Full Flap Take-Off in PA28 - Is it safe?
David Garrington
I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses full flap for
very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt and climb at 80Kt.
This sounded very interesting as there are a number of short fields in Scotland...!
In particular I fly a PA28-161 (Warrior) and the ability to leave the runway (usually
grass) in a shorter distance and to gain greater height sooner could be useful. Especially
if it can be used to increase safety margins.
Having tried this technique once from a long hard runway it appears to work well. Rotation
was at about 55Kt accelerating to 60Kt before climbing. Somewhat less than normal runway
was required and the aircraft seemed to climb quickly to 200ft. where I remove flaps
slowly.
I was quite suprised how well it worked as a full flap go-around in a C-172 was not
impressive..!
Have any other pilots tried this technique and what are the pitfalls. In particular if any
Instructors have any comments that would be particularly useful.
Thanks,
David
Octavius
I would follow the instructions in the POH for short field takeups. Pipe has
done much research with real test pilots towards finding the best performance.
If the POH does not say to use full flaps for a short field takeoff then it is
most likely that it
o does not improves short field performance
o is dangerous.
The latter would certainly be the case in a C-172.
John - N8086N
------------------------------------------------
The US Senate (The finest bunch of men money can
rent) passed the "American Competitiveness Act"
[S. 1723]. Once again, money wins out over
national interests.
YOUR JOB IS AT STAKE! Write your congressman to
oppose the "American Competitiveness Act" when
it comes to the House.
------------------------------------------------
EMail Address:
|m.i.a.n.o @ |
|c.o.l.o.s.s.e.u.m.b.u.i.l.d.e.r.s.|
|c.o.m.|
Brian
David Garrington wrote:
> I was quite suprised how well it worked as a full flap go-around in a C-172 was not
> impressive..!
Which is probably why some 172's call for immediate 20 degree flaps upon
go-around.
--Brian
William W. Plummer
Check your POH. I think it says 2 notchs of flaps for the max performance
take off. The third notch adds more drag than lift so it works against you.
That's why you use full flaps on short final -- you're trying to get
own! --Bill
>I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
full flap for
>very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt and
climb at 80Kt.
>
>This sounded very interesting as there are a number of short fields in
Scotland...!
>
>In particular I fly a PA28-161 (Warrior) and the ability to leave the
runway (usually
>grass) in a shorter distance and to gain greater height sooner could be
useful. Especially
>if it can be used to increase safety margins.
>
>Having tried this technique once from a long hard runway it appears to work
well. Rotation
>was at about 55Kt accelerating to 60Kt before climbing. Somewhat less than
normal runway
>was required and the aircraft seemed to climb quickly to 200ft. where I
remove flaps
>slowly.
>
>I was quite suprised how well it worked as a full flap go-around in a C-172
was not
>impressive..!
>
>Have any other pilots tried this technique and what are the pitfalls. In
particular if any
>Instructors have any comments that would be particularly useful.
>
>Thanks,
>
>David
THoeks1567
Did my primary training in a Warrior and did lots of full flap TO's especially
from to grass fields here in southern lower Michigan. Never tried it with an
Archer, tho'. Since have switched to a STOL Maule.
Rod Madsen
As a former flight instructor using mostly PA-28s, I can say that the preferred flap setting
for best short field performance is 2 notches. Three notches produces more extra drag than
lift and climb performance sufers.
rod madsen
mary-anne & tom
I think the POH suggests two notches flaps for short field/soft field
takeoff. The last notch of flaps increases drag a lot more than it
increases lift. Taking off with full flaps doesn't strike me as a good
idea.
I presume that after takeoff you fly at best angle of climb and then
transition to best rate of climb (80 kts I believe) after clearing the
obstacles at the end of the runway? I also presume that you retract the
flaps once having cleared your obstacle?
Just how short is your short runway? An Archer gets up and goes without a
lot of runway without resorting to such, shall we say, unconventional
methods as full flaps. If your takeoff distance is that marginal try
something more conventional like minimum fuel/weight. Or trade in the
Archer for a Super Cub (smile). I hope you are carefully calculating
takeoff performance before each departure so you don't wind up in the trees
(or whatever is at the end of your aerodrome).
Regards,
Tom
David Garrington wrote in message <359a6a6a...@news.ftech.net>...
>I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
full flap for
>very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt and
climb at 80Kt.
>This sounded very interesting as there are a number of short fields in
Scotland...!
dj...@my-dejanews.com
Yes, follow the POH. Extra flap may get you off the ground quicker but climb
will be worse.
The Aviat Husky uses full flap for short field take-offs and its got the power
to climb away steeply with the extra drag.
Regards Dave Pilkington
> Check your POH. I think it says 2 notchs of flaps for the max performance
> take off. The third notch adds more drag than lift so it works against you.
> That's why you use full flaps on short final -- you're trying to get
> own! --Bill
>
> >I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
> full flap for
> >very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt and
> climb at 80Kt.
> >
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Roger Halstead
--
Roger Halstead K8RI and EAA Chapter 1093 Historian
N833R World's oldest Debonair? S# CD-2
http://members.tm.net/rdhalste
David Garrington wrote in message <359a6a6a...@news.ftech.net>...
>I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
full flap for
>very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt and
climb at 80Kt.
>
It's been a while since I flew a Cherokee 180 which is an earlier version of
the 181, but as I recall the book (POH) calls of 2 notches of flaps for a
short filed take off, not three.
>This sounded very interesting as there are a number of short fields in
Scotland...!
>
>In particular I fly a PA28-161 (Warrior) and the ability to leave the
runway (usually
>grass) in a shorter distance and to gain greater height sooner could be
useful. Especially
>if it can be used to increase safety margins.
The 161 will be a fair amount less spritely on shortfield takeoffs compared
to the 180, or 181.
I've done both in both and the 161 took a *bunch* more runway.
>
>Having tried this technique once from a long hard runway it appears to work
well. Rotation
>was at about 55Kt accelerating to 60Kt before climbing. Somewhat less than
normal runway
>was required and the aircraft seemed to climb quickly to 200ft. where I
remove flaps
>slowly.
Practice with two notches (If that's what the POH recomends) and work up to
your best performance.
Then if you really *have* to compare do the same with full flaps. I think
you;ll find that the two notches will outperform the full position by a
substantial margine on shortfield takeoffs. remember that the 180-182 has
another 20 HP to help with climb compared to the 160/161
>
>I was quite suprised how well it worked as a full flap go-around in a C-172
was not
>impressive..!
The 180/181 climb much better than a 172 and have a greater margine for
power and climb.
>
>Have any other pilots tried this technique and what are the pitfalls. In
particular if any
>Instructors have any comments that would be particularly useful.
IMHO the biggest danger would be the extra drag slowing the acelleration and
the possibility of having the lever slip when removing the flaps. Take the
flaps out too soon and it develops a really big sink rate.
The Cherokee/Archer/Warriors are about the most docile handeling
conventional aircraft you'll find. So much so, that at times pilots are
tempted to take them where they should not go. Fly by the POH, particularly
when it comes to situations that are close to the limits of the aircraft
which are usually better than the pilots limits.
Roger
>
>Thanks,
>
>David
Gene Hagan
I have practiced full flap take off in both PA28-140 and PA28-180R and had
no adverse encounters.What I noticed most was that the ground effect on
grass fields seemed to last longer or to a higher footage off the ground.
Check your POH to make sure that you do not exceed any maximums on your
make or model. I am not trying to say it is ok to use full flaps on take
off but it did seem to use less runway than 1or 2 notches of flaps when at
lighter weights. When at max. weight or at higher density altitudes 1or 2
notches seemed to work better.
David Garrington <da...@lochaber.ftech.co.uk> wrote in article
<359a6a6a...@news.ftech.net>...
> I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
full flap for
> very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation at 55-60Kt
and climb at 80Kt.
>
> This sounded very interesting as there are a number of short fields in
Scotland...!
>
> In particular I fly a PA28-161 (Warrior) and the ability to leave the
runway (usually
> grass) in a shorter distance and to gain greater height sooner could be
useful. Especially
> if it can be used to increase safety margins.
>
> Having tried this technique once from a long hard runway it appears to
work well. Rotation
> was at about 55Kt accelerating to 60Kt before climbing. Somewhat less
than normal runway
> was required and the aircraft seemed to climb quickly to 200ft. where I
remove flaps
> slowly.
>
> I was quite suprised how well it worked as a full flap go-around in a
C-172 was not
> impressive..!
>
> Have any other pilots tried this technique and what are the pitfalls. In
particular if any
> Instructors have any comments that would be particularly useful.
>
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
Julian Scarfe
David Garrington wrote:
>
> I was discussing short field take-off with another pilot who said he uses
> full flap for very short fields when flying a PA28-181 (Archer). Rotation
> at 55-60Kt and climb at 80Kt.
> In particular I fly a PA28-161 (Warrior) and the ability to leave the runway
> (usually grass) in a shorter distance and to gain greater height sooner
> could be useful. Especially if it can be used to increase safety margins.
Increasing flap does two things:
1) it increases the maximum lift coefficient a little, and
2) it increases the drag a little at all lift coefficients.
1 means that you can generate the lift you need to oppose the weight of the
aeroplane at a lower airspeed, so you can get airborne at a lower speed and
therefore in a shorter distance. However, I'd be very surprised if the
difference is more than 2 knots between an adequate rotation speed (stall + a
margin) for full flap and for standard short field flap (2 notches?). So
unless you're going to control your rotation speed to that precision, you
probably don't gain much in terms of take-off roll. The very fact that you
indicate a range (55 to 60 knots) for rotation suggests that you don't.
However, once the aircraft is airborne at the lower airspeed, the fun starts.
Because of 2, you now have an aircraft with more drag than you would have with
less flap, sitting in ground effect. It therefore has less excess power with
which to climb away, and your rate of climb will therefore be reduced,
possibly to the point at which your aeroplane won't climb out of ground effect
at all.
So in summary, if rotation speed is carefully controlled, you may be able to
reduce the distance for which the wheels are on the ground by a few yards, but
your rate of climb takes a beating. I suppose if you were taking off from a
short airstrip ending in a marsh with no obstacles on the climbout, you might
get an advantage. But for normal short-field operations, you probably do
yourself more harm than good. Perhaps there are some aircraft designed to
take off with full flap extended, but Piper have done the tests on the PA28
and are likely to have found the optimum configuration.
[I'd also suggest that you take a long hard look at your aircraft's insurance
policy to see what it says about adhering to manufacturer's recommendations.
Some are quite strict, particularly with respect to take-off and landing
sites.]
--
Julian Scarfe
dj...@my-dejanews.com
What I noticed most was that the ground effect on
> grass fields seemed to last longer or to a higher footage off the ground.
Hmmm, must be grass effect, not ground effect which does that.
I have seen people flying on grass effect alone.
75374...@compuserve.com
You might try the following technique, which does not bend the POH rules
quite so badly:
Start takeoff roll with no flaps, and extend them the conventional two
notches just before reaching rotation speed.
This causes the plane to accelerate faster because of lack of drag from the
flaps and it will practically "pop" off the ground when the flaps are
extended.
I recognize this technique is not without risk (looking down to find flap
handle during takeoff roll, possibly mis-setting them, etc.) but under
certain circumstances might be worth a try.
Manual flaps make you feel less like a 747 captain, but do allow you to
extend and retract them quickly if need be, which can come in handy.
-Larry Proulx
David Garrington
On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 16:30:30 GMT, da...@lochaber.ftech.co.uk (David Garrington) wrote:
Many thanks for the various comments regarding 'Full Flap Take-Off in PA28'
It is interesting to note the difference between the C-172 & PA28.
In the handbooks the C-172 only uses 10deg flap at most and the PA28-161 25deg.
The only time I did a go around in a 172 it was very obvious from the handling that you
need to remove much of the flap soon as there is lots of drag. The PA28 on the other hand
does not seem to have the same drag and in fact tends to float if airspeed not watched
carefully on landing.
When I first flew the PA28 I mentioned to the instructor about using 10 deg flap on a
PA28 and he jumped right in and said 'it's not approved' (I suppose it isn't disapproved
either?). For a while I accepted this but some time later another instructor suggested
always using 10 deg flap on the PA28 as it was kinder to the undercarriage, Especially on
rougher surfaces. So now we have two equally qualified pilots with different ideas. There
is even the other idea I've heard of using less flap to start then add a notch once up to
speed. Now there's something to get your teeth into but not me...!
My first impression of the take-off with full flap was that the aircraft climbed well and
loss of ground effect no problem. I have not done any serious comparisons of climb
performance or take-off distance though the impression was that the aircraft was off the
ground in less than half of a 700m runway (less than 2Kt headwind) and the climb was equal
or better than normal. At the time I was more interested in airspeed to ensure it was well
above stall.
The comment about being accurate with airspeed to within 2Kt is perhaps more relevant and
getting the aircraft off the ground quickly as per the POH is probably the answer.i.e.
technique rather than anything else.
Regarding length of runways used: The shortest I have so far used is 560m asphalt but the
Orkneys have some very interesting lengths like 260 to 390m. Ok it's usually windy so
factoring will help but I am trying to find the safest length I can use with an aircraft
of this vintage and still carry fuel and passengers. I theory the PA28 ground roll is
around 300m and distance to 50' is 450m without any safety factors.
Thanks again for the comments, I'll keep watching the thread and practicing my short field
technique at every opportunity.
Meanwhile blue skies and soft landings to those who replied.
Regards, David
My E-mail: da...@lochaber.ftech.co.uk
jdb...@imap3.asu.edu
This is the same technique used by bush pilots in Alaska to get out of
those incredably short strips ~500 feet and less
75374...@compuserve.com
wrote:
: You might try the following technique, which does not bend the POH rules
Jaap Berkhout
In article <6nai7j$fhp$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dj...@my-dejanews.com writes:
>From: dj...@my-dejanews.com
>Subject: Re: Full Flap Take-Off in PA28 - Is it safe?
>Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:29:56 GMT
>What I noticed most was that the ground effect on
>> grass fields seemed to last longer or to a higher footage off the ground.
>Hmmm, must be grass effect, not ground effect which does that.
The ground effect above grass is (theoretically) more pronounced than above
concrete runways because of the higher friction on the air/ground interface.
Jaap Berkhout
Informatiseringscentrum, University of Amsterdam
berk...@ic.uva.nl
dj...@my-dejanews.com
Sorry, you'll have to explain this one to me - I thought that ground effect
was the reflection plane's effect on the induced velocities due to the bound
and trailing vortices.
In article <berkhout....@cutthis.ic.uva.nl>,
Julian Scarfe
Hilton Goldstein wrote:
> Actually, increasing flaps does a *whole host* of things, some subtle,
> others not so.
I agree with that, but like you I think the most relevant ones here are the
lift and drag coefficient changes that we agree on.
> I'll conclude with an interesting question: Why/how is more lift generated
> when we stall the wing more? That's what flaps do (more than a few
> degrees) - they stall parts of the wing.
News to me. References/evidence? All the pictures and data I've seen show an
effective increase in camber on flap extension, so obviously the lift
coefficient goes up.
--
Julian Scarfe
Frank A Palmer
As an old Bush Pilot in Australia, careful and judicial use of takeoff flap
has saved my life several times on short strips. If you ever think you have
insufficient length, try this technique: position the aircraft 25 to 50
yards away from the takeoff point (either upwind or off to one side), and
with NO flap apply full power. Turn onto the threshold of the strip (a
gently curving 90 or 180 degree ground turn). At the threshold you will now
have the advantage of a good few knots up in airspeed (better than starting
from Zero IAS!). Just before you rotate, put on 10 to 20 deg of flap (a
copilot doing this allows you to keep yours eyes where they should be) and
you will lift off beautifully. Then get the wheels up fast. At height
CAREFULLY milk off the flaps at your ease. This technique does several
things: 1. it enables you to enter the strip AT SPEED, which shortens your
run, 2. it enables the aircraft to quicly accelerate without flap drag, and
3. it enables you to stall the plane off the ground fairly safely, because
any stall will begin where the angle of attack is greatest, ie in the flap
area, leaving the wingtips flying nicely, so you maintain useful aileron
control. Careful with that full-power ground turn, though; it's hard to do
it safely, particularly in dust or mud.
Many city pilots simply have never learned to fly their aircraft off the
ground at its most effective climb speed and angle. Most people on a short
airstrip will try to fly off either too soon (and stall into the ground!)
or too fast (and not make it over the trees). A few knots over your plane's
best climb angle speed makes a very big difference here.
It's a good idea to leave your GPS at home, hop in your plane and go and
spend a day on a small country airstrip expanding your knowledge of the
sounds and the feel of your aircraft at the outer limits of its envelope.
Until you have experienced what your plane will really do for you, you run
the risk of getting into trouble one dark and stormy night.
Lastly, something few of us do publicly; I acknowledge and thank my
instructor of all those years ago for the solid, sensible training he gave
me. He was Ron Fisher, ex-Air Force pilot and ex-Qantas pilot. I don't know
if you are still around, Ron, but I thank you for enabling me and many
others to fly for many years without injury. Please note that I didn't say
accident! I am lucky because Ron was teaching student pilots at the END of
his professional flying career, so I got all the interesting tips and
stories.
Happy landings to you all,
Frank Palmer
>David Garrington <da...@lochaber.ftech.co.uk> wrote in article
<359b4bfc...@news.ftech.net>...
> On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 16:30:30 GMT, da...@lochaber.ftech.co.uk (David
Garrington) wrote:
>
> Many thanks for the various comments regarding 'Full Flap Take-Off in
PA28'
John Lowry
Dear Frank and All:
Your advice is a more detailed version of an encapsulated version I
wrote some years ago:
For a short take off, sneak through the air...and then spring into it.
John.
John T. Lowry, PhD
Flight Physics; Box 20919; Billings MT 59104
Voice: 406-248-2606; E-mail: jlo...@mcn.net
Frank A Palmer wrote in message <01bda53b$7e28d2a0$460c8aca@default>...
Jim Wolper
Frank A Palmer wrote:
> As an old Bush Pilot in Australia, careful and judicial use of takeoff flap
> has saved my life several times on short strips. [snip]
> Many city pilots simply have never learned to fly their aircraft off the
> ground at its most effective climb speed and angle.
We teach this to all private pilots in the USA.
> It's a good idea to leave your GPS at home, hop in your plane and go and
> spend a day on a small country airstrip expanding your knowledge of the
> sounds and the feel of your aircraft at the outer limits of its envelope.
> Until you have experienced what your plane will really do for you, you run
> the risk of getting into trouble one dark and stormy night.
>
Please, please, please, do this with a competent flight instructor! But it
issomething that more pilots should do.
Jim Wolper ATP/PhD/CFI
sha...@nospam.com
>Frank A Palmer wrote:
>> Many city pilots simply have never learned to fly their aircraft off the
>> ground at its most effective climb speed and angle.
Jim Wolper writes:
>We teach this to all private pilots in the USA.
Frank Palmer:
>>Lastly, something few of us do publicly; I acknowledge and thank my
>>instructor of all those years ago for the solid, sensible training he gave
>>me.
I can vouch for the fact that Jim knows what he's talking about, because
he tried to teach me how to fly! (Whether he actually succeeded, I'll
leave that for him to say.)
I still remember all the things Jim said: fly by attitude, keep your head
outside the cockpit, don't chase the needles.
(I don't think I'll actually truly learn to fly till I teach someone else
to.)
So here's that public acknowledgement: thanks, Jim!
Shamim Mohamed
spm (at) drones. com
Chris Gattman
> Yes, follow the POH. Extra flap may get you off the ground quicker but climb
> will be worse.
So what about using full flaps to get off the ground into ground effect, then
bring the flaps up to the second notch to climb out?
Haven't tried it myself. Maybe I'll try it out next week.
-Chris
Chris Gattman
> Hmmm, must be grass effect, not ground effect which does that.
>
> I have seen people flying on grass effect alone.
Circling Jefferson Airplane concerts, no doubt! :>
dj...@my-dejanews.com
Before you try it have a think about what will happen when you raise the
flaps, get ready for the sink.
j...@ix.netcom.com
>dj...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> Yes, follow the POH. Extra flap may get you off the ground quicker but climb
>> will be worse.
>So what about using full flaps to get off the ground into ground effect, then
>bring the flaps up to the second notch to climb out?
>Haven't tried it myself. Maybe I'll try it out next week.
I know that Pipers have more lift and less drag than Cessnas, but I still very
much doubt full flaps is going to be an advantage
(on a Cessna it absolutely most definitely is NOT, either at 30 or 40. 10
degrees can be an advantage, and 20 is not recommended)
If I were you, I'd try it 10 degrees on the first take-off, and work your way up
on succeeding take-offs. I suspect 20 may be fine on a Piper, but maybe someone
else out there knows for sure.
-john r.
Charles K. Scott
j...@ix.netcom.com writes:
> I know that Pipers have more lift and less drag than Cessnas
What Pipers and what Cessnas are being compared? Doesn't lift create
drag? So wouldn't it be difficult for an airplane that makes more lift
to also be less draggy? All things being relatively equalized, as far
as that's possible.
Corky Scott
Jim Sokoloff
> I know that Pipers have more lift and less drag than Cessnas, but I
> still very much doubt full flaps is going to be an advantage
>
> (on a Cessna it absolutely most definitely is NOT, either at 30 or 40. 10
> degrees can be an advantage, and 20 is not recommended)
Negative; the 182 (Skylane) uses 20 degrees of flaps for all
max-performance takeoffs.
---Jim
j...@ix.netcom.com
>j...@ix.netcom.com writes:
Yep, you're right I did generalize a bit there. I've only flown a 182 a couple
times, I was automatically thinking of the 152s and 172s..
For that matter, a 310 or Citation probably has much different characteristics
as well, and those are Cessnas too!
Above all, Know Thy Airplane. :-)
j...@ix.netcom.com
>In article <6omim3$br2$1...@news-2.news.gte.net>
>j...@ix.netcom.com writes:
>> I know that Pipers have more lift and less drag than Cessnas
>What Pipers and what Cessnas are being compared? Doesn't lift create
>drag? So wouldn't it be difficult for an airplane that makes more lift
>to also be less draggy? All things being relatively equalized, as far
>as that's possible.
I probably should have worded it differently, maybe I should have gone home long
before! (late night at the office).. what I meant was that 20 degrees flaps
gives a better L:D in a Piper Cherokee than it does in a Cessna 150, 152 or 172
(and this is in my limited experience with Piper Cherokee, so I should really
defer this conversation to someone with more experience in both)
Still, it brings up some interesting questions. I did word it poorly, and I was
about to agree with you, but then I started thinking it _may_ be correct.. more
lift will also create more induced drag, but I think the Cessna's 'barn door'
flaps create more parasitic drag as well. Only thing is, I don't know if the
Piper flaps actually create more lift... they seem to. but maybe that's also
the ground effect of a lower wing.
I still find it hard to believe that a full-flap take-off in any small Piper
(re-reading it, I see the Archer was the specific example) is going to be
advantageous. Maybe for soft-field into ground effect, than retract one notch -
but for short-field? I have not seen anyone yet that can verify it works.
Failing that, I'd follow the POH. If several people say, 'Yah, sure, I do it
all the time' I would still be wary and experiment on a nice long runway first,
where it poses no significant risk.
-john r.
>Corky Scott
Patrick W. P. Dirks
wrote:
> dj...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > Yes, follow the POH. Extra flap may get you off the ground quicker but climb
> > will be worse.
>
> So what about using full flaps to get off the ground into ground effect, then
> bring the flaps up to the second notch to climb out?
>
> Haven't tried it myself. Maybe I'll try it out next week.
Hey - there's no need to become a test pilot; it's all spelled out for you
in the POH. Short field takeoffs are with 25 degrees of flaps (second
notch) as are soft-field takeoffs using the technique you describe: get
off the ground into ground effect with 25 degrees of flaps, then
accelerate in ground effect and climb away.
On the Cherokees I've flown the last notch of flaps (40 degrees) adds MUCH
more drag than lift. Great for slow approaches but I'm not surprised the
manufacturer-specified techniques for maximum takeoff performance only
include 25 degrees of flaps.
Don't try to improvise when maximum performance counts!
Blue Skies,
-Pat Dirks.
--
Patrick W. Penzias Dirks __!__ Phone: (408) 974-2057
Apple Computer, Inc. _______(*)_______ Fax: (408) 974-0362
1 Infinite Loop, MS 302-4K ! ! ! URL: www.apple.com
Cupertino, CA 95014 Email: p...@apple.com
PGP Key fingerprint = DE E8 3D 0B 34 C4 B5 90 4C C8 54 B3 64 73 3A 17
NOTE: I don't speak for Apple; my postings are my personal opnions.
Nothing I write should be mistaken for Apple's opinion as a
corporation.
Dale
__snip__
>
> (on a Cessna it absolutely most definitely is NOT, either at 30 or 40. 10
> degrees can be an advantage, and 20 is not recommended)
>
__snip__
Depends on the Cessna. 182's (at least the older straight-tailed ones),
180's, 185's and 206's all recommend 20 degrees for short/soft field
take-offs.
--
Dale L. Falk
Cessna 182A
N5912B
Chris Gattman
> I know that Pipers have more lift and less drag than Cessnas, but I still very
> much doubt full flaps is going to be an advantage [snip[
>
> If I were you, I'd try it 10 degrees on the first take-off, and work your way up
> on succeeding take-offs. I suspect 20 may be fine on a Piper, but maybe someone
> else out there knows for sure.
According to the ASA pilot's guide for the PA-28, 25 degrees of flap is the
"common" practice for short-field takeoff. Guess they agree with everybody here.
Later, it says the following:
"The go-around does not pose any particular problems, even with full flaps
extended... Although the aircraft will climb with full flaps extended, it is common
practice to raise flaps to the second stage (25 deg) as part of the immediate
go-around actions."
*shrug* I guess that means it's safe provided you have enough runway left just in
case. It doesn't sound like it poses an advantage.
-Chris
Newps
my 182. I can get the plane into the air in 500-700 feet off a grass
strip, no wind, 6000 density altitude, 500 under gross. Down around
1000 density altitude, same weight the performance is riveting with 20
flaps. The stall horn is blaring in the soft field takeoff, but push
the nose over once airborne, accelerate to 70+, and start raising
flaps. Or just climbout at 60-65mph if there is an obstacle.
Roger Halstead
--
Roger Halstead K8RI and EAA Chapter 1093 Historian
N833R World's oldest Debonair? S# CD-2
http://members.tm.net/rdhalste
j...@ix.netcom.com wrote in message <6omim3$br2$1...@news-2.news.gte.net>...
>Chris Gattman <ga...@europa.com> wrote:
>
>>dj...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>>> Yes, follow the POH. Extra flap may get you off the ground quicker but
climb
>>> will be worse.
<anip>
And it may pop you right up on the nose wheel in a good imitation of a
wheelbarow too. It's real easy to get a Cherokee up and running on the nose
gear with the mains in the air.
Don't forget as this is not a recomended procedure you are becomming a test
pilot and should it come up on its nose, and ding a prop or nose gear, some
one is going to have to explain to the insurrance company.
Roger
>
>-john r.
>
>
Shaun Triner
Australia if my ISP is to be believed), however, I can tell you that in the
POH for an Archer in Australia, a short field take-off is done with nil
flap. Soft field is done with second stage.
Shaun.
<snip>
Roy Smith
> in the POH for an Archer in Australia, a short field take-off is done
> with nil flap. Soft field is done with second stage.
Does Piper really publish different POHs for different countries?
It's very strange that they would make different flap recommendations in
Australia and the US. Although the various government aviation agencies
may not like it, aerodynamics is governed by the laws of physics, which
are the same all over.
--
Roy Smith <r...@popmail.med.nyu.edu>
New York University School of Medicine
Jim Wolper
>
>
> It's very strange that they would make different flap recommendations in
> Australia and the US. Although the various government aviation agencies
> may not like it, aerodynamics is governed by the laws of physics, which
> are the same all over.
>
No! In Australia they're upside down relative to the US! :-)
a. m. boardman
>"Shaun Triner" <s...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>> in the POH for an Archer in Australia, a short field take-off is done
>> with nil flap. Soft field is done with second stage.
>
>Does Piper really publish different POHs for different countries?
As far as I remember, every fixed-gear PA28 POH that I have specifies no
flaps for short hard fields. I'd think you'd accelerate better without
all that flap hanging out, which is probably the point. The flaps only
come out for soft/obstructed fields...
andrew
TMetzinger
writes:
yeah, don't their gyros precess in the other direction :-)?
Timothy Metzinger
Private Pilot - ASEL
DOD # 1854 '82 Virago 750 - "Siobhan"
TB-9s, TB-10s, C172Rs at FDK (No Names)
PGP Public Key Available on Keyservers
Roy Smith
> As far as I remember, every fixed-gear PA28 POH that I have specifies no
> flaps for short hard fields. I'd think you'd accelerate better without
> all that flap hanging out, which is probably the point.
I'm looking at my Archer-II PA28-181 POH. Gives performance tables for
flaps up and flaps 25 takeoff on a paved runway. Ground roll distances
are shorter for the 25. The normal procedures text and checklists
indicate flaps 25 for either short of soft takeoffs.
Roy Smith
> No! In Australia they're upside down relative to the US! :-)
Then don't they have to placard their planes, "Non-inverted flight prohibited"?
dj...@my-dejanews.com
in many ways. eg factors on take-off and landing distances; climb gradient
limitations after take-off.
I haven't seen this Archer manual, I must have a look next weekend at YMMB.
I'm surprised that there's even a comment about soft field take-offs. I like
to stay at home when the strip is soft.
American compasses behave strangely down here too.
In article <199807222148...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
tmetz...@aol.com (TMetzinger) wrote:
> In article <35B61798...@cwis.isu.edu>, Jim Wolper
<wolp...@cwis.isu.edu>
> writes:
>
> >> It's very strange that they would make different flap recommendations in
> >> Australia and the US. Although the various government aviation agencies
> >> may not like it, aerodynamics is governed by the laws of physics, which
> >> are the same all over.
> >>
> >
> >No! In Australia they're upside down relative to the US! :-)
> >
> >
> >
>
> yeah, don't their gyros precess in the other direction :-)?
> Timothy Metzinger
> Private Pilot - ASEL
> DOD # 1854 '82 Virago 750 - "Siobhan"
> TB-9s, TB-10s, C172Rs at FDK (No Names)
> PGP Public Key Available on Keyservers
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----