Into wind for run-ups?
Grandpa Aerotart
You wanna compare a Super Connie to a Baron?
Of course they didn't do their runups on the move..because they were incredibly complex compound radial engines..and there were 4 of them.
As far as facing courts martial for reckless, unprofessional behaviour?
I would suggest that since the RAAF doesn't operate anything in the same class as a Baron or Chieftian and has only operated SE pistons, in recent decades, in the ab initio stage of training it probably isn't in a position to comment on how they can or can't be operated...and neither would one of their products unless and until he has some direct experience.
Your example of the RFDS Chieftain pilot is certainly one of less than great situational awareness/airmanship. Those roller blind checklists are cumbersome to use and far from being the best available single pilot checklist.
Night time and raining is a good time to slow down and take extra care...but that doesn't make doing some checks on the move 'unprofessional' always..it just indicates that on a dark night with bad weather and a crowded ramp some common sense might be required...but as we all know common sense is anything but common.
Of course they didn't do their runups on the move..because they were incredibly complex compound radial engines..and there were 4 of them.
As far as facing courts martial for reckless, unprofessional behaviour?
I would suggest that since the RAAF doesn't operate anything in the same class as a Baron or Chieftian and has only operated SE pistons, in recent decades, in the ab initio stage of training it probably isn't in a position to comment on how they can or can't be operated...and neither would one of their products unless and until he has some direct experience.
Your example of the RFDS Chieftain pilot is certainly one of less than great situational awareness/airmanship. Those roller blind checklists are cumbersome to use and far from being the best available single pilot checklist.
Night time and raining is a good time to slow down and take extra care...but that doesn't make doing some checks on the move 'unprofessional' always..it just indicates that on a dark night with bad weather and a crowded ramp some common sense might be required...but as we all know common sense is anything but common.
The Pelican to the rescue! 
Also covers ground leaning..sounds strangely like what CC has been saying all this time. Can't think why!
Also covers ground leaning..sounds strangely like what CC has been saying all this time. Can't think why!
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,976
Received 105 Likes
on
60 Posts
Who said anything about taxiing against the brakes?
still crazy Chimbu... I guess we will have to agree to disagree here. In my view the pros far outweight the cons, run up's on the run are more prone to human error and it really doesn't save that much more time or money. As for not touching the brakes.... well I seem to remember taxiing at a reasonable speed to be plainly good airmanship.
I agree you dont need to do an engine run for every flight, but if you feel that confortable in your equipment.. well good luck to ya you crazy dutch bastard
I agree you dont need to do an engine run for every flight, but if you feel that confortable in your equipment.. well good luck to ya you crazy dutch bastard
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Propellors
If you do stationary runups on the gravel strips in central Australia, you will not last long, as you will destroy propellors.
You can see a little "willy willy" sucking up gravel below your prop. If the aircraft is moving, this gets left behind, and damage is much reduced.
I once watched a military pilot all but destroy a propellor on a Pilatus Porter by doing stationary runups etc on a gravel patch. He must have had a fuel problem, as he arrived un announced, landed, and requested fuel. We told him that we only had avgas but he elected to take some avgas, so was duly refuelled.(PT6's can use avgas-with limits)
We then watched as he started up and we ran for cover as his propellor started throwing stones. He sat there for a lengthy period and went through his check list etc, totally oblivious of the damage that the "pinging" stones were doing to his prop. And this in a taildragger with good prop clearance.
Military pilots are good for military things.
Roller blind checklists have their place, but also have serious limitations. They can actually be a hazard, if not written properly. Too often their purpose is to protect people who are not in the aeroplane. When the RFDS put the first Kingair in Alice Springs the roller blind checklist was more of a "to do list" It was so long it used to jam. It even had the coffee machine as a checklist item.
Things are not always as simple as they seem.(and as they should be.) Sometimes, doing checks on the run is the best way, whether the military do it that way or not.
The words "it's only GA" have absolutely no place in aviation. This attitude polutes Australian aviation, and is one of the reasons for the sad state of parts of GA.
It must be taken seriously, and done properly. It IS different.
You can see a little "willy willy" sucking up gravel below your prop. If the aircraft is moving, this gets left behind, and damage is much reduced.
I once watched a military pilot all but destroy a propellor on a Pilatus Porter by doing stationary runups etc on a gravel patch. He must have had a fuel problem, as he arrived un announced, landed, and requested fuel. We told him that we only had avgas but he elected to take some avgas, so was duly refuelled.(PT6's can use avgas-with limits)
We then watched as he started up and we ran for cover as his propellor started throwing stones. He sat there for a lengthy period and went through his check list etc, totally oblivious of the damage that the "pinging" stones were doing to his prop. And this in a taildragger with good prop clearance.
Military pilots are good for military things.
Roller blind checklists have their place, but also have serious limitations. They can actually be a hazard, if not written properly. Too often their purpose is to protect people who are not in the aeroplane. When the RFDS put the first Kingair in Alice Springs the roller blind checklist was more of a "to do list" It was so long it used to jam. It even had the coffee machine as a checklist item.
Things are not always as simple as they seem.(and as they should be.) Sometimes, doing checks on the run is the best way, whether the military do it that way or not.
The words "it's only GA" have absolutely no place in aviation. This attitude polutes Australian aviation, and is one of the reasons for the sad state of parts of GA.
It must be taken seriously, and done properly. It IS different.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.........god it's hard to believe the amount of stuff written here about what is essentially good airmanship amongst other things. Sure, do engine runups whilst on the move where practicable but use common sense at all times, if it's anyway risky to do so then simply don't !.........sure do runups tail into wind where appropriate but there's no harm doing it (where possible) into wind, back to good airmanship with controls & engine handling, both of which should be respected well before airborne flight:-)
I'm sure all here have seen it all, poor airmanship, poor decision making etc. We are but human but we can make a difference & we can try to do what we believe is correct at every opertunity but never & I mean never at the expense of common sense..........those two words that will always sustain ones life where all else fails.............happy flying & remember the flying isn't over 'till the hangar doors are closed !:[)
Capt Wally :-)
I'm sure all here have seen it all, poor airmanship, poor decision making etc. We are but human but we can make a difference & we can try to do what we believe is correct at every opertunity but never & I mean never at the expense of common sense..........those two words that will always sustain ones life where all else fails.............happy flying & remember the flying isn't over 'till the hangar doors are closed !:[)
Capt Wally :-)
With the greatest of respect to the skygods here, I wish to point out two things.
1. Since I have not flown a particular aircraft all day, and because the pilot who used it before me might be even more inept than I am, I will conduct a runup check. For example, the previous pilot might not have "leaned aggressively on the ground" and my mag check might indicate a minute or two of aggressive leaning is necessary to clean the plugs.
Alternatively, he (or she) might simply have not adhered to the POH and written up the MR and declared the aircraft unserviceable because the mag drops and difference were outside limits.
I do not wish to discover this situation in the middle of a takeoff roll.
2. Since I am going to do a runup. it might be useful if my aircraft was pointed in the same direction as other aircraft attempting the same exercise. While it might be pleasant to gaze into the eyes of one or two (OK three or four!) female pilots at YMMB, doing it while standing on the brakes and revving the engine offers scope for a kind of mingling that is not my preferred method.
1. Since I have not flown a particular aircraft all day, and because the pilot who used it before me might be even more inept than I am, I will conduct a runup check. For example, the previous pilot might not have "leaned aggressively on the ground" and my mag check might indicate a minute or two of aggressive leaning is necessary to clean the plugs.
Alternatively, he (or she) might simply have not adhered to the POH and written up the MR and declared the aircraft unserviceable because the mag drops and difference were outside limits.
I do not wish to discover this situation in the middle of a takeoff roll.
2. Since I am going to do a runup. it might be useful if my aircraft was pointed in the same direction as other aircraft attempting the same exercise. While it might be pleasant to gaze into the eyes of one or two (OK three or four!) female pilots at YMMB, doing it while standing on the brakes and revving the engine offers scope for a kind of mingling that is not my preferred method.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and my mag check might indicate a minute or two of aggressive leaning is necessary to clean the plugs
The longer you run the engine at high power, the hotter the internal temperatures get although the CHT gauge, if you have one, may not show much of a rise. But keep in mind, the hotter the engine, the less power it delivers during take off and if in a twin you have an engine failure at a critical time, the already hot engine that you have beaten to death during its run up - will deliver you significantly less power for single engine climb.
Extract from the book "Fly The Engine" by Kas Thomas. Chapter 3, page 41 and 42 on Run-Up's: Quote in part:
regarding plug fouling and mag drops:
"First use common sense. Try a quick burnoff of the plugs. The key word here, is quick. Don't take all day. Run the engine up to runup rpm, or possibly 100rpm higher, with both mags online, and slowly lean for best rpm. Don't be afraid to lean aggressively, because at runup power your engine is putting out, at best, only about 40% power and at that kind pf power setting you aren't going to hurt anything by overleaning. Leave the mixture at the best rpm setting for about 10 seconds. Lean slightly more until the engine just starts to stumble, then enrichen and recheck the mags.
If the "bad" mag still sounds bad and still makes you nervous, by all means taxi back. Don't sit there running up, straining on the brakes, kicking up the dirt with the propeller etc needlessly. If a 10 second burnoff won't do the trick the first time, the odds are it won't work any better the second time. All you will do is overheat your engine. Which brings me to another tip:
Always face into the wind for run-up (to aid engine cooling) and open the cowl flaps if any. If there is no wind, taxi to a position downwind of any available aircraft and unless blowing dirt is a factor - face into the other plane's propwash"
Unquote.
It is common to see pilots running up both engines together in a twin. There is no compelling reason for this and forget the myth about nosewheel assembly twisting. What is the point in banging away at high power on one engine while trying to burn out plugs on the other engine that is being tested? Same applies to prop pitch control exercising. One engine at a time please.. Leave the other engine idling leaned out waiting it's turn to do it's stuff. Stays cooler that way. The cooler the internal temps the better chance of safer single engine performance during take off climb.
Last edited by A37575; 3rd Nov 2006 at 10:40.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: QLD, Australia
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is always exciting to watch a 700+hp twin doing run-ups FASTIDIOUSLY into wind, (and often directly across the apron/taxiway) whilst a not so experienced pilot taxis behind in a C152.
I wonder how many of the lovers of the static run-up own the propellors.
Karumba is certainly not a bad strip as far as stones are concerned - you need to get out more.
I wonder how many of the lovers of the static run-up own the propellors.
Karumba is certainly not a bad strip as far as stones are concerned - you need to get out more.
A37575 - two minutes is poetic licence. More like 30 seconds, and its only on a couple of aircraft that I fly that occasionally get the problem (200HP Lycoming).
On gravel strips of course do a rolling runup. As for only doing first "flight of day" runups, of course do it, presupposing it's an aircraft you are familiar with and nobody else is going to use it except you.
If you are hiring an aircraft, as far as I'm concerned its 'caveat emptor". I don't know what the state of the engine is apart from whats written on the MR.
Two sentences keep going through my mind:
"The engine in this aircraft always does that."
"Didn't you know about XXXX? It's been like that for months."
Also with the greatest of respect, while I can see the virtues of whats been written in this and the leaning thread. It would be wise for simple people like me and students to think very hard about how to incorporate these teachings into their operations without incurring the ire of their instructors.
On gravel strips of course do a rolling runup. As for only doing first "flight of day" runups, of course do it, presupposing it's an aircraft you are familiar with and nobody else is going to use it except you.
If you are hiring an aircraft, as far as I'm concerned its 'caveat emptor". I don't know what the state of the engine is apart from whats written on the MR.
Two sentences keep going through my mind:
"The engine in this aircraft always does that."
"Didn't you know about XXXX? It's been like that for months."
Also with the greatest of respect, while I can see the virtues of whats been written in this and the leaning thread. It would be wise for simple people like me and students to think very hard about how to incorporate these teachings into their operations without incurring the ire of their instructors.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South of the border
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would suggest that since the RAAF doesn't operate anything in the same class as a Baron or Chieftian and has only operated SE pistons, in recent decades, in the ab initio stage of training it probably isn't in a position to comment on how they can or can't be operated..
Be careful dismissing the experience garnered from those who operate in a significantly different manner to you. You'd be surprised the lessons learned and considered 'common knowledge' on the other side of the fence, just as the military has a lot to learn from us mere civilians.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Round prop hubs
Hey Chimba,
I read Deak's article where he stated the first 20 odd cm of the prop is round and of no aerodynamic value way back when he wrote it. This seemed plain wrong for all the props on flat engines and can be verified by simple observation. Sure it's fat but it is still a good aerofoil. However quite correct for round engines. Since I fly both I went and looked at a few, the 1340, 985 and Dromader donks certainly have round hubs the old Hamilton Standard partcularly.
However by the time the hub forms into a workable aerofoil it is at about the same radius as the outer crankcase, the crankcase doesn't need cooling airflow, by the time you radius out to the cylinder the blades are now shaping up just fine, still the cylinders don't need much airflow, get to the radius of the cylinder heads which do need good airflow and the blades are, well there proper blades.
I took this up with John Deakin and he appologised and agreed.
I also questioned him on the tuft test he conducted on the inside of the engine nacelle of his Bonza which he videoed and verified that bum to wind runups resulted in improved flow through the engine. He had no answer why it occoured except that it did.
I'll need a little more convincing before I start doing bum to the wind runups.
It's like feeding a horse a carrot from the wrong end, it's just not natural, poor horsemanship to I suspect.
Regards
M
I read Deak's article where he stated the first 20 odd cm of the prop is round and of no aerodynamic value way back when he wrote it. This seemed plain wrong for all the props on flat engines and can be verified by simple observation. Sure it's fat but it is still a good aerofoil. However quite correct for round engines. Since I fly both I went and looked at a few, the 1340, 985 and Dromader donks certainly have round hubs the old Hamilton Standard partcularly.
However by the time the hub forms into a workable aerofoil it is at about the same radius as the outer crankcase, the crankcase doesn't need cooling airflow, by the time you radius out to the cylinder the blades are now shaping up just fine, still the cylinders don't need much airflow, get to the radius of the cylinder heads which do need good airflow and the blades are, well there proper blades.
I took this up with John Deakin and he appologised and agreed.
I also questioned him on the tuft test he conducted on the inside of the engine nacelle of his Bonza which he videoed and verified that bum to wind runups resulted in improved flow through the engine. He had no answer why it occoured except that it did.
I'll need a little more convincing before I start doing bum to the wind runups.
It's like feeding a horse a carrot from the wrong end, it's just not natural, poor horsemanship to I suspect.
Regards
M
Grandpa Aerotart
Well I have looked at the first 10-15 odd cm of my propeller and I can't see anything particularly aerodynamic about it...I looked at a prop on a spitfire a few months ago at it is all 'blade' from the spinner out. I guess it varies widely as you suggest...but the fact remains that not much cooling airflow gets 'pushed' into the cowl by the prop in your average GA aircraft stationary on the ground.
But as with all things you invariably expose yourself when you attempt 'simple' explanations. I don't spend days or weeks researching my posts before hitting submit, they come from long experience.
Capt WE Johns...no the DC3, Caribou and Harvard don't count with respect to the comparison I was making. A37573 was suggesting anyone irresponsible enough to do checks 'on the run' in a typical GA light single or twin should/would be hung, drawn and quartered, in the RAAF.
They could be quite safely done in a CT4 but it is not RAAF SOP and neither is it GA SOP with ab initio students..and that is fine.
I would never suggest anyone do checks on the run in a DC3, Bou or Harvard...and I've flown 2 of them....hint, not the Bou
They are not Barons, Bonanzas, 210s, 310 or Chieftains....for starters the Dak and some models of Harvard have no tailwheel steering...just taxiing them is an art without attempting mag/prop checks concurrently.
I guess it gets back to 'uncommon' common sense....and most of us aren't in the airforce.
But as with all things you invariably expose yourself when you attempt 'simple' explanations. I don't spend days or weeks researching my posts before hitting submit, they come from long experience.
Capt WE Johns...no the DC3, Caribou and Harvard don't count with respect to the comparison I was making. A37573 was suggesting anyone irresponsible enough to do checks 'on the run' in a typical GA light single or twin should/would be hung, drawn and quartered, in the RAAF.
They could be quite safely done in a CT4 but it is not RAAF SOP and neither is it GA SOP with ab initio students..and that is fine.
I would never suggest anyone do checks on the run in a DC3, Bou or Harvard...and I've flown 2 of them....hint, not the Bou
They are not Barons, Bonanzas, 210s, 310 or Chieftains....for starters the Dak and some models of Harvard have no tailwheel steering...just taxiing them is an art without attempting mag/prop checks concurrently.
I guess it gets back to 'uncommon' common sense....and most of us aren't in the airforce.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chimba
I appreciate the fact the cooling air is drawn in by deck pressure differential.
And to on follow on that it is apparent that it is the outer extremities of the blade section that have the most influence on static cooling efficencies, as it is this section that is accelerating the air past the cooling air outlet. Now in a mild downwind I'm sure that the props airstream velocity has dominate influence on proceedings. But above a mild downwind component I wouldn't mind betting that the prop wash starts to suffer from the same principal problem that choppers trying to hover in ground effect have, vortex ring I think it's called. Any way you know all this and I think you probably explained it better back further.
As a side note to others, and this probaly belongs in the ground leaning thread. Those who are trying to clear fouled plugs with a hard runup should realise that if the plug is carbon fouled you can usually burn it off and clear the problem. However if you have suffered lead fouling you cannot burn it off, you need to physicaly dislodge the small bead of lead that is shorting the electrode, this is where cycling a prop at higher RPM might I say might help. Other wise it's a trip back to the tool box. Lead fouling is most likely to occour when combustion temps and plug nose temps are low and the chemical lead scavenging agents in fuel won't work. Another good reason to keep ground mixture's lean and minimise time on the ground.
Another rant
M
I appreciate the fact the cooling air is drawn in by deck pressure differential.
And to on follow on that it is apparent that it is the outer extremities of the blade section that have the most influence on static cooling efficencies, as it is this section that is accelerating the air past the cooling air outlet. Now in a mild downwind I'm sure that the props airstream velocity has dominate influence on proceedings. But above a mild downwind component I wouldn't mind betting that the prop wash starts to suffer from the same principal problem that choppers trying to hover in ground effect have, vortex ring I think it's called. Any way you know all this and I think you probably explained it better back further.
As a side note to others, and this probaly belongs in the ground leaning thread. Those who are trying to clear fouled plugs with a hard runup should realise that if the plug is carbon fouled you can usually burn it off and clear the problem. However if you have suffered lead fouling you cannot burn it off, you need to physicaly dislodge the small bead of lead that is shorting the electrode, this is where cycling a prop at higher RPM might I say might help. Other wise it's a trip back to the tool box. Lead fouling is most likely to occour when combustion temps and plug nose temps are low and the chemical lead scavenging agents in fuel won't work. Another good reason to keep ground mixture's lean and minimise time on the ground.
Another rant
M
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone asked a while back where a good place to do runups is when there is not one designated. I have also come accross this once or twice. The first time it led me to doing runups in a twin on the roll which took up a lot of effort on the taxi and I'm sure my instructors wouldnt have been happy. Bit dodgy of me.
Runups before each flight is -as I understand- in my ops manual and I would prefer to do it when not required by ops manuals cos things do get missed when you leave it to other people.
I find into wind helps at GAAPS because it makes ur aircraft's position and entry/exit in the bay predictable to other aircraft and since the aircraft will all point the same way, you won't be prop washing others.
Personally I have few problems with checks on the run, good practice for larger operators. I follow their procedures such as pausing checks when crossing runways and 'clear left/right' approaching taxiways. Of course all subject to workload, safety first and speed/efficiency second etc etc.
Runups before each flight is -as I understand- in my ops manual and I would prefer to do it when not required by ops manuals cos things do get missed when you leave it to other people.
I find into wind helps at GAAPS because it makes ur aircraft's position and entry/exit in the bay predictable to other aircraft and since the aircraft will all point the same way, you won't be prop washing others.
Personally I have few problems with checks on the run, good practice for larger operators. I follow their procedures such as pausing checks when crossing runways and 'clear left/right' approaching taxiways. Of course all subject to workload, safety first and speed/efficiency second etc etc.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vh-ajm,
Good question, where to runup when none is provided.
They way I and most seasoned pilots would mostly tackle this is to start up and quietly idle away some where discreet and into wind and where your prop wash won't annoy anyone. And with a clean surface under the props.
A simple key to this is to consider this matter before you even get in the aircraft. As you might even want to wander over to a pre selected area and check the surface suitability for blue metal/gravel.
Now if you don't have the luxury of a clean surface under the props, set your idle nice and low say 700-800 RPM consistant with smooth running and lean to max increase in RPM. When the RPM comes up a bit which it should, reset to that 700-800 RPM again. Be aware even with proper leaning some engines will still lead foul at these low RPM's due still not being hot enough to activate the lead scavenging agents. If your in an aircraft that is a bit inclined to foul on the ground then choose 900-1000 RPM
Do all your checks bar the engine runup then taxi off, do the runup bit on the run and quickly ish, you need very little head in the cockpit for a mag check and prop cycle/feather check. Particularly with a bit of practise, if the taxi route is going to be along gravel do this brief runup while taxiing into wind if you can.
Grass is often better to run up over than asphalt as it has a great ability to impeed the votices that occour under the prop in addition to also impeeding the movement of gravel/stones that lie within it.
Your SOP's have the final word though.
Regards
M
Good question, where to runup when none is provided.
They way I and most seasoned pilots would mostly tackle this is to start up and quietly idle away some where discreet and into wind and where your prop wash won't annoy anyone. And with a clean surface under the props.
A simple key to this is to consider this matter before you even get in the aircraft. As you might even want to wander over to a pre selected area and check the surface suitability for blue metal/gravel.
Now if you don't have the luxury of a clean surface under the props, set your idle nice and low say 700-800 RPM consistant with smooth running and lean to max increase in RPM. When the RPM comes up a bit which it should, reset to that 700-800 RPM again. Be aware even with proper leaning some engines will still lead foul at these low RPM's due still not being hot enough to activate the lead scavenging agents. If your in an aircraft that is a bit inclined to foul on the ground then choose 900-1000 RPM
Do all your checks bar the engine runup then taxi off, do the runup bit on the run and quickly ish, you need very little head in the cockpit for a mag check and prop cycle/feather check. Particularly with a bit of practise, if the taxi route is going to be along gravel do this brief runup while taxiing into wind if you can.
Grass is often better to run up over than asphalt as it has a great ability to impeed the votices that occour under the prop in addition to also impeeding the movement of gravel/stones that lie within it.
Your SOP's have the final word though.
Regards
M
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Mic,
Pretty much what I did last time. Was just a bit hairy doing it assy. Nice long taxiway though so it turned out ok. Have been told to do checks at the hold point before but figured the jet behind me wouldnt have been to happy about that.
AM
Pretty much what I did last time. Was just a bit hairy doing it assy. Nice long taxiway though so it turned out ok. Have been told to do checks at the hold point before but figured the jet behind me wouldnt have been to happy about that.
AM
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: desert somewhere
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the best interests of your propeller….
When operating on a gravel/loose surface always try to keep moving with minimum power - ESPECIALLY with a tailwind. Try to make all turns into wind - again using minimum power. Try to avoid stationary runups - ESPECIALLY with a tailwind. Try to maneuver your aircraft so that you will be starting into wind.
A while ago I observed a light twin turn to line up through a tailwind on a gravel runway. The whole aircraft literally disappeared in a cloud of dust as the wind came through the rear quadrant. A little bit of situational awareness goes a LONG way with regard to prop care.
IMO it is good airmanship to employ these techniques on any runway, sealed or un-sealed. You might get away without giving much thought to it, but it doesn’t look very professional and I wouldn’t want to be the poor bloke who has to pay for the prop overhauls!
When operating on a gravel/loose surface always try to keep moving with minimum power - ESPECIALLY with a tailwind. Try to make all turns into wind - again using minimum power. Try to avoid stationary runups - ESPECIALLY with a tailwind. Try to maneuver your aircraft so that you will be starting into wind.
A while ago I observed a light twin turn to line up through a tailwind on a gravel runway. The whole aircraft literally disappeared in a cloud of dust as the wind came through the rear quadrant. A little bit of situational awareness goes a LONG way with regard to prop care.
IMO it is good airmanship to employ these techniques on any runway, sealed or un-sealed. You might get away without giving much thought to it, but it doesn’t look very professional and I wouldn’t want to be the poor bloke who has to pay for the prop overhauls!