Originally Posted by
MechEngr
There are a few things to consider.
When there is a tail wind it takes longer to accelerate the plane to that airspeed.
The longer it takes to accelerate the more runway is required.
If the pilot has screwed up then they will run out of runway before they get to the minimum airspeed where the tail doesn't strike.
To make the screw up greater, the pilot who sees the runway running out will pull the plane to a higher pitch to take off at a lower airspeed - but that higher pitch is too high and the plane tail strikes the runway.
Look at a couple of limit cases. If there is a headwind equal to the no-tail-strike take-off speed the plane won't need any runway, just pull back on the controls and when the correct pitch is reached the plane takes off, with no runway roll at all. This trick has been done in light planes; maybe 30-40 knots. Alternatively, on a runway that is miles and miles long, with a sufficient tailwind that the airspeed is never positive, the airspeed required to take off is not reached because the tires cannot roll that fast.
I don't believe that theory. Otherwise max derate/reduced thrust would be just as likely to create a tailstrike hazard.
Originally Posted by
vilas
Don't know aerodynamics of lift during rotation but there's a general feel about the rotation like the ground speed and rate of change of attitude. In TW the GS is higher which could create illusion that rate of rotation is slower and make pilot inadvertently increase rate of rotation. There's a tail strike pitch for each aircraft that needs to be monitored during rotation and if approaching that without lift off then you need to freeze rotation.
I don't believe that theory either. Otherwise, heavy weight takeoffs would have more tailstrikes due to increased Vr speed.