Flaps on take-off?

[BigTex]

I just figured a guy who suggests spinning a Mooney is fun and safe wouldn't need flaps to TO

Seriously though, I hope you misunderstood Jerry, and he more correctly said to NOT use flaps only if the situation dictated it. Maybe he was talking just for himself, and not for the myriad of less experienced pilots.

Hopefully you can get him to visit MS and speak for himself.

Well, we have quite the sewing circle going...

Fantom, where in the world did you EVER got the idea that I suggested spinning a Mooney is okay? You read in on another thread that I consider Power on stalls no big deal and you get spinning a Mooney is something I'd suggest. Last time I checked, stalls and spins are not the same thing.

He did my transition training so I don't think there was any misunderstanding.

He'll likely be at the Upcoming MAPA conference so maybe you can ask him personally.

[fantom]

Well, we have quite the sewing circle going...

He did my transition training so I don't think there was any misunderstanding.

He'll likely be at the Upcoming MAPA conference so maybe you can ask him personally.

 

Sewing circle, and impossible to misunderstand something during training?? News to me.

 

I know Jerry, so I'll ask him when I get the opportunity. 

 

Glad to know your stalling, but not spinning, Tex. I'll try to pay more attention to your quotes.

[adrian]

Usually no flaps for me, especially if I'm going to climb into IMC soon after takeoff. The ground roll is shorter with flaps, but it's pretty short without them in an E. The flap limiting speed is very low, and there is a significant trim change on flap retraction. Taking off without flap means a much lower workload just after takeoff.

(LOP / full flap landings / sealed long range tanks / haven't tried Marvel Mystery, but might give Camguard a go!)

[Bob_Belville]

Usually no flaps for me, especially if I'm going to climb into IMC soon after takeoff. The ground roll is shorter with flaps, but it's pretty short without them in an E. The flap limiting speed is very low, and there is a significant trim change on flap retraction. Taking off without flap means a much lower workload just after takeoff.

Not following your logic. There's a pitch change from T.O. trim to climb mode whether or not you start with flaps. The change in an E from 15 deg flaps is not much you have can't put the yoke on the speed and trim out  the pressure. Establish climb, raise gear, raise flaps, establish climb attitude/IAS, fuel pump off, turn on course, engage AP/GPSS... smoke 'em if you got 'em.   

[Marauder]

Yawn...

[Shadrach]

A lot of these pilots reduce power to 25/25 which is bad in a lot of ways, but the reasoning for it is "for less noise". If they were 500' higher they wouldnt need to reduce RPM for noise, as altitude is a pretty good noise barrier. And the Mooney is a rather quiet airplane, as some folks have demonstrated in 200 MPH low passes, it just doesnt make much noise to begin with. I'd argue no louder than a 172.

I resemble that remark....probably not quite 200mph as I had it pulled back a bit for the bumps and ~10kts on the nose. It was not real loud in the vid, but I can't imagine that it was real quiet either...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pNvAMe1i7jE

Best in HD

[DS1980]

I like these threads that go on and on for 5 pages, and the answer is one sentence in the POH.

 

Just remember folks, there is more than one way to correctly fly an airplane in every phase of flight. If there wasn't, the second we made a minor mistake we would fall out of the sky in a blazing fireball. Stay within the Operating Limitations, personal limitations and comfort zone and we will all live to see our deathbed.

 

Well, that was a depressing last sentence.

[N201MKTurbo]

It seems to be getting a bit slow around here, so I figured I would squirt a bit of lighter fluid on the Barbie.

 

I was reading through the POH to see what it says about flaps and takeoff. While it does not prohibit no-flaps takeoffs it does indicate it in the pre-takeoff checklist. and of course all the performance charts are based on flaps 15.

 

But that is not what concerned me....

 

For all you guys and gals who are sticklers for the book. I noticed that the takeoff performance charts stop at 8000 feet (78-201 manual)

 

I have operated out of Leadville and Telluride Colorado quite a few times. Both fields are above 8000 feet.

 

Was I legal?

[kmyfm20s]

It seems to be getting a bit slow around here, so I figured I would squirt a bit of lighter fluid on the Barbie.

 

I was reading through the POH to see what it says about flaps and takeoff. While it does not prohibit no-flaps takeoffs it does indicate it in the pre-takeoff checklist. and of course all the performance charts are based on flaps 15.

 

But that is not what concerned me....

 

For all you guys and gals who are sticklers for the book. I noticed that the takeoff performance charts stop at 8000 feet (78-201 manual)

 

I have operated out of Leadville and Telluride Colorado quite a few times. Both fields are above 8000 feet.

 

Was I legal?

What does the STC on your turbo say?

[aaronk25]

What does the STC on your turbo say?

Lol....I did leadville this summer. 12,800DA. No turbo 77j. 100lbs girl friend and 33gallons of fuel and bags..........1/2 down the runway was thinking please fly please fly pretty please......ah screw this I should have bought a turbo.....fly please

[jetdriven]

You can't turbocharge the wing

[N201MKTurbo]

What does the STC on your turbo say?

 

I've never been to either airport with my turbo. All the trips were in my 67 M20F.

 

The STC for the turbo says to use the existing performance charts. It is pretty lame. I discussed it with Sandman a time or two, but he didn't want to say anything about it.

[kmyfm20s]

You can't turbocharge the wing

Yes you can, that's what flaps do!

[kmyfm20s]

Lol....I did leadville this summer. 12,800DA. No turbo 77j. 100lbs girl friend and 33gallons of fuel and bags..........1/2 down the runway was thinking please fly please fly pretty please......ah screw this I should have bought a turbo.....fly please

Funny my first flight after getiing my PPL was to Telluride in a 182 I purchased. I was mentally prepared for the 150 to 200 FPM climb out just not the signifcantly longer roll. I was saying the same thing you where:) 

[N201MKTurbo]

You got to love the dip in the middle of TEX. I've actually become airborne on the down slope then did a touch and go on the upslope before finally getting completely airborne. When you are down in the hole it looks like you are seriously short of runway. Then when you get to the top of the hill the rest of the runway magically appears.

BTW I always use flaps at TEX...

[carusoam]

Aarron,

I would read the manual again.

It clearly says what you won't get, if you mention what her MGTW is, in a public forum.

Good luck with that..., these young guns...

-a-

[Mooneymite]

It seems to be getting a bit slow around here, so I figured I would squirt a bit of lighter fluid on the Barbie.

 

For all you guys and gals who are sticklers for the book. I noticed that the takeoff performance charts stop at 8000 feet (78-201 manual)

 

I have operated out of Leadville and Telluride Colorado quite a few times. Both fields are above 8000 feet.

 

Was I legal?

 

Operating under part 91, I'd guess yes.  Part 121, no.  Part 135....depends.

 

Isn't amazing that something that will get you busted under one part of the FAR's is "perfectly acceptable" under another?  Different levels of safety, no?

[aaronk25]

Aarron,

I would read the manual again.

It clearly says what you won't get, if you mention what her MGTW is, in a public forum.

Good luck with that..., these young guns...

-a-

I got know idea what your saying???? My weight was about 2400-2450lbs at take off.

[carusoam]

Your GF's weight probably got published accidentally....?

Wether it is 80 or 180, she probably isn't going to like it published....

Just sayin',

-a-

[WardHolbrook]

The performance charts in most newer aircraft are reasonably accurate, the caveat is that if you want to achieve book performance you need to fly the aircraft by the book, taking into account all of the book procedures, techniques, profiles, speeds, etc. However, if the book call for a certain flap setting or a certain rotation speed and you chose to use something else then you can throw the book numbers out the window. In other words  if you can't consistently achieve the performance in the book, the problem is likely the pilot, not the airplane. I always wonder where all of these "extra curricular" procedures come from. I'd truly be surprised if it was beneficial; in fact, I'd be willing to bet that overall takeoff performance is reduced. The problem with procedures like this is that they feel like they're doing something, but unless you've got the data points to back it up the fact is that they probably don't. My experience is that the manufacturers typically put procedures in the POH that result in the maximum available performance - after all, performance sells airplanes. 

[carusoam]

We never had the instrumentation to measure the performance either.

Until now...

There are apps that measure performance. This can be compared to the book numbers.

Caution: it takes a fair amount of effort to follow the procedures to obtain the actual performance that is in the book. Using an app on an IPad is not a substitute for following your POH.

My C didn't have a POH when it was built. My CFI also recommended the no flap T/O due to it's simplicity, not performance.

We don't fly Mooneys for their simplicity do we?

Best regards,

-a-

[WardHolbrook]

We never did and still don't. The factory always has. It's pretty presumptive to think that you're going to come up with something totally opposite (flaps up vs flaps down) to what the factory certification test pilots did back in the day. Seriously.

[carusoam]

Ward,

Where I'm going with this is an ap that has the ability to actually measure take-off performance.

It is called CloudAhoy. It measures the T/O roll and other things...

For any accuracy it requires a waas antenna such as skyradar. To determine the accuracy of what it is telling (truthfulness) it plots the track of the aircraft on and over the ground.

I have not been able to verify the value of the app for it's accuracy but I did let it measure the T/O distances between O1 and O3 powered Ovations and the data matched the POHs within 100 feet.

O1 1200'

O3 800'

This was not a scientific gathering of information by any means...

But if an individual were going to fly two different procedures to see what it feels like...

Fire up the CloudAhoy and collect data. Review the data from your kitchen table and determine which is more accurate, the human butt or IPad/skyradar combination...

The no flap T/O procedure is easier than the POH procedure, but not any better from a performance point of view...

Let me know if anyone wants to share their data collected for their A/F and engine....

Best regards,

-a-

Again, this is not a recommendation to not follow the procedures found in your POH.

[Cruiser]

Operating under part 91, I'd guess yes.  Part 121, no.  Part 135....depends.

 

Isn't amazing that something that will get you busted under one part of the FAR's is "perfectly acceptable" under another?  Different levels of safety, no?

 

NO. bureaucratic BS.

[Mooneymite]

NO. bureaucratic BS.

Actually, I like the fact that part 91 allows me to choose whether I use flaps, or not, and lets me take off from Leadville even if the plane doesn't have data for such.

I further like the fact that when I fly on an airline, the pilot is not making decisions about flaps/no flaps based on how he feels today, or what he reads on some message board. The safety record for part 121 ops is clearly a tribute to uniformly applied regulation.