Gentle take-offs at high speed

Most of the posters have been flying for too long and they forgot
how takeoff feels for a non-pilot or a new pilot.

When you set the takeoff trim to 60-65 kts on a c172 (you know the
elevator trim position by experience), the plane lifts off almost by
itself, so
smooth and effortless, and elegant. It feels beautiful. Then, you
smoothly add nose down trim a little bit at a time, as the plane
stablizes
at takeoff climb speed of 70 kts.

In the simulator, you have to move the yoke by its displacement instead
of light pressure. It is hard to give the sim yoke the right amount of
gentle
nudge, and I also found myself overcontroling the simulator yoke. The
finer
feel of the control is different and can not relate to the real plane.

The real thing is beautiful, and hard to explain in words unless you
experience
it. Like explaining the joys of sex. You get the feel when you can do
the takeoff with only two fingers on the yoke, in calm air.

As the other poster explained, the airplane wants to fly and it is
easier
to control in the air.



wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Is there any harm in taking off at a relatively high speed and very
gently? There seems to be plenty of runway in most cases for small
aircraft. If I leave the ground at 120 kts instead of the normal
rotation speed, I find that I can lift off ever so gently. Plus I
have lots of airspeed if something goes wrong during my gentle climb.
Are there drawbacks to this that I'm missing?

Of course!

A normal takeoff is very gentle and comfortable compared
to rumbling over a real-world bumpy runway at 120kts.
Your simulator is wrong if it says that a high speed takeoff
is more gentle. I suspect it's not accurately simulating
runway texture and bumps. Air under the wings makes
a far more comfortable shock absorber than the oleo strut.

Tire wear is greatly accelerated by going faster than the rated
speed. A blowout at faster than rated speed would not
be pretty.

Crosswind gusts are a potential safety issue while your wheels
are contacting the ground, but they're not a big problem once
you're airborne. The gear was not designed to take strong
side loads.

To maximize options if an engine goes out, you want to have
plenty of altitude under you, not over you. It's best to climb
to a reasonable altitude quickly.

"P S" wrote in news:1163209397.165388.182990
@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Most of the posters have been flying for too long and they forgot
how takeoff feels for a non-pilot or a new pilot.

Not this pilot. I call it magic EVERYTIME the wheels leave terra firma.

Especially when the air is calmer then calm and the plane pretty much does
what it was designed to do so effortlessy as the ground falls away from
me....

Allen

I always thought I was the only one who sweated takeoffs more than landings.
I consider a perfect takeoff (at least from smooth pavement) one in which
you don't know you've left the ground until you look down.

mike
"A Lieberma" wrote in message
. 18...
"P S" wrote in news:1163209397.165388.182990
@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Most of the posters have been flying for too long and they forgot
how takeoff feels for a non-pilot or a new pilot.

Not this pilot. I call it magic EVERYTIME the wheels leave terra firma.

Especially when the air is calmer then calm and the plane pretty much does
what it was designed to do so effortlessy as the ground falls away from
me....

Allen

mike regish writes:

I always thought I was the only one who sweated takeoffs more than landings.
I consider a perfect takeoff (at least from smooth pavement) one in which
you don't know you've left the ground until you look down.

Statistically, nearly half of all accidents occur during landing, so
it's logical to be more worried about landings. Take-offs are more
fun, so perhaps that also distracts pilots from the potential risks.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

writes:

Your simulator is wrong if it says that a high speed takeoff
is more gentle.

My simulator is not a person and doesn't say anything to me.

I suspect it's not accurately simulating runway texture and
bumps.

It simulates both, but only with noise, since it's not a full-motion
simulator.

I had not considered the bumpiness, although to some extent a plane
that wants to fly is going to be pressing pretty lightly against the
runway (assuming it is balanced just right). I'm not holding the yoke
forward, I'm just not pulling it back.

Tire wear is greatly accelerated by going faster than the rated
speed. A blowout at faster than rated speed would not
be pretty.

Another useful consideration. Blowouts are not simulated,
unfortunately.

Crosswind gusts are a potential safety issue while your wheels
are contacting the ground, but they're not a big problem once
you're airborne. The gear was not designed to take strong
side loads.

I haven't had too much trouble with crosswinds, although yesterday at
a few Colorado mountain airports was an exception.

To maximize options if an engine goes out, you want to have
plenty of altitude under you, not over you. It's best to climb
to a reasonable altitude quickly.

But if you climb quickly you have less margin between your current
configuration and a stall, no? Whereas waiting longer to lift off
would have you moving much faster as you climb, so if you lose an
engine you have more inertia to keep you going while you deal with the
problem.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Your simulator is wrong if it says that a high speed takeoff
is more gentle.

My simulator is not a person and doesn't say anything to me.

I suspect it's not accurately simulating runway texture and
bumps.

It simulates both, but only with noise, since it's not a full-motion
simulator.

I had not considered the bumpiness, although to some extent a plane
that wants to fly is going to be pressing pretty lightly against the
runway (assuming it is balanced just right). I'm not holding the yoke
forward, I'm just not pulling it back.

Asking for disaster. Your plane has the same inertial mass as it
always did, but a certain amount of weight is being carried by the
wings. So when you go over a short rise in the runway, there's
a huge force between the wheels and the pavement. When you
go over a slight dip, the wheels leave the pavement entirely.
You're bouncing down the runway. Not gentle at all!

I haven't had too much trouble with crosswinds, although yesterday at
a few Colorado mountain airports was an exception.

If you're bouncing down the runway, alternately leaving and
then hitting the ground, you will soon have trouble with
crosswinds.

But if you climb quickly you have less margin between your current
configuration and a stall, no?

You climb out at Vx or Vy, depending on conditions.
Well above stall. Depending on field conditions, you
might lift off the runway at something significantly
slower, and accelerate to climb speed while in or
near ground effect.

Whereas waiting longer to lift off
would have you moving much faster as you climb, so if you lose an
engine you have more inertia to keep you going while you deal with the
problem.

You can use your elevator to trade airspeed for altitude. It's
a game of managing the total energy (kinetic + potential) of
the system. Putting your whole energy budget into the
kinetic bucket isn't so good, because increasing airspeed
increases parasitic drag. You're best off to minimize
the amount of energy that drag steals from you.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Is there any harm in taking off at a relatively high speed and very
gently? There seems to be plenty of runway in most cases for small
aircraft. If I leave the ground at 120 kts instead of the normal
rotation speed, I find that I can lift off ever so gently. Plus I
have lots of airspeed if something goes wrong during my gentle climb.
Are there drawbacks to this that I'm missing?


Wellll....from a groundpounding skydiving perspective...

you lift *off* per normal rotation speed but stay in ground effect to
build up airspeed and then swoop up several hundred feet or so at
1000fpm (Cessna, not a Twin Otter say). 'less you're a ground loving,
dirt kissing pussy. And I'm not saying you are...but some of your posts
make me wonder if perhaps you'd be best served by Microsofts "Bus"
Simulator.

Just my 2 cents.

Richard

Richard writes:

you lift *off* per normal rotation speed but stay in ground effect to
build up airspeed and then swoop up several hundred feet or so at
1000fpm (Cessna, not a Twin Otter say).

I've read about this but I have a hard time keeping the aircraft in
ground effect once it lifts off. It really wants to climb once it is
in the air. I do routinely put the stick forward fairly quickly (I
don't trim for take-off--maybe I should practice with that), but even
then the aircraft still climbs.

'less you're a ground loving,
dirt kissing pussy. And I'm not saying you are...but some of your posts
make me wonder if perhaps you'd be best served by Microsofts "Bus"
Simulator.

Flying is not an exercise in machismo for me.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
says...


Flying is not an exercise in machismo for me.


Indeed - it is nothing to you, because you do not fly.

If you were to take a few flying lessons you would not have to pollute this
group with nonsensical questions - but then this would defeat your purpose,
as you would no longer have the opportunity to challenge and insult the
well-meaning people who try to give you advice . . .

I used to think the advantage of simulators was that they allowed the pilot
to learn, without risk of putting him permanently out of commission . . . Now
I see the the first is not necessarly true, and the second is not necessarily
an advantage . . .

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:59:10 +0100, Mxsmanic wrote:

Is there any harm in taking off at a relatively high speed and very
gently? There seems to be plenty of runway in most cases for small
aircraft. If I leave the ground at 120 kts instead of the normal
rotation speed, I find that I can lift off ever so gently. Plus I
have lots of airspeed if something goes wrong during my gentle climb.
Are there drawbacks to this that I'm missing?

Runway condition. Most have some unevenness, and you can be getting popped
around quite a bit as the speed picks up. Aircraft tires are fairly small
diameter, hence dips and bumps that wouldn't bother a car affect a plane quite a
bit more.

Also, holding the plane down at higher speeds offers its own problems. A
tailwheel airplane like mine can conceivably start ticking the ground with the
prop. For a nosewheel airplane, holding the plane down can cause directional
instability, a phenomenon called "wheelbarrowing."

If the sim doesn't give the opportunity for a "gentle" takeoff at lower speeds,
there's something wrong with the modeling.

Ron Wanttaja