Takeoff & initial climb best practices

[Bob - S50]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

I'm the odd duck.  Takeoff is very busy for me.  Once I see positive rate the wheels come up, usually with a pretty good tug on the yoke.  Flaps right after that.  Right after that I bring prop and power back to 25 squared for the climb out.  Heresy you say!  It is the proscribed procedure in the book.  The book was written in hieroglyphics you say! True dat, but my thinking goes like this.  The older Mooneys are notorious for engine cooling issues, lots of vintage airplanes are. I've never seen it, but I don't have a fancy pants engine monitor, so I'm not likely to.  But I think the best way to exacerbate engine cooling issues is the climb slowly at high power settings.  I climb slowly (100-120 mph) with somewhat lower power settings.

I don't know anything about cooling issues in a C, but pulling the RPM back may actually increase CHT's because it will move peak pressure closer to TDC.  Pulling the MP back should in fact help with the CHT's because you are reducing power AND the lower MP slows the burn rate which moves peak pressure further past TDC.  If you want to reduce power, you might try leaving the RPM at 2700 but pull MP back.  I'm guessing even at 25" it will be lower than 25 squared.  And if you really want it cooler, 2700 RPM and 23" should give you about the same power at 25 squared and give you even lower CHT's.

Just something you might want to try to see how it works.

[Bob - S50]

50 minutes ago, jlunseth said:

There was a really good article written about takeoff strategy several years ago. To write the article, the author and a copilot actually went out and experimented to find what altitude they needed to execute the “Impossible Turn.” They found The Turn to be more difficult that most pilots would expect because it is a 270, not a 180, and the turn causes quite a bit of loss of altitude. They also found that one of the greatest dangers is pilot surprise and failure to act in the first few seconds after the engine quits. There is no choice, the nose must go down right away.

They went to altitude for their experiments, simulated a full power takeoff, cut the throttle, and then held the climb for three seconds to simulate pilot surprise. They then observed how much altitude would be lost in a 270 to the airport and it was about 900 feet. I don’t remember the particular aircraft, it was probably a Skyhawk. They advocated doing this test for yourself, in your aircraft, so you know how much altitude you need to even attempt the turn.

Then they tried some climb rates. What they found was that Vx is actually somewhat dangerous because the airspeed is too slow and the pitch angle too high. A pilot who takes a little too much time putting the nose over as at high risk of a stall and spin. Vy was not good either, the aircraft takes too long to get to a turn altitude, and too far away from the airport.  What they found to be best was a climb at best glide, which is generally about a midpoint between Vx and Vy. It gives the pilot time to react and put the nose over, and has the best chance of climbing to Turn altitude within gliding distance of the airport.

So my takeoffs are full power, gear at positive rate, then flaps, then climb at 85 to 1000 ft. Then do whatever you want, climb to a high cruise altitude or go to 2500 and head for the practice area. 

My home field, KFCM, does not have a lot of good places to put it down in the event of an engine out. There are some, but not alot. Best strategy is to get to 1000 AGL as quickly as possible in a way that, if the engine fails, does not leave you prone to stall/spin.

I remember seeing an article along those lines too.  Just a nit pick.  It isn't actually a 270 to get back to the runway, it's actually worse.  It's about a 260 followed by an 80 to line up with the runway so it's closer to a 360.  And the best bank angle is 45 degrees.  I've done that at altitude and I lost about 400' while holding best glide speed.  My minimum altitude for the impossible turn is 600' AGL.

Runway length also matters.  We don't generally get airborne at the end of the runway.  We usually cross the end at some altitude.  But when we are returning to land we only need to make it to that end of the runway and we have a tailwind helping us.  Therefore, a little extra speed for the few seconds it takes to get to the impossible turn altitude probably won't hurt us much.

Another strategy I've heard is an early turn.  There is no requirement to get to 400' AGL before turning when VFR.  If we are planning to depart the pattern, one of the suggested (in the AIM) visual signals that we will be doing so is a 45 degree turn after takeoff.  If we make a 30 to 45 degree turn while the engine is still running, it will not take a 260+80 degree turn to line up with the runway.  It will take something less and could be as little as a single 210 to 225 degree turn depending on how far away from the runway we are.

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, jlunseth said:

Then they tried some climb rates. What they found was that Vx is actually somewhat dangerous because the airspeed is too slow and the pitch angle too high.

I once tried to climb some tall trees and terrain with 30kts headwind, I doubt the aircraft would have been able to fly at Vx in those gusts, the stall warner was buzzing few times at VX+20kts....should one adjust VX with headwind/gusts? or just point the nose to obstacles and gain more speed for manoeuvrability in windy days? 

I agree there is a huge LOC risk from stall in EFATO at Vx climb attitude (how long it takes time/altitude to unload the wings to 0G before taking some speed and flying again), the height loss will be 2-3 times the 1G power off stall, so about 300ft-400ft, I am not sure even if "height-velocity H-V flight envelope" is something fixed wings care that much about?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_height–velocity_diagram

For gliders climbing steeply on winch cables at slow speed & height is definitely a fail, even at higher speed & altitudes cable breaks on 45deg attitude will need quick full forward stick for the aircraft keep flying bellow it stall speed in the low G recovery...

For the impossible turn, I am sticking to 1500agl in the Mooney but done few at 400ft on other light wings to make 360 back to departure heading (I don't plan to land with tailwinds except on ILS runways)  

Edited August 12, 2020 by Ibra

[jlunseth]

40 minutes ago, Bob - S50 said:

I remember seeing an article along those lines too.  Just a nit pick.  It isn't actually a 270 to get back to the runway, it's actually worse.  It's about a 260 followed by an 80 to line up with the runway so it's closer to a 360.  And the best bank angle is 45 degrees.  I've done that at altitude and I lost about 400' while holding best glide speed.  My minimum altitude for the impossible turn is 600' AGL.

You are absolutely right about the turn. I thought about going into all that in my post but knew you all would figure it out of I shorthanded a little.  Also, arguably, if you can make it back to the airport at any angle you have options other than the trees and the houses. You can put it down across a runway, or on an intersecting taxiway, or in the median, so from that standpoint the 260 and 80 to line up with your departing runway are nice, but in a pinch, optional.

[midlifeflyer]

22 hours ago, PT20J said:

One of my gripes with CFIs is that a lot of them have a favorite way of doing things and try to remake every pilot in that image.

I've talked about a 10 Commandments of flight instruction, but all I've really come up with is the  First:

"Thou shalt not change a pilot's  technique which works  just because you like one better."

[Hank]

1 hour ago, jlunseth said:

Also, arguably, if you can make it back to the airport at any angle you have options other than the trees and the houses. You can put it down across a runway, or on an intersecting taxiway, or in the median, so from that standpoint the 260 and 80 to line up with your departing runway are nice, but in a pinch, optional.

What are these alternate locations of which you speak? This was my home drome during lessons and my first 7 years of Mooney ownership:

3000' of where can I go besides the River? Pretty much nowhere, although there is a Walmart a couple miles straight out on 26.

[ArtVandelay]

What are these alternate locations of which you speak?
3000' of where can I go besides the River? Pretty much nowhere, although there is a Walmart a couple miles straight out on 26.

I would use what looks like 4/22, and then highway 52 if not crowded.

[steingar]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

What are these alternate locations of which you speak? This was my home drome during lessons and my first 7 years of Mooney ownership:

3000' of where can I go besides the River? Pretty much nowhere, although there is a Walmart a couple miles straight out on 26.

If you're in a Mooney you can put it in the trees.  You'll likely walk away under your own steam.  Mooneys are stout.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

If you're in a Mooney you can put it in the trees.  You'll likely walk away under your own steam.  Mooneys are stout.

I read about a guy who landed in treetops in Florida one night. His only injuries were from reaching the ground in the dark and tripping while walking to civilization. Mooneys are very stout, part of what I like about them.

Wish I knew how the plane was recovered from 60' agl!

[Yetti]

What I was taught by a Mooney Safety guy.  Off the run way as the needle moves past the bottom of the white arc.  Gear up.   Tip the nose down a bit to get the wing flying.  It take alot to get the mooney wing flying good.   climb at 100 mph seems to be the best.   Flaps as needed.  Which is generally no flaps.

 

[GeeBee]

9 hours ago, Bob - S50 said:

The only thing you might want to consider is that part about using Vx to 400'.  Vx gets you there in the least distance.  Vy gets you there in the least time.  Because Vy will give you more speed, it will also give you more time to get your nose down to avoid a stall if the engine quits.

I use 100 KIAS instead of Vy which is about 88 KIAS because there is almost no difference in climb rate, gives me better visibility for a straight ahead landing, gives me more time to react, and is fast enough that my engine stays cool with the cowl flaps in trailing which reduces drag and allows the rate of climb to be close to or even better than Vy.

You need to think of the obstacle clear zones around a certified airport as a "canyon" with dead ends at both ends. A "standard canyon" is 400'. You're not going left, right, or anywhere until you clear 400'. This is why sophisticated autopilots and F/D will not allow heading select below 400' and why jets climb at V2+5-15. Accelerating immediately to Vy may will get a better rate, but the time spent in acceleration is more time in the "canyon" and going closer to the "canyon" end before climbing. It is all about climb angle, not climb rate below 400'. The other advantage of Vx to 400' is it complies with PAN-Ops criteria so no matter where you are you are doing it correctly if executing an instrument departure

http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-302.html

[toto]

I don't think it's been mentioned before in this thread, but there's a sometime-MSer @Buster1 who wrote a nice book on engine out planning and procedures.

It's well worth a read..

https://www.amazon.com/Engine-Out-Survival-Tactics-Emergencies-ebook/dp/B01HTWFPQU

[Bob - S50]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

You need to think of the obstacle clear zones around a certified airport as a "canyon" with dead ends at both ends. A "standard canyon" is 400'. You're not going left, right, or anywhere until you clear 400'. This is why sophisticated autopilots and F/D will not allow heading select below 400' and why jets climb at V2+5-15. Accelerating immediately to Vy may will get a better rate, but the time spent in acceleration is more time in the "canyon" and going closer to the "canyon" end before climbing. It is all about climb angle, not climb rate below 400'. The other advantage of Vx to 400' is it complies with PAN-Ops criteria so no matter where you are you are doing it correctly if executing an instrument departure

http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-302.html

The 400' has to do with obstacle clearance for IFR departures.  Here's a quote from the AIM 5-2-9-e.1:

"Unless specified otherwise, required obstacle clearance for all departures, including diverse, is based on the pilot crossing the departure end of the runway at least 35 feet above the departure end of runway elevation, climbing to 400 feet above the departure end of runway elevation before making the initial turn, and maintaining a minimum climb gradient of 200 feet per nautical mile (FPNM), unless required to level off by a crossing restriction, until the minimum IFR altitude."

Except for a very short runway (which probably doesn't have a SID or ODP) I think every Mooney on here could easily be at 35' AGL by the end of the runway.  Even at 120 K GS, 200'/NM is only 400 FPM which I also think we can all do except at pretty high density altitudes.  Fly at Vy which is closer to 90 and we only need 300 FPM rate of climb.  And the difference in speed between Vx and Vy is less than 20 knots so we are talking a savings in climb rate of less than 50 FPM by flying at Vx.  However, flying at Vy may allow us to maintain a rate of climb more than 50 FPM greater than we could do at Vx.  Since it appears we can easily comply with the standard climb gradient even at Vy, the extra speed will make an engine failure a little less dangerous than one flown at Vx.

However, some departures specify steeper climb gradients.  My opinion would be that if we can't meet that gradient at Vy, maybe we should wait for a VFR day.

When VFR, we are see and avoid so the 400' restriction does not apply.

Edited August 13, 2020 by Bob - S50
Add last sentence

[carusoam]

Climbing into a low ceiling at Vx probably isn’t the best idea either...

What ever disaster is going to befall you is going to happen very rapidly at 400’

Vx is closer to stall speed... the cushion of Vy is just a bit better....

Of course departing into a 400’ ceiling went out of my tool box early on...

Everything has to be going perfectly well to be stabilized so quickly and climbing... And still changing configurations... that alter the amount of lift...

PP thoughts of times past... not a current IR pilot...

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Ibra]

5 hours ago, carusoam said:

Climbing into a low ceiling at Vx probably isn’t the best idea either...

Definitely NO in my M20J text book, anyway the different between Vx and Vy climb gradients on my aircraft is negligible, SL max ROC is 1200fpm and Vy  = 85kts and Vx = 66kts
At MTOW: Vx gradient is less than = 12/66 = 18%, let say 16%? Vy gradient is equal to = 12/85 = 14%, and eventually the two converges to each other with DA    
At Vx+/-5kts, M20J climb gradient with takeoff flaps at 60kts is 1% and at 70kts is about 15%, so I know which speed to pick when +10kts gusts or bumpy clouds are around 

Even on short fields I go slightly higher than Vx or simply don't takeoff unless wind is favourable, I just like to see where I am going nose down rather than stalling it on it's belly or hanging on it's propeller two kts bellow Vx (being able to select Vx attitude with no visible horizon is a luck exercise) 

IMO, the VX/VY differences are usually highly theoretical, I personally like to have more visibility and speed, at least I can see the mess coming and act quickly, obviously, if the single engine quits at 400ft agl with obstacles ahead, it does not matter much if you were on Vx or Vy...
Just give it back to the ground in straight path wing level on lowest energy (high drag config and high drag speed)

For IFR departures, it is usually +1500m/+800m vis or RVR on takeoff, the M20J I should be at 800ft/400ft on Vy climb on what is ahead as I liftoff maybe 50ft-100ft less than Vx but I don't think that will spoil the party 

Edited August 13, 2020 by Ibra

[GeeBee]

If you can't fly the airplane on instruments at Vx you have no business taking off in instrument conditions. You should be proficient at +/- 5 knots. That will not put you anywhere near stall. 

 

[jlunseth]

19 hours ago, Hank said:

What are these alternate locations of which you speak? This was my home drome during lessons and my first 7 years of Mooney ownership:

 

3000' of where can I go besides the River? Pretty much nowhere, although there is a Walmart a couple miles straight out on 26.

Anywhere on that nice green grass would be better than the trees. FCM is much like that. It is on a high bluff with a large river/wetland below. If you can make the turn to the south you can go to the swamp. The airport owns some land to the east if you are low, not much else but trees, houses and lakes.

I once rode with the pilot of a turbo Beaver who put us down across the runway at Mudhole Smith Airport in Cordova. It can be done.

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

If you can't fly the airplane on instruments at Vx you have no business taking off in instrument conditions. You should be proficient at +/- 5 knots. That will not put you anywhere near stall. 

Can't maintain +/-5kts at VX on full power & gusty conditions while doing other stuff and pushing hard with the right leg, it is too unsafe, so I prefer an easier route, especially as one tradeoff 20kts for barely 3% gradient....

All one has to do to pass his IFR check ride and please ATC is to show +500fpm on VSI during IFR climbs and stick to SID gradients 
Though I may brag showing ATC +2000fpm just passing runway threshold on sunny days

I like to maintain +/-800fpm & +/-10% gradients with 80kts-90kts while IFR but that's a personal choice flying it with finger tips rather than gym arms force out of trim, I think +18% gradient is just too steep but yes it is not yet unusual attitude (plus stall warner horns at 65kts all time at MTOW even in calm days, maybe need calibration or just disregard it, maybe ASI mis-read 5CAS, maybe Vx is at 75kts, maybe PT heat is not very hot, or wings are not that clean of water/ice, wings are in 5deg bank while ball is not in the middle, air is turbulent...)

Edited August 13, 2020 by Ibra

[gsxrpilot]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

If you can't fly the airplane on instruments at Vx you have no business taking off in instrument conditions. You should be proficient at +/- 5 knots. That will not put you anywhere near stall. 

 

Can -- yes

Should -- no

[Austintatious]

22 hours ago, Hank said:

What are these alternate locations of which you speak? This was my home drome during lessons and my first 7 years of Mooney ownership:

3000' of where can I go besides the River? Pretty much nowhere, although there is a Walmart a couple miles straight out on 26.

Looks to me that if you go strait out from either runway, you have 2 options if the engine fails below 600-800 feet agl... Either the highways that run parallel to the airfield, or the river.  Obviously the highway would be more dry!

[PT20J]

Another view of Vx and Vy. For what it's worth, I agree with John. These speeds have more value as a uniform means to compare performance than for operational use in light piston aircraft. 

https://www.advancedpilot.com/articles.php?action=article&articleid=1842

Skip

[Pilot boy]

On 8/12/2020 at 10:01 AM, jlunseth said:

There was a really good article written about takeoff strategy several years ago. To write the article, the author and a copilot actually went out and experimented to find what altitude they needed to execute the “Impossible Turn.” They found The Turn to be more difficult that most pilots would expect because it is a 270, not a 180, and the turn causes quite a bit of loss of altitude. They also found that one of the greatest dangers is pilot surprise and failure to act in the first few seconds after the engine quits. There is no choice, the nose must go down right away.

They went to altitude for their experiments, simulated a full power takeoff, cut the throttle, and then held the climb for three seconds to simulate pilot surprise. They then observed how much altitude would be lost in a 270 to the airport and it was about 900 feet. I don’t remember the particular aircraft, it was probably a Skyhawk. They advocated doing this test for yourself, in your aircraft, so you know how much altitude you need to even attempt the turn.

Then they tried some climb rates. What they found was that Vx is actually somewhat dangerous because the airspeed is too slow and the pitch angle too high. A pilot who takes a little too much time putting the nose over as at high risk of a stall and spin. Vy was not good either, the aircraft takes too long to get to a turn altitude, and too far away from the airport.  What they found to be best was a climb at best glide, which is generally about a midpoint between Vx and Vy. It gives the pilot time to react and put the nose over, and has the best chance of climbing to Turn altitude within gliding distance of the airport.

So my takeoffs are full power, gear at positive rate, then flaps, then climb at 85 to 1000 ft. Then do whatever you want, climb to a high cruise altitude or go to 2500 and head for the practice area. 

My home field, KFCM, does not have a lot of good places to put it down in the event of an engine out. There are some, but not alot. Best strategy is to get to 1000 AGL as quickly as possible in a way that, if the engine fails, does not leave you prone to stall/spin.

A great way to simulate this is also Xplane.  You can easily set an engine failure at your home airport.   Fail it at 500 AGL, 800agl etc.  No guarantee it will fly like your real plane but it gives you some idea and is useful practice imo.

[Pilot boy]

I'm a very new owner of a 64 M20E.  I raise gear almost right away, 50 ft or so, positive rate as it's much easier to use the Johnson bar below 85 mph.  Then I raise flaps at 400 AGL as I don't care to lose lift too low to the ground.  After reading this thread I may shoot for 300 AGL as it feels like I'm waiting too long for 400 and the 64 E has a Vfe of only 100 mph which actually gets hard to stay under if I'm by myself and the gear is raised.  

[jlunseth]

Just now, Pilot boy said:

A great way to simulate this is also Xplane.  You can easily set an engine failure at your home airport.   Fail it at 500 AGL, 800agl etc.  No guarantee it will fly like your real plane but it gives you some idea and is useful practice imo.

No, I don't think so. A sim might be help with building good procedures and habits, if you actually have controls and buttons that duplicate what are in your aircraft. But I would not rely on it to tell my how the aircraft will respond in real life, and that is the major purpose of running through the drills. A high veracity sim like the airlines use, maybe, XPlane or Flight Sim on a PC with a gaming yoke, not so much.

[carusoam]

7 hours ago, GeeBee said:

If you can't fly the airplane on instruments at Vx you have no business taking off in instrument conditions. 

 

 Not sure of the meaning of this statement...

Who it is directed to...

Why it gets mentioned every now and then...

 

It is completely agreeable under most conditions, by most MSers, most of the time....

 

All it takes is sitting through the presentation of an MSer’s experience of his stall spin on departure... where his plane and passenger end up parked in a garage attached to a house in the neighborhood...

The pilot credentials... pro, and military.... highly skilled, highly trained.... (He posted pics around here somewhere, worth digging up)

Its not always the engine...

Its not always the plane...

Its not always the human...

And the conditions were VFR too..

 

If he recognized that he couldn’t fly his plane at Vx and clear the obstructions ahead... he wouldn’t have a presentation to give... 

 

+1 for practice with simulators... they are great practice procedural tools....  really good for getting the thought process together... even older versions of MSFT give you a hint of what it is like as you fall outside the back of the power curve... and tree branches start lapping at your wings...

+1 For practice at altitude and using long runways first.... With real airplanes... this helps a pilot know that his new 2him plane has Vx and Vy matching where he thinks they should be (based on POH data).

It is all about flying the real plane, in the real world... 

Best regards,

-a-