A/FD recommended takeoff and landing runways

dmspilot said:
That's not what a strawman is.

A strawman occurs when you accuse your opponent of making an argument that they didn't make. Which is exactly what you are doing.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. "...an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument."

You haven't MADE a real argument so I'm searching for what your problem is with my assertion that the special emphasis FAA gave it, actually means something.

If you're asserting that it doesn't, say why.

They could delete the entire (b) section completely and not change the meaning of the law by replacing it with...

"Performance data for aircraft required to have an AFM shall be taken from the AFM."

No need to say only takeoff and landing data must be.

"All items" covers the runway length. Otherwise why call it out specifically adding the word "must"?

dmspilot said:
I have an answer, but not interested in discussing it with you. Good night.
Click to expand...

Which is not unexpected since you're more interested in personally attacking than answering why you disagree with the posed interpretation, based on direct definitions of the words used by FAA.

Again, I didn't write them. If you're emotionally bothered by them, take it up with them.

If you disagree with how to PROVE you followed the law as written, that's fine.

I gave one way to do it. It's a very industry standard way, and takes 60 seconds, but folks are quite distressed about it I guess. I didn't say "must". FAA did. In a sentence that otherwise isn't necessary at all.

@midlifeflyer gave another way. His relies on experience and a friendly non-antagonistic inspector, and might also work fine.

I tend to think showing the inspector an actual number covers it better. In this case, the law says you should be able to answer the question.

You can also memorize the performance chart, for all I care. Lots of ways to meet the requirement.

And we've both stated nobody will probably ever ask the question who could violate someone for not doing it.

Why anyone who strives to be a better aviator would whine that they need to know these items (and more) before turning the key, is beyond me. Obviously FAA wants us to.

And they called out these items very specifically out of hundreds of things one must "familiarize" themselves with for any flight.
 
denverpilot said:
Yeah wow. Why do you keep responding with nothing to add to the discussion? Feel free.
Click to expand...

Because I am tired of responding to the same thing over and over again.

Sorry, I don't know what the word "must" means. Guess I should go back to school. Maybe I can get a Ph.D. in the meaning of the word "must". LOL.
 
The FAA is all about FAA-approved data.
§91.103 Preflight action.
Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include—

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;
Click to expand...
There is FAA-approved data available for most of the above. For the portions that don't have FAA-approved data, FAA-approved data does not exist for anyone.

(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:

(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein; and

(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable information appropriate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and temperature.
Click to expand...
Depending upon the certification of the airplane, a pilot may or may not have FAA-approved data for takeoff and landing distances. If you have FAA-approved data (an AFM is required for your airplane), use it. It you don't have FAA-approved data (an AFM is not required for your airplane) use something else. It may have to be experience, it may be non-FAA-approved data. Use what you have.

In all cases, apply common sense. "Be familiar with" the information. If the FAA-approved data in your 40-year-old airplane says you can clear 50 feet in only 2000 feet, that doesn't mean you can start your takeoff roll 2000 feet from the obstacle so you don't have to back-taxi the full runway length. Just like you don't plan your fuel to the drop based on FAA-approved winds aloft forecasts. You only need to "be familiar with" the information and plan accordingly.
 
denverpilot said:
Another attempt to lie and discredit. I haven't made up anything for you or anyone else.

Next excuse?
Click to expand...

You said I am trying to argue the meaning of the word must, that I have a problem with the regulations, that I don't want to do what the regulations tell me to do, and that I am emotionally upset by the FAA regulations. All figments of your imagination.
 
dmspilot said:
You said I am trying to argue the meaning of the word must, that I have a problem with the regulations, that I don't want to do what the regulations tell me to do, and that I am emotionally upset by the FAA regulations. All figments of your imagination.
Click to expand...

I have said no such thing. You think too highly of yourself if you took statements about an FAR and "the pilot" that personally. But giant egos are common in aviation.
 
you guys, seem to be in an endless loop

according to this right here, nobody has ever made a legal flight:
"become familiar with all available information concerning that flight"

I don't think anyone has ever been familiar with ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION

so stop arguing already
 
exncsurfer said:
you guys, seem to be in an endless loop

according to this right here, nobody has ever made a legal flight:
"become familiar with all available information concerning that flight"

I don't think anyone has ever been familiar with ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION

so stop arguing already
Click to expand...

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

I think that says it all... :D

Tim
 
If i >= 15 then goto exxit
 
tspear said:
lol, I have not seen goto in years. Brings back fond memories.
Click to expand...
My first programming class was 1979 or so and goto was still taught. I've still got a 10 statement FORTRAN book around here somewhere. Back then debugging was truly a mission. Back in the 90s students quickly learned that I could find bugs in their code faster than they could create them...okay, maybe not...but ya did have to be detail oriented on that stuff.
 
Clark1961 said:
My first programming class was 1979 or so and goto was still taught. I've still got a 10 statement FORTRAN book around here somewhere. Back then debugging was truly a mission. Back in the 90s students quickly learned that I could find bugs in their code faster than they could create them...okay, maybe not...but ya did have to be detail oriented on that stuff.
Click to expand...
In 1978 my dad bought a Northstar Horizon with a z8080 chip and 16k of ram. I started to learn how to program on that, in roughly 84 I took a college programming class on an IBM mainframe using cards while in highschool. That is where I learned assembly. Hard to belive I have been working in computers for almost 28 years. Only 20 till I can retire...

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk
 
MauleSkinner said:
True...and that was basically the OP's question as I understand it..."what experience can be applied when charts don't go that far?"

Another tool that I've found very useful over the years is the T.O.P. Computer from Sporty's:
http://www.sportys.com/pilotshop/takeoff-performance-computer.html
Since most of us don't fly exactly like the test pilots did, and our airplanes aren't new, it can be used to take those factors into account as well.
Click to expand...

I ordered one of these and got it today. Played with it for about an hour so I am very comfortable with it. I love it, seems very useful and really takes in all the factors. Have you found it to be accurate in your use? Comparing different situations to my POH performance charts it seems very good and definitely more conservative (but not so conservative that it seems way wrong).
 
CC268 said:
I ordered one of these and got it today. Played with it for about an hour so I am very comfortable with it. I love it, seems very useful and really takes in all the factors. Have you found it to be accurate in your use? Comparing different situations to my POH performance charts it seems very good and definitely more conservative (but not so conservative that it seems way wrong).
Click to expand...

I've never used the calculator but your inquiry has me wondering - have you ever checked how your takeoff and landing distances compare to what either the calculator or the original Piper performance charts indicate? The Piper charts typically will state the airplane configuration that is necessary to get the book results so you'll want to use the recommended configuration to benchmark your abilities. Benchmarking your abilities/performance in a controlled environment (such as at your home airport, maybe with a CFI, etc.) can translate into knowing your airplane and your abilities better for when you want to operate outside your area of comfort. If you're consistently taking off and/or landing, but using more runway than Piper or your calculator says it should take you're going to want to take that into consideration when planning your arrival or departure. Especially at whatever challenging airport you may be thinking of going to.

That said, I've found that under relatively normal conditions even a student pilot with relatively few hours of flight experience can match the performance depicted in the performance charts with a little practice and coaching. I'd expect that most private pilots can too, as long as they don't get sloppy or too rusty.
 
mondtster said:
I've never used the calculator but your inquiry has me wondering - have you ever checked how your takeoff and landing distances compare to what either the calculator or the original Piper performance charts indicate? The Piper charts typically will state the airplane configuration that is necessary to get the book results so you'll want to use the recommended configuration to benchmark your abilities. Benchmarking your abilities/performance in a controlled environment (such as at your home airport, maybe with a CFI, etc.) can translate into knowing your airplane and your abilities better for when you want to operate outside your area of comfort. If you're consistently taking off and/or landing, but using more runway than Piper or your calculator says it should take you're going to want to take that into consideration when planning your arrival or departure. Especially at whatever challenging airport you may be thinking of going to.

That said, I've found that under relatively normal conditions even a student pilot with relatively few hours of flight experience can match the performance depicted in the performance charts with a little practice and coaching. I'd expect that most private pilots can too, as long as they don't get sloppy or too rusty.
Click to expand...

Yes absolutely that is a good point! And I have compared actual take off data to the performance chart (at least to the best of my ability with the limited amount of time I have in my Cherokee so far).

In fact the instructions for the calculator ask you to do just what you have stated to "calibrate" the calculator to get the most accurate calculations. You simply mark the ground roll and 50ft obstacle take off distances that you have determined from your "real world" testing. Otherwise you can just mark the POH ground roll and 50ft obstacle take off distances at sea level.

Not saying I'm placing my life in the hands of this calculator, but so far just playing with it and trying out different conditions it seems like it will be a very good "situational awareness" tool.
 
CC268 said:
I ordered one of these and got it today. Played with it for about an hour so I am very comfortable with it. I love it, seems very useful and really takes in all the factors. Have you found it to be accurate in your use? Comparing different situations to my POH performance charts it seems very good and definitely more conservative (but not so conservative that it seems way wrong).
Click to expand...
I used it when I had my Maule, which had no takeoff data at all. Calibrated per the instructions, I found it to be quite accurate when I used it.

Obviously the boundaries between "turf", "grass", and "long grass" (I think that's the terminology they use) aren't clearly defined, but a little bit of experience with those conditions helps give an idea of which to use.
 
exncsurfer said:
you guys, seem to be in an endless loop

according to this right here, nobody has ever made a legal flight:
"become familiar with all available information concerning that flight"

I don't think anyone has ever been familiar with ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION

so stop arguing already
Click to expand...

T'is true! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top