be exercised
immediately after the airplane becomes airborne and
while it accelerates, to avoid settling back onto the surface.
An attempt to climb prematurely or too steeply
may cause the airplane to settle back to the surface as
a result of losing the benefit of ground effect. An
attempt to climb out of ground effect before sufficient
climb airspeed is attained may result in the airplane
being unable to climb further as the ground effect area
is transited, even with full power. Therefore, it is
essential that the airplane remain in ground effect until
at least VX is reached. This requires feel for the airplane,
and a very fine control touch, in order to avoid
over-controlling the elevator as required control pressures
change with airplane acceleration.

"popular" takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate to Vr, pull mains off,
lower nose in ground effect, and accelerate to Vx or Vy as necessary in
ground effect (even on a hard surface runway) before climbing away.

NO

Bob Moore
ATP CFI(I)
PanAm (retired)

I'm still trying to figure out how to accelerate "smoothly," "rapidly," or
just plain accelerate when my every-time practice is to push the throttle
full forward.

Bob Gardner

"EridanMan" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hey guys,

I'm sure this has been discussed in this forum before, but a rather
detailed google search back didn't come up with anything concrete, and
I have been wondering about it.

All of the recent discussion of take-offs has had me wondering - how do
you do it?

There are 3 "official" procedures outlined in the FAA Private pilot's
manual-

Standard Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate smoothly to Vr, put the
aircraft into Vy attitude, let the plane climb away on its own.

Short Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate quickly to Vr, put
the aircraft into Vx attitude, let the aircraft climb away on its own,
drop the nose and take Vy attitude as soon as passed obstacle altitude.

Soft Field Takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually 1 notch or so), accelerate to Vr, pull back
firmly to get the aircraft into ground effect, then lower the nose
again once in ground effect and let the aircraft accellerate to Vx or
Vy, depending upon whether or not there are obstacles to clear.

Simple enough.

However, my instructor, and several of you guys use a technique not
listed above-

"popular" takeoff-
Flaps per POH (usually retracted), accelerate to Vr, pull mains off,
lower nose in ground effect, and accelerate to Vx or Vy as necessary in
ground effect (even on a hard surface runway) before climbing away.

Its basically a flaps-less soft-field takeoff even on firm runways.

My instructor gives several reasons for this takeoff-

1- Air is better than the best oleo strut, smoother takeoff for
passengers.
2- The plane accelerates faster in ground effect (without the wheel
drag)
3- It allows you to crab into a crosswind sooner, getting you out of a
draggy slip condition.
4- Less wear on both the struts and the tires.
5- Its absolutely essential at high DA altitude airports
6- It gets you in 'practice' for short-field takeoffs (the only
difference between your normal takeoff and the short field takeoff is
flap setting)... I.E, they're nothing special and nothing to worry
about.

The FAA manual lists the primary danger of "premature liftoff" as
power-on stall and the risk of the aircraft settling back onto the
runway... This makes sense, but honestly even in my underpowered little
cherokee, once I get the mains off and I'm set up in ground effect,
sink doesn't seem to be an issue- she seems perfectly happy to "hover"
down the runway building speed. I would imagine there might be a risk
if a ham-fisted pilot doesn't ease the elevator-pressure back enough
and climbs out of ground effect too early- but that takes no more
finesse then a coordinated turn - its just a simple pilot skill that
quickly becomes second nature.

So if the 'hybrid' takeoff above really does have all of these
advantages, why isn't it 'recommended' per the FAA handbook?

How do you guys do it?

Just looking for some guidance from the more experienced pilots on
here

-Scott

1- Air is better than the best oleo strut, smoother takeoff for
passengers.

True, But not a very smooth takeoff as you have pitch up, pitch down
and then pitch back up.


2- The plane accelerates faster in ground effect (without the wheel
drag)

False in most cases on a paved runway, In fact I watched a Commache
Crash doing this. Fully loaded he was off the ground in 1500 feet in
ground affect nose high. He flew off the end of the 5000 foot runway
still nose high and only 4 feet off the ground before he aborted the
take off. He never was able to reach his best climb speed in the nose
high, high drag configuration.


3- It allows you to crab into a crosswind sooner, getting you out of a
draggy slip condition.

True, But good crosswind rudder and aileron control input will usually
let you take off without having to do so. (Raise the downwind wing and
keep straight with the rudder)

4- Less wear on both the struts and the tires.

True

5- Its absolutely essential at high DA altitude airports

Absolutely False, See response to #2 DA was a significant factor in
that accident, But if proper short field technique had been used I
believe they would not have had an issue.

6- It gets you in 'practice' for short-field takeoffs (the only
difference between your normal takeoff and the short field takeoff is
flap setting)... I.E, they're nothing special and nothing to worry
about.

Did you mean Soft Field? It will get you in practice for Soft Feilds.
For Short Feilds you should accelerate on the main gear controls about
neutral (low drag) until within about 5 knots of you Vx speed. Rotate
and maintain Vx. (Note a few airplanes will lift off in a level
attitude prior to Vx, if so, then float in ground affect until with a
few knots of Vx)


Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

Bob -
Yes, I misquoted the soft-field procedure, i'm sorry (I don't have the
book in front of me).

Could you elaborate more on your 'no' for the procedure I mentioned?
I'm more interested in why one particular talkoff procedure over
another... This is about increasing my personal understanding more than
it is about simply being told 'what the book says' so to speak.

Brian-
Thanks for your input, some quick responses-

True, But not a very smooth takeoff as you have pitch up, pitch down
and then pitch back up.

Done 'correctly' (again, I'm not 100% sure I'm correct, but the old
timers at my club swear by it), the pitch down after attaining ground
effect is very subtle... I do have to say that it "feels" really
smooth.

False in most cases on a paved runway, In fact I watched a Commache
Crash doing this. Fully loaded he was off the ground in 1500 feet in
ground affect nose high. He flew off the end of the 5000 foot runway
still nose high and only 4 feet off the ground before he aborted the
take off. He never was able to reach his best climb speed in the nose
high, high drag configuration.

Hmm... that's interesting, my initial sophomoric instinct suggests that
perhaps he didn't release enough of the back-pressure to accelerate
enough... but as I said - purely sophomoric judgement there.

True, But good crosswind rudder and aileron control input will usually
let you take off without having to do so. (Raise the downwind wing and
keep straight with the rudder)

A slip is still a slip though, isn't it? even if you're correctly
downwind-wing-high and on your upwind gear, the wind is still striking
the fuselage at an angle.

False, See response to #2 DA was a significant factor in
that accident, But if proper short field technique had been used I
believe they would not have had an issue.

I have no experience with higher DA yet, so I am completely
un-qualified to comment I suppose - I am merely quoting what i have
been told

Did you mean Soft Field?

yes

Could you elaborate more on your 'no' for the procedure I mentioned?
I'm more interested in why one particular talkoff procedure over
another... This is about increasing my personal understanding more than
it is about simply being told 'what the book says' so to speak.

Sure,


True, But not a very smooth takeoff as you have pitch up, pitch down
and then pitch back up.

Done 'correctly' (again, I'm not 100% sure I'm correct, but the old
timers at my club swear by it), the pitch down after attaining ground
effect is very subtle... I do have to say that it "feels" really
smooth.

It can be done very smoothly but this is normally done by not lifting
off at minimum airspeed (full up elevator) but rather just raising the
nose to about the normal climb attitude. Doing this the aircraft will
lift off at a lower than normal climb speed float in the ground affect
until reaching the normal climb speed and then climb out. You will have
to adjust the elevator as the aircraft accelerates but the attitude
will not change. I often teach this to new students because it is
simple and works really well and you don't have to look at the ASI at
all to do so. Just let the airplane accelerate until you just before
you think it is ready to fly, Pull back to raise the nose of the
aircraft until the top of the spinner is just below the Horizon (will
vary some with different aircraft and pilots) and hold it there. You
can try this by starting out with full elevator and as soon a the
attitude reaches your nomal climb attitude hold it there. This is often
done on gravel runways to raise the propeller as high off the ground as
possible. This disadvantage to this technique is that the high angle of
attack while still on the ground extends the ground run due to the
extra drag caused by the high angle of attack.


False in most cases on a paved runway, In fact I watched a Commache
Crash doing this. Fully loaded he was off the ground in 1500 feet in
ground affect nose high. He flew off the end of the 5000 foot runway
still nose high and only 4 feet off the ground before he aborted the
take off. He never was able to reach his best climb speed in the nose
high, high drag configuration.

Hmm... that's interesting, my initial sophomoric instinct suggests that
perhaps he didn't release enough of the back-pressure to accelerate
enough... but as I said - purely sophomoric judgement there.

The biggest issue he had was he was using a modified soft feild
technique when he should have been using a short field technique due to
the high DA and Gross weight. I suspect he always took off this way
and in a 250HP high performance aircraft it didn't occur to him that he
should have been using a short feild. It did not occur to him to lower
the nose because doing so in this situation would have caused him to
settle back onto the runway.



True, But good crosswind rudder and aileron control input will usually
let you take off without having to do so. (Raise the downwind wing and
keep straight with the rudder)

A slip is still a slip though, isn't it? even if you're correctly
downwind-wing-high and on your upwind gear, the wind is still striking
the fuselage at an angle.

Yes it is a slip, but having a little extra speed after lift off will
prevent you from settling back on the runway and it is better to be
aligned with the runway if you do settle back onto the runway. Once a
positive rate of climb is established then release the rudder pressure
to a normal climb setting and let the aircraft Crab into the wind for
maximum climb rate or angle.


-----

Perhaps I didn't respond correctly to your 1st post. It just got my
attention because I have seen an accident caused by this technique. But
the accident was probably caused more by the fact that this was not the
technique to use in that situation. You were asking more about Normal
Take off's and landing. The technique your instructor recommends will
work just fine for normal takes-offs. Here are my points on it
remembering these are normal takes offs.
1 Plus, Helps protect the Prop from Debris.
2. Minus, Longer take off roll due to high angle of attack while
stilling rolling
3. Minus, Slight less control lifting off at minimum flying speed, some
chance of settling back onto runway.
4, Slight Plus, Less wear and tear on tires and struts (minimual
difference in my opinion)

Hope this helps

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

Could you elaborate more on your 'no' for the procedure I mentioned?
I'm more interested in why one particular talkoff procedure over
another... This is about increasing my personal understanding more than
it is about simply being told 'what the book says' so to speak.

Sure,


True, But not a very smooth takeoff as you have pitch up, pitch down
and then pitch back up.

Done 'correctly' (again, I'm not 100% sure I'm correct, but the old
timers at my club swear by it), the pitch down after attaining ground
effect is very subtle... I do have to say that it "feels" really
smooth.

It can be done very smoothly but this is normally done by not lifting
off at minimum airspeed (full up elevator) but rather just raising the
nose to about the normal climb attitude. Doing this the aircraft will
lift off at a lower than normal climb speed float in the ground affect
until reaching the normal climb speed and then climb out. You will have
to adjust the elevator as the aircraft accelerates but the attitude
will not change. I often teach this to new students because it is
simple and works really well and you don't have to look at the ASI at
all to do so. Just let the airplane accelerate until you just before
you think it is ready to fly, Pull back to raise the nose of the
aircraft until the top of the spinner is just below the Horizon (will
vary some with different aircraft and pilots) and hold it there. You
can try this by starting out with full elevator and as soon a the
attitude reaches your nomal climb attitude hold it there. This is often
done on gravel runways to raise the propeller as high off the ground as
possible. This disadvantage to this technique is that the high angle of
attack while still on the ground extends the ground run due to the
extra drag caused by the high angle of attack.


False in most cases on a paved runway, In fact I watched a Commache
Crash doing this. Fully loaded he was off the ground in 1500 feet in
ground affect nose high. He flew off the end of the 5000 foot runway
still nose high and only 4 feet off the ground before he aborted the
take off. He never was able to reach his best climb speed in the nose
high, high drag configuration.

Hmm... that's interesting, my initial sophomoric instinct suggests that
perhaps he didn't release enough of the back-pressure to accelerate
enough... but as I said - purely sophomoric judgement there.

The biggest issue he had was he was using a modified soft feild
technique when he should have been using a short field technique due to
the high DA and Gross weight. I suspect he always took off this way
and in a 250HP high performance aircraft it didn't occur to him that he
should have been using a short feild. It did not occur to him to lower
the nose because doing so in this situation would have caused him to
settle back onto the runway.



True, But good crosswind rudder and aileron control input will usually
let you take off without having to do so. (Raise the downwind wing and
keep straight with the rudder)

A slip is still a slip though, isn't it? even if you're correctly
downwind-wing-high and on your upwind gear, the wind is still striking
the fuselage at an angle.

Yes it is a slip, but having a little extra speed after lift off will
prevent you from settling back on the runway and it is better to be
aligned with the runway if you do settle back onto the runway. Once a
positive rate of climb is established then release the rudder pressure
to a normal climb setting and let the aircraft Crab into the wind for
maximum climb rate or angle.


-----

Perhaps I didn't respond correctly to your 1st post. It just got my
attention because I have seen an accident caused by this technique. But
the accident was probably caused more by the fact that this was not the
technique to use in that situation. You were asking more about Normal
Take off's and landing. The technique your instructor recommends will
work just fine for normal takes-offs. Here are my points on it
remembering these are normal takes offs.
1 Plus, Helps protect the Prop from Debris.
2. Minus, Longer take off roll due to high angle of attack while
stilling rolling
3. Minus, Slight less control lifting off at minimum flying speed, some
chance of settling back onto runway.
4, Slight Plus, Less wear and tear on tires and struts (minimual
difference in my opinion)

Hope this helps

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

Could you elaborate more on your 'no' for the procedure I mentioned?
I'm more interested in why one particular talkoff procedure over
another... This is about increasing my personal understanding more than
it is about simply being told 'what the book says' so to speak.

Sure,


True, But not a very smooth takeoff as you have pitch up, pitch down
and then pitch back up.

Done 'correctly' (again, I'm not 100% sure I'm correct, but the old
timers at my club swear by it), the pitch down after attaining ground
effect is very subtle... I do have to say that it "feels" really
smooth.

It can be done very smoothly but this is normally done by not lifting
off at minimum airspeed (full up elevator) but rather just raising the
nose to about the normal climb attitude. Doing this the aircraft will
lift off at a lower than normal climb speed float in the ground affect
until reaching the normal climb speed and then climb out. You will have
to adjust the elevator as the aircraft accelerates but the attitude
will not change. I often teach this to new students because it is
simple and works really well and you don't have to look at the ASI at
all to do so. Just let the airplane accelerate until you just before
you think it is ready to fly, Pull back to raise the nose of the
aircraft until the top of the spinner is just below the Horizon (will
vary some with different aircraft and pilots) and hold it there. You
can try this by starting out with full elevator and as soon a the
attitude reaches your nomal climb attitude hold it there. This is often
done on gravel runways to raise the propeller as high off the ground as
possible. This disadvantage to this technique is that the high angle of
attack while still on the ground extends the ground run due to the
extra drag caused by the high angle of attack.


False in most cases on a paved runway, In fact I watched a Commache
Crash doing this. Fully loaded he was off the ground in 1500 feet in
ground affect nose high. He flew off the end of the 5000 foot runway
still nose high and only 4 feet off the ground before he aborted the
take off. He never was able to reach his best climb speed in the nose
high, high drag configuration.

Hmm... that's interesting, my initial sophomoric instinct suggests that
perhaps he didn't release enough of the back-pressure to accelerate
enough... but as I said - purely sophomoric judgement there.

The biggest issue he had was he was using a modified soft feild
technique when he should have been using a short field technique due to
the high DA and Gross weight. I suspect he always took off this way
and in a 250HP high performance aircraft it didn't occur to him that he
should have been using a short feild. It did not occur to him to lower
the nose because doing so in this situation would have caused him to
settle back onto the runway.



True, But good crosswind rudder and aileron control input will usually
let you take off without having to do so. (Raise the downwind wing and
keep straight with the rudder)

A slip is still a slip though, isn't it? even if you're correctly
downwind-wing-high and on your upwind gear, the wind is still striking
the fuselage at an angle.

Yes it is a slip, but having a little extra speed after lift off will
prevent you from settling back on the runway and it is better to be
aligned with the runway if you do settle back onto the runway. Once a
positive rate of climb is established then release the rudder pressure
to a normal climb setting and let the aircraft Crab into the wind for
maximum climb rate or angle.


-----

Perhaps I didn't respond correctly to your 1st post. It just got my
attention because I have seen an accident caused by this technique. But
the accident was probably caused more by the fact that this was not the
technique to use in that situation. You were asking more about Normal
Take off's and landing. The technique your instructor recommends will
work just fine for normal takes-offs. Here are my points on it
remembering these are normal takes offs.
1 Plus, Helps protect the Prop from Debris.
2. Minus, Longer take off roll due to high angle of attack while
stilling rolling
3. Minus, Slight less control lifting off at minimum flying speed, some
chance of settling back onto runway.
4, Slight Plus, Less wear and tear on tires and struts (minimual
difference in my opinion)

Hope this helps

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL