How not to do a soft field takeoff.

[AdamFrisch]

P3ga603WA68

[Blind Squirrel]

Looks like he attended the Air France school of flying. (Sorry! Too soon?)

[trident3A]

Missing the accelerate in ground effect part!

[Tarq57]

The 172 pretty much landed on the wingtip.
The wingtip is only slightly bent.

Strong machines.

Pity that the poor old girl probably burned out. Pilot should be charged with cruelty.

[Above The Clouds]

Its not surprising that the wing dropped, the stall warner must have been screaming away and there they are using using large aileron inputs close to the stall.

[dubbleyew eight]

that was just plain stupid.
get the wheels off, fly level to accelerate, then climb out.

[Piper.Classique]

Did the pilot get out? It is starting to burn as the video stops.

[mary meagher]

Nosewheel aircraft on soft field. And just to add interest, tall trees at the end of the run! He never had it flying at all, tried to hoik it up so the attitude was nose high, angle of attack too high, stall, aircraft actually drops the wing with the start of a spin....

I saw a glider do that once. Failed winch launch, instructor did not take over in time....but both pilots survived. No fire.

[Maoraigh1]

Did the pilot get out? It is starting to burn as the video stops
Said elsewhere to be very little injury.

[john_tullamarine]

Said elsewhere to be very little injury.

That probably wouldn't apply to the laundry bill.

[Sam Rutherford]

To be fair :O I don't think he ever had the option to 'accelerate in ground effect'. It was either pop it in the air and stall, or just drive to his destination!

What is interesting is that there appears to be lots and lots of space behind him before he starts his roll...

[Blind Squirrel]

My guess is he could have made it, even given the mid-field starting point (perhaps it was too boggy behind). What really did a number on the take-off run, it seems to me, is that twice (at 0:07 and 0:15) he dragged his tail along the ground, killing whatever possibility of accelerating to flying speed he might have had.

The extraordinary thing is that he ever believed that this is how one takes off from a soft surface. Perhaps his technique might have worked if there had been a howling headwind of 30-40 kt, but otherwise the likelihood of avoiding a pile-up was effectively zero. Given identical control inputs, that would probably have been true even if he had been departing from a paved runway.

[Pace]

What a shame! He kept the nose wheel well clear sadly not enough flying speed and became airborne too soon.

I wonder what the airfield elevation and temperature was as both may have played a part in this.

I do nonetheless feel sorry for the guy not an easy airfield

pace

[Maoraigh1]

is that twice (at 0:07 and 0:15) he dragged his tail along the ground

Bounce? Not easy to hold a steady angle on rough ground.

[Jan Olieslagers]

What is interesting is that there appears to be lots and lots of space behind him before he starts his roll...

That is not so clear, as I see the video it starts when he is already rolling so there is no sight of where he started. If that was not at the absolute beginning of available space, the pilot only got what he deserved. Shame for the plane indeed.

[Andy_P]

I am just (or was till I hit a kangaroo on my motorcycle) learning to do soft field take off now, so interesting to watch this. I didn't think that ground affect would make that amount of difference in a high wing aircraft.

[Tarq57]

I am just (or was till I hit a kangaroo on my motorcycle) learning to do soft field take off now, so interesting to watch this. I didn't think that ground affect would make that amount of difference in a high wing aircraft.You can tell how it does, because the aircraft is almost controllable whilst in ground effect (about 10-15'), though it's not really going anywhere (due to the 'control' technique used, which is coarse, and too nose high) but within seconds of managing to coax the poor old girl out of ground effect, it stalls and spuds in.

[onetrack]

"Exactly 20 seconds after firewalling the throttle, Rupert suddenly realised - to his great consternation - what a total con that last eBay purchase of his, was - the book he'd bought, entitled, "Flying For Dummies .... " :)

[mary meagher]

Nosewheel, tailwheel, which is better for rough, boggy strips?

Wouldn't hurt to walk over the ground first. Where are the worst bits to avoid?

And begin at the beginning, not half way down the run.

I mostly flew a taildragger, Supercub 150, so PLENTY of power to weight, which is why it is used for pulling up gliders.....a 180 cub even more so....though with the heavy 180 hp engine fitted, the cub may tip over on its nose if you don't remember to hold the stick back.

The Cub starts with nose in the air, tailwheel on the ground. As power and speed increase, the nose moves down! to a level attitude, which presents the correct angle of attack. Holding the level attitude, with full power, the Cub lifts off in ground effect. STILL holding the level attitude, speed increases. There is no doubt, we rise into the air, and so does the glider, if one is following on the end of the rope!

You can't just hoik the old girl into the air, she goes when she is ready, not before.

[Dan the weegie]

when she is ready, not before.

Normally before you're ready though :)

Tailwheel in my opinion is the best for soft surface with big wheels it is definitely the best, with sufficient power to get the tail up you only have 2 wheels on the ground so it reduces rolling resistance. Although I imagine the difference isn't enormous but the big wheels probably make the most improvement on soft perf.

[ChickenHouse]

What an unusual attitude for such a machine. Did they carry a bore pig in the bag for extra? Also, trimming looks at first glance way off.