PA-28 short field take off flap setting
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly, I am appalled by the apparent total disregard for good airmanship and the lack of interest in the operating manual.
The final stage of flap is NOT for ANY type of take-off - not one! It is there for the final stage of landing only. Playing silly buggers with it for a take-off is iffy at best (soft ground or mud) and courting trouble at worst. Not for nothing do they call the P-28 a brick built s-house!
The assumed fact that someone has been practising this technique without mishap does NOT mean it cannot go wrong. Just accept the fact that it can and will.
In all my years of flying I have never heard of anything so stupid.
NEVER try something an aircraft was not designed to do - the TP did it first and if he didn't write it up there is a reason.
The final stage of flap is NOT for ANY type of take-off - not one! It is there for the final stage of landing only. Playing silly buggers with it for a take-off is iffy at best (soft ground or mud) and courting trouble at worst. Not for nothing do they call the P-28 a brick built s-house!
The assumed fact that someone has been practising this technique without mishap does NOT mean it cannot go wrong. Just accept the fact that it can and will.
In all my years of flying I have never heard of anything so stupid.
NEVER try something an aircraft was not designed to do - the TP did it first and if he didn't write it up there is a reason.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the circuit we had to make it tight and fast due to traffic. On final he attempted (as passenger!!! I was PIC, it wasn't a dual instruction flight) to pull on the flaps while I was decelerating, before the airspeed went into the white arc (96 KIAS). Well before in fact. I stopped him and ensued a brief argument that it was "OK as you're only 5 knots above". Well, no it was not OK on several grounds: 1) I was PIC, not he; 2) it is my aircraft, not his, and I operate my aircraft within published limitations only and 3) he was a bloody fool.
Moderator
Absolute statements
One of the things which I learned about life, and aviation in particular, is that generally, absolute statements are not helpful. Generalisations are better.
Throughout this thread, I have been trying to generally say that pilots, particularly those flying PA 28's, are opening themselves up for a flight of unhappiness if they perform takeoffs with greater than the specified flap setting, or at rotation speeds less than those recommended in the flight manual. As I have said, I've been there, and it was not good.
No one here should pretend that they don't know what a proper "normal" takeoff technique would be for the aircraft type they fly. Pilots should definately avoid techniques whic are outside "normal", without training or mentoring. As I have said here, that training or mentoring is not just reading something written here by a pilot of unconfirmed skill and experience. Two reasons for that, you have no idea if that pilot knows what he is talking about, and if he does, can you glean what you need to know from reading only? In the case of unusual configuration takeoffs, most pilots could not. Hands on training and practice would be vital for safety.
So don't go being a test pilot, unless that's what you are employed to do.
That said, a remark like:
perhaps goes further than it needs to in denouncing approved procedures.
I made a remark here about the temporary application of full flaps (40 degrees in a Cessna 180/185) during a float takeoff. I shall presume that the author of the quoted statement disagrees with this technique. I was trained in this technique on the water, where lateral confinement makes the heading change of rolling up onto one float undesireable. I have said that the distraction of the application of flaps during a takeoff run is undesireable for new pilots, and still recommend the roll out technique. That said, the use of full flaps during takeoff is a factory recommended procedure; I quote page 16/17:
"During tests at altitudes up to 8,000 feet pressure altitude, full flap application in combination with a quick jerk aft on the wheel was more effective than employing the one float technique."
This is quoted from the "Notes on Flying Technique for Cessna 180 Airplane Equipped With EDO Model 289 Amphibious Seaplane Floats", which is an EDO publication, available from Kenmore Air EDO Floats L.L.C.
I'm sure that it would be apparent to readers here that this technique is best learned during proper training, rather than casual self experimentation. Did you ever wonder why the Cessna 180/185 aircraft never had electric flaps, where all of the other Cessna models did? Cessna did seek the opinions of their operator clients, particularly the bush operators. Electric flaps just do not move up and down fast enough!
Oh, and by the way, EDO floats are also approved on some PA 28's. I don't have the equivilent EDO publication for those aircraft.
I hope this brings into context some aspects of the discussion, while still convincing the PA 28 landplane pilots out there to fly it the way the book says, and being wary of getting "stuck" in ground effect.
Pilot DAR
Throughout this thread, I have been trying to generally say that pilots, particularly those flying PA 28's, are opening themselves up for a flight of unhappiness if they perform takeoffs with greater than the specified flap setting, or at rotation speeds less than those recommended in the flight manual. As I have said, I've been there, and it was not good.
No one here should pretend that they don't know what a proper "normal" takeoff technique would be for the aircraft type they fly. Pilots should definately avoid techniques whic are outside "normal", without training or mentoring. As I have said here, that training or mentoring is not just reading something written here by a pilot of unconfirmed skill and experience. Two reasons for that, you have no idea if that pilot knows what he is talking about, and if he does, can you glean what you need to know from reading only? In the case of unusual configuration takeoffs, most pilots could not. Hands on training and practice would be vital for safety.
So don't go being a test pilot, unless that's what you are employed to do.
That said, a remark like:
The final stage of flap is NOT for ANY type of take-off - not one! It is there for the final stage of landing only. Playing silly buggers with it for a take-off is iffy at best (soft ground or mud) and courting trouble at worst.
I made a remark here about the temporary application of full flaps (40 degrees in a Cessna 180/185) during a float takeoff. I shall presume that the author of the quoted statement disagrees with this technique. I was trained in this technique on the water, where lateral confinement makes the heading change of rolling up onto one float undesireable. I have said that the distraction of the application of flaps during a takeoff run is undesireable for new pilots, and still recommend the roll out technique. That said, the use of full flaps during takeoff is a factory recommended procedure; I quote page 16/17:
"During tests at altitudes up to 8,000 feet pressure altitude, full flap application in combination with a quick jerk aft on the wheel was more effective than employing the one float technique."
This is quoted from the "Notes on Flying Technique for Cessna 180 Airplane Equipped With EDO Model 289 Amphibious Seaplane Floats", which is an EDO publication, available from Kenmore Air EDO Floats L.L.C.
I'm sure that it would be apparent to readers here that this technique is best learned during proper training, rather than casual self experimentation. Did you ever wonder why the Cessna 180/185 aircraft never had electric flaps, where all of the other Cessna models did? Cessna did seek the opinions of their operator clients, particularly the bush operators. Electric flaps just do not move up and down fast enough!
Oh, and by the way, EDO floats are also approved on some PA 28's. I don't have the equivilent EDO publication for those aircraft.
I hope this brings into context some aspects of the discussion, while still convincing the PA 28 landplane pilots out there to fly it the way the book says, and being wary of getting "stuck" in ground effect.
Pilot DAR
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You put forward some points which deserve attention but IMHO they still do not justify the technique described on this particular aircraft.
I have flown over 100 different types in all kinds of situations, including the PA 28, and I would never employ full flap during take off.
It is inherently dangerous and can easily lead to grief.
I have flown over 100 different types in all kinds of situations, including the PA 28, and I would never employ full flap during take off.
It is inherently dangerous and can easily lead to grief.
Moderator
In the context of a PA 28, I completely agree. A full flap takeoff in a wheelplane PA 28 is completly un-necessary, and particularly prone to being dangerous. If anyone considered it to be necessary, they should be waiting for conditions to change greatly, or trucking out the plane, as previously mentioned.
Other aircraft types are due their individual consideration, but generally would employ only partial (if any) flap for takeoff....
Pilot DAR
Other aircraft types are due their individual consideration, but generally would employ only partial (if any) flap for takeoff....
Pilot DAR
