A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What is a "short field" for a PA28-181



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old November 19th 04, 06:35 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:lmfnd.106367$bk1.76106@fed1read05...

I won't argue with your POH! Does it give the speeds on both takeoffs?

Mike
MU-2


1.2 Vs for both conditions, premature raising of the nose or raising it to
an excessive angle will result in a delayed takeoff. Normal takeoffs are
with 10degree flap settings. At MAX GW, accelerate to 65-70mph, slight
back pressure to let the airplane fly itself off the ground. Accelerate to
normal climb. Enroute climb speed is 115mph, gets the nose down for
visibility and air cooling into the engine and better forward speed.

Short Field no obstacle, 25degree flap settings and lift off at the same
65-70mph at MAX GW. The text does state that with no obstacle, accelerate
to best rate (Vy) 105mph


This doesn't make sense to me. How can the plane take off shorter if the
rotation is made at the same speed and the plane accelerates slower (with
the flaps down.)

Short Field With an obstacle, 25 degree flap, lift off at lowest possible
airspeed and accelerate in ground effect to 95mph, (Vx), climb at 95mph
until the obstacle is cleared, then accelerate to 105mph (Vy)


This sounds more like what I would expect. The question I now have is
whether the distance figures you gave earlier are for the "short field with
obstacle" or without the obstacle. Also the speeds I am interested in are
the speeds at the 50' obstacle.

The basic theory that I am espousing (supported by several POHs) is that a
certain amount of energy is added to the airplane between being stationary
on the ground and being 50' higher and moving at some speed. Since flaps do
nothing except increase the drag on the ground roll and have a lower l/d,
less energy is availible to accelerate and climb with the flaps down. This
is only valid if the speeds at the 50 obstacle are equal.

Mike
MU-2

I should add that this is from the 1973 PA-32-300, fixed gear, fat wings.

BT.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dover short pilots since vaccine order Roman Bystrianyk Naval Aviation 0 December 29th 04 12:47 AM
Alternator field cycling & alternator damage Nathan Young Owning 7 November 14th 04 09:02 PM
Judge halts work on Navy landing field in eastern N.C. Otis Willie Naval Aviation 1 April 21st 04 12:04 PM
Generators, redundancy, and old stories Michael Owning 2 March 3rd 04 06:25 PM
fzzzzt, popped alternator breaker C-172M Mike Z. Owning 8 November 7th 03 02:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.