Rejected Takeoffs?

P

PaCherokeePilot

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 27, 2026
Messages
1
Display Name
PaCherokeePilot
Thoughts on rejected takeoffs?

I am a private pilot with about 170. This evening I went up and practiced instrument approaches but had a little bit of time left over so I wanted to try and do some rejected takeoffs for practice. In addition to occasionally keeping up on my emergency procedures I added these to my list of things to practice. The argument is that if your flying a single engine airplane and the engine quits your going to land anyways. My thoughts is it is good to practice rejected takeoffs just after rotation to simulate making an emergency landing on the departing runway. For my airplane the runway I use is plenty long and I have little or no risk of overrunning. I wanted to see if this is frowned upon or something good to practice. Things like these where never thought to me training as a private pilot but I don’t believe a steep turn is gonna kill me, real world emergency’s like an engine rolling back while taking off probably will if you don’t identify something is wrong and do not immediately take corrective action. Plus in almost everyone’s takeoff briefing they say if enough runway remains they will land straight ahead but it is not ever practiced. Obviously it carries a little more risk but considering my home airport has a long runway it seems like no issue. Just wondering everyone’s thoughts on this or if it is considered something that carries too much risk.
 
Not as far as I’m concerned, assuming no tower. Just be considerate to people in the pattern and those waiting to take off. In fact, in experimental flight testing it is common practice to “crow hop” down the runway (several lift offs and landings in a short space) to test equipment and to get a feel for the aircraft.

You should also add practicing the “impossible turn” at altitude. Find out exactly how high you have to be before you are assured of returning to the field.

I was lucky when I was at VG37 Greenway Airfield to have a crop duster field off the end of the runway and angled at about 30 degrees from our runway. I’d practice engine out down to the ground now and then. It gives one real confidence in one’s abilities as a pilot.
 
PaCherokeePilot said:
Thoughts on rejected takeoffs?

I am a private pilot with about 170. This evening I went up and practiced instrument approaches but had a little bit of time left over so I wanted to try and do some rejected takeoffs for practice. In addition to occasionally keeping up on my emergency procedures I added these to my list of things to practice. The argument is that if your flying a single engine airplane and the engine quits your going to land anyways. My thoughts is it is good to practice rejected takeoffs just after rotation to simulate making an emergency landing on the departing runway. For my airplane the runway I use is plenty long and I have little or no risk of overrunning. I wanted to see if this is frowned upon or something good to practice. Things like these where never thought to me training as a private pilot but I don’t believe a steep turn is gonna kill me, real world emergency’s like an engine rolling back while taking off probably will if you don’t identify something is wrong and do not immediately take corrective action. Plus in almost everyone’s takeoff briefing they say if enough runway remains they will land straight ahead but it is not ever practiced. Obviously it carries a little more risk but considering my home airport has a long runway it seems like no issue. Just wondering everyone’s thoughts on this or if it is considered something that carries too much risk.
Click to expand...
As a solo private pilot, how do you plan to practice these, and what do you expect to learn?
 
Lindberg said:
As a solo private pilot, how do you plan to practice these, and what do you expect to learn?
Click to expand...
Also note that “just after rotation” is probably the most difficult time to transition from takeoff to landing without damaging the airplane.
 
Aborted takeoffs and simulated engine loss immediately after takeoff are part of the private pilot syllabus I have been using for many years. It was very gratifying to hear that one of my former students knew exactly what to do last year when her engine failed about 100 feet in the air, and her instructor in the right seat started to panic. "I got this," she said, and put down on the remaining runway.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
Aborted takeoffs and simulated engine loss immediately after takeoff are part of the private pilot syllabus I have been using for many years. It was very gratifying to hear that one of my former students knew exactly what to do last year when her engine failed about 100 feet in the air, and her instructor in the right seat started to panic. "I got this," she said, and put down on the remaining runway.
Click to expand...
And why a good CFI uses a real syllabus and doesn’t use the ACS as one.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
Aborted takeoffs and simulated engine loss immediately after takeoff are part of the private pilot syllabus I have been using for many years. It was very gratifying to hear that one of my former students knew exactly what to do last year when her engine failed about 100 feet in the air, and her instructor in the right seat started to panic. "I got this," she said, and put down on the remaining runway.
Click to expand...

Centerline slow-flight, side-slips in ground effect and land backs. Fantastic stuff to learn. But has pretty much gone the way of spin training.
 
RTOs are not given nearly enough attention by anyone that isn't flying jets.

Go, and practice. Start with RTOs where you don't leave the ground at all, though - Get up to rotation speed and then abort. If you want to do air aborts, you might consider doing them a little higher the first few times, depending on the length of your runway.
 
I encourage practicing them, but would also recommend bring an experienced CFI along to help keep you out of trouble. You can get in trouble doing a Vx Climb and cutting(losing) power, You may not have enough energy to sufficiently stop the resulting descent enough to avoid damaging the aircraft. Practicing at various points during the departure is good to determine how much stopping distance is required.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
I think it depends :D

The "impossible/improbable" turnback maneuver? Yes, definitely, if for no reason other than knowing how the airplane will perform. I sometimes get in an airplane with a pilot who does a nice takeoff briefing including "if I am above X', I'll consider a return to the airport." If I don't already know, I invariably ask how they came up with that number.

Kind of the same for landing on the remaining runway with an aborted takeoff in the air. I think doing it at least once is a great idea, mostly to see what it looks like.

Beyond that, I think a takeoff briefing to trigger your reaction in case it happens is far more important. And remember, it's not just about the engine quitting entirely

I probably mentioned it at some point in the past. I was doing a discovery flight and did the takeoff briefing. We took off and, sure enough, the engine didn't quit but it stopped climbing after maybe 40'. With plenty of runway ahead, I did one tweak of the mixture control (this was Denver). When that had no effect, I pulled the throttle and landed. Pretty much exactly what the briefing was intended to accomplish. My potential student thought it was the coolest thing he ever saw and continued taking lessons.
 
brcase said:
I encourage practicing them, but would also recommend bring an experienced CFI along to help keep you out of trouble. You can get in trouble doing a Vx Climb and cutting(losing) power, You may not have enough energy to sufficiently stop the resulting descent enough to avoid damaging the aircraft. Practicing at various points during the departure is good to determine how much stopping distance is required.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why there's a window that I wouldn't practice these even with an instructor on board.

In a real emergency, there's no guarantee that you and the plane are uninjured. We train to maximize our chances, but in a true RTO, you may have to accept a hard landing, an overrun, going through the fence, an intentional ground loop, etc.

And in practice, there's very little room for the instructor to "save" the student from mistakes at low altitude. If you pull the throttle at 20' and the student does the wrong thing, or the right thing too slowly, you're probably screwed. Maybe regardless of what the student does.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Beyond that, I think a takeoff briefing to trigger your reaction in case it happens is far more important. And remember, it's not just about the engine quitting entirely.
Click to expand...
In the glider, we brief premature tow terminations at all stages, from the runway to pattern altitude. But we don't practice them between the ground and 200' because the risk of injury and damage outweighs the teaching value.
 
Lindberg said:
In the glider, we brief premature tow terminations at all stages, from the runway to pattern altitude. But we don't practice them between the ground and 200' because the risk of injury and damage outweighs the teaching value.
Click to expand...
Interesting. We did practice at any altitude. But we had a rather long runway so that may be a difference. < 200 land straight. > 200 turn around. Call out at 200 feet was expected on every launch to have it be easy to know what the abort procedure would be without having to think about it.
 
The cost:benefit is not there for me.

I could easily see causing a problem while practicing this...and the chances of it really helping in a real engine failure (or other cause of rejection) is minimal.

I can see value in knowing what to do for engine failure happening below 500' (SEL).....but those are almost impossible to safely practice to completion.
 
There are certain things that make for good training, that I wouldn't want a low time student pilot attempting while solo. As long as everything goes to plan, it probably isn't an issue, but if something goes sideways, they may not have the experience to recover. "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment."

For my solo students, I prefer "Try to stay in the middle of the air. Do not go near the edges of it."
 
Lindberg said:
And in practice, there's very little room for the instructor to "save" the student from mistakes at low altitude. If you pull the throttle at 20' and the student does the wrong thing, or the right thing too slowly, you're probably screwed. Maybe regardless of what the student does.
Click to expand...

I agree. But to clarify my earlier comment I am not talking about a surprise. More of an intended touch & go in reverse. The analogy that comes to mind comes from instrument training. The biggest issue I've seen with the circle to land maneuver is the only realistic part of it in training - flying a traffic pattern at only 500-600 AGL. The biggest problem many students have is the look when downwind waaaay below pattern altitude.

Concerns about students freezing up and causing an accident? Like the demonstration stalls, this one can be done by the CFI - sort of like I did for real.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The "impossible/improbable" turnback maneuver? Yes, definitely, if for no reason other than knowing how the airplane will perform. I sometimes get in an airplane with a pilot who does a nice takeoff briefing including "if I am above X', I'll consider a return to the airport." If I don't already know, I invariably ask how they came up with that number.
Click to expand...
I think, if one is going to practice that at altitude, one should have some spin entry and recovery training. It's too easy to get a bit slow in a steepish turn, trying to get the airplane turned around with minimal altitude loss, and a spin might be the result. What are you going to do if you've never been in a spin and recovered it? And what do things look like leading up to a pro-spin situation? Too many pilots have no idea. Some of them find out a little too late.
 
Salty said:
Interesting. We did practice at any altitude. But we had a rather long runway so that may be a difference. < 200 land straight. > 200 turn around. Call out at 200 feet was expected on every launch to have it be easy to know what the abort procedure would be without having to think about it.
Click to expand...
Bold. I imagine if I pulled the release at 20' on a student I might wind up with a broken glider. Or back. And from 100', even if he got us down and stopped with no damage from trees, fences, rocks, etc., getting back to the airport would be a real PITA.
 
Lindberg said:
Bold. I imagine if I pulled the release at 20' on a student I might wind up with a broken glider. Or back. And from 100', even if he got us down and stopped with no damage from trees, fences, rocks, etc., getting back to the airport would be a real PITA.
Click to expand...
Ok, so maybe not any altitude, but I did more than one straight ahead rope break.
 
Lindberg said:
I imagine if I pulled the release at 20' on a student I might wind up with a broken glider. Or back.
Click to expand...
Other than being extremely jarring, stalling a 2-33 at about 50 feet didn’t do any damage to us or the glider. But I wouldn’t want to do it in an airplane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top