is there a takeoff version of the saying "any landing you can walk away from is a good one"?
because if there is, it applies here..
is there a takeoff version of the saying "any landing you can walk away from is a good one"?
because if there is, it applies here..
Given that conditions were such that the pilot on hindsight should not have gone: They was a hell of a takeoff, the pilot knew they needed all the scarce speed they could get- and never flinched, did not pull up even a teeny weiner little bit until the last possible millisecond. And just made it. Who ever it was knew thier plane. Hurrah! Well Done!! Cool Vid!!
Salanis wrote:John Brown wrote: Also it sounded like it was having problems making power. Could have been the audio recording but it didn't sound right.Didn't sound too off to me. Keep in mind that you're hearing a very simple, open piped, carbureted, flat-4. It is almost certainly running rich too, which is standard on takeoff. It probably is down on power. As titled, it's all about density altitude. Hot, humid day means thinner air, means more speed required to gain lift and less power produced by the engine. And flaps were not part of the takeoff check list at most altitudes for most of the planes I've flown. The airplane I learned in, which is slightly larger than that one, did not have flaps.
I think he (or she) did try to lift off before the very end.. if you watch, there were a couple of small "hops" into the air a couple of seconds before they finally got lift
I think those "hops" were due to the field. Normally in a tail dragger, you pick the tail up before you take off.
Being a taildragger.. I wonder if the downward slope of the strip hurt getting into the air?
mad_machine wrote: Being a taildragger.. I wonder if the downward slope of the strip hurt getting into the air?
No, that would probably make it easier. Improved acceleration.
Salanis wrote:mad_machine wrote: Being a taildragger.. I wonder if the downward slope of the strip hurt getting into the air?No, that would probably make it easier. Improved acceleration.
Hmmmm....not a pilot, but I would have thought the reduction in angle of attack would be a bigger deal.
Here's a post attributed to the pilot in question:
Originally Posted by Her Story:
Oh dear... Have to 'fess up. Things do come back to haunt one, don't they? This was me, Selina, in GYYF. Of course I have already received this video a few times in the last couple of days. I think it was 1999 or 2000.
What can I say? It was hot, I had 2 passengers and thought I knew more than I did about short field takeoffs. This little field is just outside of Victoria B.C. and once we were in the air we headed straight to Nanaimo's LONG runway to land and assess damages. The only victims, other than my pride, were the gear fairings as I did a bit of landscaping on the way out.
What was I thinking? I sure didn't use correct short field procedures and quickly ran out of room. I knew I was in trouble and also knew I was committed to the takeoff. As we lifted off my right seat passenger, a more experienced pilot (as was the second passenger in the back), was quick enough to yell at me to push the nose down and was ready to do so himself if I didn't. That instinct to pull up is strong especially with the tops of the trees coming at you.
Just about the best learning experience I've every had... And probably the scariest.
Coincidentally I met the owner of this little field this past weekend at a fly-in and we had a little reminisce about my "incident". The field is still in use although I think they have removed a few more of the trees at the end. I don't think I'll be tackling it again although a little voice inside says perhaps I should go back without passengers and do it properly!
Seems there are multiple contributing issues with this episode that occurred at least ten years ago. That said, it still comes down to "pilot error", " divine intervention" or just plane old luck.....
At least the purported pilot has gained some much-needed experience and wisdom and is still alive all these years later.
JoeyM wrote: Hmmmm....not a pilot, but I would have thought the reduction in angle of attack would be a bigger deal.
I don't see how angle of attack is reduced. Are you thinking that the tail wheel will touch the ground before the pilot can pull up to gain lift? That would have to be some pretty steep ground. You do not need to point the nose up very high to gain lift.
Are you thinking because the apparent wind is angled upward? That would increase angle of attack.
Downhill slope, you don't need as much positive lift. (Well, unless you're trying to clear trees.) If the ground slopes up, you need to climb faster than the ground. If it slopes away, you effectively gain altitude by remaining level.
Salanis wrote:JoeyM wrote: Hmmmm....not a pilot, but I would have thought the reduction in angle of attack would be a bigger deal.I don't see how angle of attack is reduced. Are you thinking that the tail wheel will touch the ground before the pilot can pull up to gain lift?
Nope. I was thinking that if the normal takeoff attitude is +3 degrees from horizontal (forward) motion, a downward slope of two degrees would mean that the wing now only has a +1 degree angle of attack.
After second thought, though, I'd like to retract that. Forward motion != horizontal motion, and in many cases the two are very different from one another.
Being sloped down also makes it easier to take off in a tail dragger because it's easier to see where you're going.
You'll need to log in to post.
