Up Hill take off

[ExpressJetter]

8 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Rules of thumb are great if they’re derived from personal experience, practice and calculations. Driven by pilot lounge chatter and internet posts? Not so much... They don’t help much in explaining one’s sins if one is fortunate enough to be around to be questioned.  I wonder if the crew that deposited Dale Jr’s Lattitude in the dirt of the end of 24 at Elizabethon we’re up on the appropriate rules of the correct thumbs?... there are indeed many ways to fly an airplane and many ways to crash an airplane as well. It takes someone very special to do either in a truly new way.

I dont think you're understanding what I was trying to say.

8 hours ago, MB65E said:

It all happens really fast in a jet. There is a point where one can’t fix it in the jet as you could a single. That’s why planning is so important. Nice hearing the gouge from some of you Gents. Just ordered the Navy book. Another good book is “Everything explained for the professional pilot”

Learned a little bit about winds and sloped runways with my dads 75hp T-Craft. Taking off with a tail down hill slope is almost a requirement. There is not enough HP as mentioned to out climb the trees. Landing is just as bad, unless it’s really windy, gravity always wins. Landing down hill in a t-craft (aka glider) doesn’t work either.  

-Matt

"Everything Explained"  is probably the best book for aviation I've read.  It goes from technical into general rules of thumb to use.  Let me know if the author still sends out updates to keep it current the the FAR/AIM

[GeeBee]

It does really happen fast in a jet, but most jets are FAR 25 beasts and FAR 25 gives you a world of difference performance in performance calculations, even to the point that after Amendment 54, you have actual wet runway numbers based upon both grooved and non-grooved surfaces with real world testing such as brakes and tires worn to the limits. You also have different climb segments and a balanced field requirements. I can't tell you how many times I have set at places like HNL and FCO burning off fuel to "make weight". Equally so, there are indeed differing techniques such as a reduced flap "Improved takeoff" which basically keeps the airplane on the ground to a higher Vr speed then take that excess energy into the following two climb segments to improve obstacle clearance. When you are on a balanced field keeping that nose down when you see the end approaching takes a lot of intestinal fortitude but it is a case where technique is important and to fail to properly fly the jet will result in the airplane failing to clear the obstacles should an engine failure occur.

Not so with FAR 23 and even less with CAR 3 aircraft (which are required to have no numbers). You are pretty much weapons free and unlike FAR 25 there is little in the way of requirements to make "real world" adjustments. For instance how is that number determined reference engine condition? Is that engine they tested with at the bottom or top of its life? How is it leaned? The fact is most the numbers are determined with a brand new airplane in flight test at a set of conditions and everything else is extrapolated by math from that point. Thus things get a little more sloppy and at the same time less room for error if you are relying upon manufacturer numbers. 

When it comes to winds, if you are counting on that wind, a good rule of thumb (there we go again) is to count on 1/2 the stated head wind and 1.5 times the stated tailwind. That is what the FAA requires the airlines to margin  in their automated performance data and it leaves you a good margin. 

[carusoam]

1) The Navy book is available around here somewhere....  it makes a great read...

2) As far as tail winds go... once you get up in the air... be aware of the next challenge... you may run into increasing tail winds with a small bit of altitude...

So... keep discussing openly...

Best regards,

-a-