Dumb question

[7212wing]

I am a Be-1900c/d driver working for a small charter company (also a training pilot). Once in a while I am sent into airfields which are short. I was just wondering(dumb question) if it is possible to do a short field take off with 35° flap. The POH does not mention any flap settings. Only for training purpose. Can anybody help?

[SNS3Guppy]

7212Wing,

What flap settings are provided in your performance charts when describing the takeoff configuration to achieve a particular set of numbers? Use those.

Before you get too wild experimenting, think not just of your takeoff distance, but what you're going to do with an engine failure just after takeoff, with flaps extended, gear out, and slow. Then plan accordingly.

[john_tullamarine]

.. and, perhaps, think carefully about what your story might be to the enquiring legal folk during the investigation after the mishap ?

As a wise (and very skilful) pilot once observed to me when I made an adventuresome suggestion as a young and inexperienced F/O .. with reference to the legal considerations .. "not even worth our time thinking about it".

Different matter in extraordinary circumstances, perhaps .. but not for the routine day-in, day-out stuff.

[MarkerInbound]

As has been said many times, "Takeoffs are optional, landings are mandatory."

I can't see how you'd get yourself into a situation where you'd need to experiment on the takeoff. Beech wrote a very nice book saying what the aircraft can do.

[7212wing]

My intention was not at all, for experimenting. The Company Beech did all that for us. I was just wondering. Thank you I will stick to POH. After all it is my butt if something happens later!!!

[7212wing]

Yes, I got it. Like I say before I was just wondering. Actually, I am wiser now, with a lot of gray hair. I was once in a place called FAIZABAD(OAFZ) Afghanistan. I was tempted to do that kind of take off due to the nature of that airstrip( if you call it airstrip) Thank you for your advice.

[SNS3Guppy]

It's your butt if something happens in real time, too. You'll be the first one to the scene of the crash.

Certainly if something goes wrong and the aircraft isn't configured correctly, then you'll be held accountable. If you're not alive, or too badly injured to face the music, then your accountability won't matter much.

How much performance do you presently have at your usual takeoff weights?

How much performance do you presently have at your usual takeoff weights, on one engine?

How much performance do you presently have at your usual takeoff weights on one engine with full flaps and gear extended?

How much performance do you have at your usual takeoff weights with one engine failed and full flaps, when retracting flaps? Do you have a margin with which to retract them, or are you climbing out at a speed which won't permit you to retract the flaps? You can get yourself into a corner by utilizing the shorter takeoff distances that greater flap settings afford, but you're stuck with greatly reduced climb performance after takeoff with one engine failed, and possibly no way to accelerate to a safe speed to retract the flaps.

If you can continue to climb with the flaps at a reduced setting, but you have no way of retracting the flaps to get there, you've just sealed your own fate. You'll have to look at the performance that's given you and reason what you can and can't do based on the operating conditions (temperature, altitude, weight) and the type of fields from which you're operating.

It's been a little while since I flew any of the King Air series, but in the BE-1900, your takeoff flap is either up, or 17 or 20 degrees, correct?

Do you have autofeather installed?

You say that the company airplane has done the experimenting for you, but don't define what this means. Do you mean to say that the company has explored the engine-out climb characteristics just after takeoff with landing flaps extended, and has data available, or simply that the company has got away with doing this for a long time, and that nothing bad has happened yet?

[7212wing]

Thank you for your advice

[7212wing]

You are right on the ball. POH is the answer. Thank you for jolting this old head of mine.

[7212wing]

You are absolutely right.Did't I say it was a dumb one?

[aviatorhi]

Now that all the "professionals" have jumped on your case and that's done with we can move on to more important things.

Flew the 1900C up north for a year, we used approach flaps for going off of gravel to hopefully reduce wear and tear on the props from stuff getting kicked up by the nose wheel, IIRC the difference in Vr and V2 was about 3 or 4 knots (from where they would have been with T/O flaps). Landing flaps don't work that well for takeoffs in the 1900, only plane I've ever been in where they did is the Super 27. From my experience I wouldn't go past approach for a takeoff, just because you don't gain much (if anything) on the ground and lose a bunch in the air.

[SNS3Guppy]

Did't I say it was a dumb one?

They say there's no such thing as a dumb question; it's not true. I've seen a few of them. This isn't one of them.

Topics like this are excellent to pose for discussion, because you may not be the only one wondering the same thing. The responses or the direction the discussion takes may be illuminating for you, for those who reply, or for those who simply lurk and read.

It's not a dumb question, unless it goes unasked.

A dumb question might have been crawling out of wreckage and asking "should I have used land flaps for that takeoff?" See the difference?

[7212wing]

I know you didn't say dumb, it was only the title of my post. Seriously, I most appreciate your response. I was a once in Faizabad (Afghanistan) where the whole length of the airstrip was made of steel bar. Can you image the rattling and jarring till you are airborne. That is where the contemplation crossed my mind. I saw the C130 guys using that kind of airstrip in a movie. And also I was in Baghdad (Iraq) where we used to spiral up for climb and spiral down for descent. That was a long time ago. I have a lot of gray hair now on the way to retirement. Since I teach Be-1900 pilots, some of them occasionally ask this kind of questions. I will stick to the POH. I wanted them to have gray hair like me. Thanks once more!!!

[SNS3Guppy]

Sounds like PSP; pierced-steel planking for a runway surface.

I'm in Afghanistan frequently, and have spent time in Iraq, too.

You might find this link of interest: http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/attachments/20040913/c90fd059/australia.flaps1-0001.doc

[7212wing]

Is super 27,DHC-6? The props are way up on the wings. From a gravel airstrip rolling take off yes, to reduce damage to the props. Like I say I was just wondering if it was possible for the 1900.
All this started when I was asked to propose a short field take off technique. After digging some materials from old company (that no longer there) I found in black and white that it can be done from asphalt runway.(although I have never seen them practicing 35º)Since I could not find anything from the POH,I was just trying to get some info, like the Cargo pod on the Be-200 modification or something like that.
Thank you for your adice.

[aviatorhi]

No a Super 27 is a Boeing 727 with JT8D-217 in 1 and 3, 40 flaps (the original landing maximum) isn't authorized. The max "legal" (Stage 3) setting for takeoff and landing is 30* (roughly 27-28 degrees). Like I said with the Beech you're gonna lose a lot of climb performance with them all the way out at the landing setting, in the end it comes down to tradeoffs and I don't see a situation where you want to trade the climb performance away for getting off the ground a bit sooner.

To make a better informed decision you'd need some sort of prior experience and/or some performance charts. But from my personal experience I don't think there is much benefit to going to LDG flaps to get off a short strip.

How long was the runway in question anyway?

[7212wing]

Thank you. That was an interesting and eye opening one.

[7212wing]

I found this link very interesting and an eye opening. Thank you SNS3Guppy.
http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beec...laps1-0001.doc (http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kjsl.com%2Fpipermail%2Fbeech-owners%2Fattachments%2F20040913%2Fc90fd059%2Faustralia.flaps 1-0001.doc&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fquestions%2F445757-dumb-question.html%23post6320251) . Although I am new for this forum and used to only reading the suggestion, I might have offended a few when I reply back for the thread. I didn't get the hang of it yet. SNS3Guppy you walking Encyclopedia.

[7212wing]

I have never had a chance to fly the 727,however I flew the B720/707 a while back and I do not recall if they had any short field take off techniques. It is true why tradeoff climb performance for a short landing roll? The airstrips we are operating are not more than 1300mts with temperature ISA+20 and pressure altitude of from 5500ft -sea level. Experience I have, however I do not want to experiment at this stage. Thank you for your advice, when it boils down it is much safer to stick to the POH. By the way, you will find the web site suggested by SNS3Guppy very interesting.
http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beec...laps1-0001.doc (http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kjsl.com%2Fpipermail%2Fbeech-owners%2Fattachments%2F20040913%2Fc90fd059%2Faustralia.flaps 1-0001.doc&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fquestions%2F445757-dumb-question.html%23post6320251)

[aviatorhi]

If memory serves correctly the C model was still able to make full power at that altitude at ISA, but that far up and at that temperature I'd want all the climb perfromance I can get, runway seems more than sufficient given the variables at play, this is all from memory though.

[7212wing]

I wish it was that simple. If it is a gravel airstrip and take off is only in one direction due to the surrounding terrain are some of the variables that I forgot to mention.

[7212wing]

I wish it was that simple. If it is a gravel airstrip and take off only in one direction due to the surrounding terrain are some of the variables that I forgot to mention.

[bfisk]

What about Vmc? Could that be limiting? Don't know the B1900 numbers.

[aviatorhi]

I flew in and out of a gravel strip exactly like you mention (sloped, one way in and one way out), only it was 800 feet longer on paper (600 of those feet were unusable though because of erosion under the runway, so it was effectively 200 feet longer), also it was down at about 600 MSL, the warmest it ever got there was ISA+15. With a full load out of there I was within my comfort zone for how the airplane performed. Like I said before, way up there in a high density altitude scenario I'd wanna limit my flaps, probably go from APPR to TO setting at about 200 feet and start building airspeed ASAP (this is assuming maximum load).

Also, as VMC descreases with altitude and the 1900s red line is a bit below any speed you'd wanna have the airplane in the air at it's not limiting in any practical sense.

[7212wing]

I wish it was that simple. I forgot to mention that the airstrips in question are some grave , landing is possible in one direction while take of the other direction due to the surrounding terrain.

[7212wing]

Vmca Flaps up -96, Flaps Takeoff-91 and Flaps Approach 89.

[7212wing]

You are absolutely right. If I add it is a B model, with tanker fuel and Max Take off will you be comfortable?

[aviatorhi]

I assume MTOW is 16.6K in the B model, and also assuming the engines still make full power at that altitude (I forget exactly when they start temping out, it's been a few years and I don't have charts in front of me) I would say that APPR flaps would be more than sufficient to get you out of there without a problem.

[aviatorhi]

Typically we tried avoiding anything in the tail section, but it could be done, the fuel burn in the 1900 shouldn't be effecting your CG to the point of possibly causing the airplane to tip on the tail during landing, if I remember correctly it wasn't even considered important enough to put on the "wiz wheel" (CG calculation tool).

As far as ref speeds and all that "good stuff" go, I found that flying the plane at 140 until 1/2 mile final (regardless of weight) and then pulling the power back and bleeding off speed until touchdown usually put me at a touchdown of ref-5 on the numbers wen going in and out of short fields. I'm not sure how you like the condition levers set, but just to give you something to think about here; high idle will have the engines spool into reverse like mad, though it may have you floating down the runway a bit more than you like, low idle won't come into reverse at quickly but the plane really wants to get on the ground sooner. Typically, by having the other guy move the condition levers from low to high at touchdown and using full reverse and max braking I was able to have the airplane stopped in 900 feet (I know because the taxiway I always wanted to make was 900 feet from te threshold at one airport), to do that I would usually touchdown about ref-10, weight was about 14-15K on those legs.

[7212wing]

Does it work for a gravel airstrip? We are talking about both the C and D model. I sort of wanted to minimize brake use, ingestion of FOD and propeller erosion !!

[aviatorhi]

I was a bit more gentle on the gravel with the reverse, but you have to be very good with your energy management if you plan to touchdown on the numbers at ref-10. A little practice on longer paved runways wouldn't hurt. As far as prop damage the company I flew with found (through trial and error) that being "light" (holding back pressure to keep it from kicking up rocks etc.) with the nose wheel was the biggest deciding factor, and avoiding the use of reverse below 50 knots the second biggest factor in terms of prop damage. Above that speed nothing would really get picked up.

[7212wing]

You are right on the ball there. I might add though, extending the ice vanes help from FOD ingestion . The thing I didn't get is; do you mean to cross 50ft height (threshold) at V ref +10 or Vref-10? I like the latter one.

[aviatorhi]

Touchdown on the threshold at about Vref-10(-15 on the very low end). And yes we left the doors open for gravel ops. The 1900 is a very strong performer on short fields and can do some amazing things, but you need to be a pretty good stick to pull it off, I've seen people try some of the "bush" methods without knowing what they were getting into and land 'before the runway', though still on gravel so it didn't much matter (it would have mattered a whole lot if it wasn't gravel before the runway).

[7212wing]

That's what I am talking about. You are my kind of pilot. That's why they say "there are few pilots and lots of drivers" It nice to know there are still some out there. No wonder you used "aviator hi" as your user name. I really appreciate for some of the tips you gave me to share for those who has the civility and burning desire to be pilots. Thank you once again.