PA32 Saratoga - short field
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This triggered a memory of a past accident (with sadly fatal consequences) in circumstances not much different to what the OP is proposing.
The link is here and contains some interesting and relevant performance data.
I can think of at least two other incidents in the UK where a PA-32 has gone through the far hedge on takeoff (and that's not counting the one that went through the side hedge attempting to takeoff at night from an unlicensed, unlit & wet grass runway
).
The link is here and contains some interesting and relevant performance data.
I can think of at least two other incidents in the UK where a PA-32 has gone through the far hedge on takeoff (and that's not counting the one that went through the side hedge attempting to takeoff at night from an unlicensed, unlit & wet grass runway
).
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting, Sillert, V.I.
The link you posted was of a 200 hr pilot, on his first solo flight in a PA32 (fixed gear saratoga) coming back from Dieppe, who chose to land at an un-manned un-designated private strip in the uk (as his first port of call) and then tried to take off again from a runway with 302m useable, with a 1.6% upslope.
Quite a lot of this story seems to exist between the lines.
The PA32 that went through the hedge at Wycombe was a T-tail lance, that was overweight, possibly on an informal charter flight, and grossly miss-handled by the 200hr pilot, who attempted to rotate early, and then held it nose-high behind the drag-curve but unable to get out of ground effect, until it went through the hedge at the end of a 735m tarmac runway.
Sadly, these and a few other similar incidents seem to have a factor in common, which is less to do with the aircraft, and more to do with the profile of pilot flying it.
But I very much agree with the principle of what you're saying, which is that Saratoga's are not really short strip aircraft.
The link you posted was of a 200 hr pilot, on his first solo flight in a PA32 (fixed gear saratoga) coming back from Dieppe, who chose to land at an un-manned un-designated private strip in the uk (as his first port of call) and then tried to take off again from a runway with 302m useable, with a 1.6% upslope.
Quite a lot of this story seems to exist between the lines.
The PA32 that went through the hedge at Wycombe was a T-tail lance, that was overweight, possibly on an informal charter flight, and grossly miss-handled by the 200hr pilot, who attempted to rotate early, and then held it nose-high behind the drag-curve but unable to get out of ground effect, until it went through the hedge at the end of a 735m tarmac runway.
Sadly, these and a few other similar incidents seem to have a factor in common, which is less to do with the aircraft, and more to do with the profile of pilot flying it.
But I very much agree with the principle of what you're saying, which is that Saratoga's are not really short strip aircraft.
Sadly, these and a few other similar incidents seem to have a factor in common, which is less to do with the aircraft, and more to do with the profile of pilot flying it.
I'll also bet the 200 pilot had a significant amount of Cessna time, where raising the nose and holding it there works pretty well all the time, unfortunately this is an invitation for disaster on the PA 32 and some other aircraft.
Unless it was grossly over weight I would have thought 735 metres of sealed runway would have been an adequate take of distance.
The T tail Lance does not want to lift off as easily as the low tail model.
The T tail being up out of the prop wash needs a higher airspeed/groundspeed before it becomes effective.
The T Tail Arrow took longer to get the nose raised on the take off roll and on a grass surface this certainly increased the take off distance. The overall impact on a sealed surface wasn't anywhere near as great in my experience.
The T Tail is a double whammy for the unwary. Because it is initially less effective and they are not getting the expected response, they will pull back even further in an attempt to raise the nose, when it does become effective it is more effective than the low tail version as it has a longer lever arm.
Now with more up elevator than needed, the aircraft over rotates, and you end up in the high drag situation described above, where the pilot mushes through the hedge at the far end of the runway.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piper went for a common family look with the T-tail Tomahawk, Arrow IV and Lance two as it was fashionable amongst airliners of the time, with a theoretical speed gain of having the stabilator up in 'clean' air. Unfortunately, the speed gain for Piper was minimal and more than outweighed by some handling disadvantages.
In terms of the Wycombe Lance II accident
https://assets.publishing.service.go...RHHT_03-12.pdf
The pilot would have had enough runway, even though it was a warm day, he was at least 186lbs overweight (and it is thought that he had full tanks after fuelling, rather than 60usg) and an aft of rear c of g (which is a real no-no in a PA32) if he hadn't mis-handled the take-off.
That everyone walked away from this accident, was truly amazing!
In terms of the Wycombe Lance II accident
https://assets.publishing.service.go...RHHT_03-12.pdf
The pilot would have had enough runway, even though it was a warm day, he was at least 186lbs overweight (and it is thought that he had full tanks after fuelling, rather than 60usg) and an aft of rear c of g (which is a real no-no in a PA32) if he hadn't mis-handled the take-off.
That everyone walked away from this accident, was truly amazing!
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JS - Do you think they went on PPRUNE or some American forum where people said "yeah go for it" and didn't run the maths themselves... Before getting in trouble and not realising 1/2 or 2/3rd of the way down the runway that they won't make it and need to stop?
Well if you look at my picture in the Australian outback on a gravel strip with midday temps in the cool around 40c then it would be foolish not to do calcs.
You don't fly in to places like that on empty tanks.
Good example here of a short field take off gone wrong
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VTnW2TXOacY
You don't fly in to places like that on empty tanks.
Good example here of a short field take off gone wrong
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VTnW2TXOacY
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JS.
I think that even though the plane looks very heavy, and even considering the length of the strip, this is still pilot error. I think any pilot who was taught well would have been able to take off from that strip, with the same variables, or at least recover whilst in ground effect from earlier errors. (pitch down to fly level in ground effect, speed up then climb). I can't understand why the pilot opted to keep pulling hard on the yoke, it looks rather clear ahead, why stall it?
I think that even though the plane looks very heavy, and even considering the length of the strip, this is still pilot error. I think any pilot who was taught well would have been able to take off from that strip, with the same variables, or at least recover whilst in ground effect from earlier errors. (pitch down to fly level in ground effect, speed up then climb). I can't understand why the pilot opted to keep pulling hard on the yoke, it looks rather clear ahead, why stall it?
That's a 182 not a 172 as the video title suggests.
A 182 should have romped away under normal circumstances, unless it was down on power or grossly overloaded. What elevation was that airstrip?
A 182 should have romped away under normal circumstances, unless it was down on power or grossly overloaded. What elevation was that airstrip?
So, 500m tarmac. No worries. Stopped in 300m easy, off in about 350m.
Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.
I think I can improve these as well.
All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!
Fly safe, Sam.
Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.
I think I can improve these as well.
All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!
Fly safe, Sam.
I was sure to have posted this before but cannot find it right now, so here goes, at the risk of posting doubly:
There's a PA32, T-tailed, based at my homefield - 600 m grass. The owners take it to Spain a couple of times per year, on those occasions they fly it to a nearby field with a longer and hard runway, only there to take up the full load of fuel, people, luggage.
There's a PA32, T-tailed, based at my homefield - 600 m grass. The owners take it to Spain a couple of times per year, on those occasions they fly it to a nearby field with a longer and hard runway, only there to take up the full load of fuel, people, luggage.
I've flown all three off grass. Six 300 , Saratoga and Lance. Given a choice. My first would be the Six. Then the Saratoga. T-tail a last resort.
Getting the Saratoga off the ground tends to use a fair bit less runway than getting it back on. Maybe I need to work at it. Maybe I can't be bothered.
Getting the Saratoga off the ground tends to use a fair bit less runway than getting it back on. Maybe I need to work at it. Maybe I can't be bothered.
Take-off is broadly full throttle and hang on. Not a lot you can do to shorten the run (without 'popping flaps' and other exotic and not terribly effective tricks).
Shortening the landing roll has lots of variables that really make big differences. But yup, it's only practice that makes a difference!
Shortening the landing roll has lots of variables that really make big differences. But yup, it's only practice that makes a difference!
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, 500m tarmac. No worries. Stopped in 300m easy, off in about 350m.
Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.
I think I can improve these as well.
All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!
Fly safe, Sam.
Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.
I think I can improve these as well.
All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!
Fly safe, Sam.
