Takeoff Following Poor Run-up

WakeNCAgent

WakeNCAgent

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
133
Location
Raleigh, NC
Display Name
Louis
Home Airfield
KTTA
As I was conducting my preflight I observed a Cessna taxi to hold short line and perform their run-up. One of the mags sounded awful, with the engine running very rough. The engine rpm rose and I presume the pilot tried to clean the plugs by leaning it hot but the engine started to backfire at least a few times over a short period of time. By this time I stopped my preflight and just stared incredulously as this plane taxied onto the runway and proceeded a very long takeoff roll followed by a slow, seemingly belabored climb to pattern altitude. After a trip around the pattern they rolled off the runway and taxied back to their hangar.

How many of us would continue a takeoff under those conditions? That was one of the worst run-ups I've ever heard. What is there to be gained by continuning the takeoff that could not be accomplished on the ground? I feel this placed the occupants and nearby residents at risk of an accident unnecessarily.
 
WakeNCAgent said:
As I was conducting my preflight I observed a Cessna taxi to hold short line and perform their run-up. One of the mags sounded awful, with the engine running very rough. The engine rpm rose and I presume the pilot tried to clean the plugs by leaning it hot but the engine started to backfire at least a few times over a short period of time. By this time I stopped my preflight and just stared incredulously as this plane taxied onto the runway and proceeded a very long takeoff roll followed by a slow, seemingly belabored climb to pattern altitude. After a trip around the pattern they rolled off the runway and taxied back to their hangar.

How many of us would continue a takeoff under those conditions? That was one of the worst run-ups I've ever heard. What is there to be gained by continuning the takeoff that could not be accomplished on the ground? I feel this placed the occupants and nearby residents at risk of an accident unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

Hey, there are guys with Chevy car engines in their experimental flying coffins. They don't even have a mag.
 
CTLSi said:
Hey, there are guys with Chevy car engines in their experimental flying coffins. They don't even have a mag.
Click to expand...
Totally not relevant ignorant comment. Since not mentioned as otherwise I would assume the airplane was a spam can.
There are a few totally dangerous homebuilts, but there are more spam can drivers that have no idea about what is going on under the cowl.
 
WakeNCAgent said:
As I was conducting my preflight I observed a Cessna taxi to hold short line and perform their run-up. One of the mags sounded awful, with the engine running very rough. The engine rpm rose and I presume the pilot tried to clean the plugs by leaning it hot but the engine started to backfire at least a few times over a short period of time. By this time I stopped my preflight and just stared incredulously as this plane taxied onto the runway and proceeded a very long takeoff roll followed by a slow, seemingly belabored climb to pattern altitude. After a trip around the pattern they rolled off the runway and taxied back to their hangar.

How many of us would continue a takeoff under those conditions? That was one of the worst run-ups I've ever heard. What is there to be gained by continuning the takeoff that could not be accomplished on the ground? I feel this placed the occupants and nearby residents at risk of an accident unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

"This milk smells really bad. Tastes bad too."

Yeah, defies common sense.
 
Paulie said:
Totally not relevant ignorant comment. Since not mentioned as otherwise I would assume the airplane was a spam can.
There are a few totally dangerous homebuilts, but there are more spam can drivers that have no idea about what is going on under the cowl.
Click to expand...


Really? Then why are there guys in three hangars next to me restoring/building old RVs doing EXACTLY that?
 
CTLSi said:
Really? Then why are there guys in three hangars next to me restoring/building old RVs doing EXACTLY that?
Click to expand...

So with your great aeronautical and engineering experience you have determined that they are dangerous from three doors down.
You obviously know nothing about the experimental community.
 
WakeNCAgent said:
As I was conducting my preflight I observed a Cessna taxi to hold short line and perform their run-up. One of the mags sounded awful, with the engine running very rough. The engine rpm rose and I presume the pilot tried to clean the plugs by leaning it hot but the engine started to backfire at least a few times over a short period of time. By this time I stopped my preflight and just stared incredulously as this plane taxied onto the runway and proceeded a very long takeoff roll followed by a slow, seemingly belabored climb to pattern altitude. After a trip around the pattern they rolled off the runway and taxied back to their hangar.

How many of us would continue a takeoff under those conditions? That was one of the worst run-ups I've ever heard. What is there to be gained by continuning the takeoff that could not be accomplished on the ground? I feel this placed the occupants and nearby residents at risk of an accident unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

If that was the case I wouldn't have taken the runway. If I were you I would have mentioned something on freq, like "hey sounds like a bad mag" or whatever you thought you heard. Sometime if someone hears something like that they'll rethink a stupid decision, and at the very least you'll sleep at big knowing you did something if they pile in.
 
Once one is primed to take off, it's often difficult to break it off if things are not right. It can be a pretty powerful psychological compunction, but one we must strive to overcome.

"It'll probably be OK" are words that are often spoken, and most times things are OK.

Except when they're not.
 
Paulie said:
So with your great aeronautical and engineering experience you have determined that they are dangerous from three doors down.
You obviously know nothing about the experimental community.
Click to expand...

Yea, I know what I see. The FAA also apparently knows. Experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas. And R&D classified planes may only fly each time with permission and be met at the airport by FAA guys.
 
FastEddieB said:
Mine is.
Click to expand...

FAR 91.319 Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.
...
(c) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator in special operating limitations, no person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate over a densely populated area or in a congested airway. The Administrator may issue special operating limitations for particular aircraft to permit takeoffs and landings to be conducted over a densely populated area or in a congested airway, in accordance with terms and conditions specified in the authorization in the interest of safety in air commerce.
(d) Each person operating an aircraft that has an experimental certificate shall—
(1) Advise each person carried of the experimental nature of the aircraft;
(2) Operate under VFR, day only, unless otherwise specifically authorized by the Administrator; and
(3) Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft when operating the aircraft into or out of airports with operating control towers.
(e) The Administrator may prescribe additional limitations that the Administrator considers necessary, including limitations on the persons that may be carried in the aircraft.
 
CTLSi said:
FAR 91.319 Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.
...
(c) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator in special operating limitations, no person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate over a densely populated area or in a congested airway. The Administrator may issue special operating limitations for particular aircraft to permit takeoffs and landings to be conducted over a densely populated area or in a congested airway, in accordance with terms and conditions specified in the authorization in the interest of safety in air commerce.
(d) Each person operating an aircraft that has an experimental certificate shall—
(1) Advise each person carried of the experimental nature of the aircraft;
(2) Operate under VFR, day only, unless otherwise specifically authorized by the Administrator; and
(3) Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft when operating the aircraft into or out of airports with operating control towers.
(e) The Administrator may prescribe additional limitations that the Administrator considers necessary, including limitations on the persons that may be carried in the aircraft.
Click to expand...

FTFY.
 
CTLSi said:
Yea, I know what I see. The FAA also apparently knows. Experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas. And R&D classified planes may only fly each time with permission and be met at the airport by FAA guys.
Click to expand...

Are you sure you're a pilot? With your knowledge base it's amazing you passed the written. You are wrong about almost every rule you try to cite.
 
Henning said:
Are you sure you're a pilot? With your knowledge base it's amazing you passed the written. You are wrong about almost every rule you try to cite.
Click to expand...

What's wrong, you don't like the rules? Take it up with the FAA.
 
Henning said:
Are you sure you're a pilot? With your knowledge base it's amazing you passed the written. You are wrong about almost every rule you try to cite.
Click to expand...

I've noticed the same thing too.
 
CTLSi said:
Yea, I know what I see. The FAA also apparently knows. Experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas. And R&D classified planes may only fly each time with permission and be met at the airport by FAA guys.
Click to expand...

Apparently you need an eye test, Magoo.
 
Henning said:
Are you sure you're a pilot? With your knowledge base it's amazing you passed the written. You are wrong about almost every rule you try to cite.
Click to expand...

Having just taken the written I can attest that the "correct" answer is experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas.
 
48dodge said:
Having just taken the written I can attest that the "correct" answer is experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas.
Click to expand...

This is a case of there being a right answer, a wrong answer and the FAA answer.
 
FWIW, the Operating Limitations on my Experimental Sky Arrow states that I cannot fly over congested areas.

Unless...

"...directed by ATC, or unless sufficient altitude is maintained to affect a safe emergency landing in the event of a power unit failure, without hazards to persons or property on the ground."

Note that that may look familiar...

91.119 states a minimum altitude...

"(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface."

I cannot really discern how I am restricted in this regard any more than any standard category aircraft.
 
Last edited:
In Canada, homebuilts are restricted to certain operating limitations in their first 25 hours of flight (with "certified"-type engines) or 50 hours with converted auto engines or whatever. After that period has been passed with no major complications, the restrictions are removed. They can carry passengers or fly at night or IFR if equipped appropriately, or over congested areas, or whatever. I'd bet that the FARs have the same sort of provisions, and that the statement "unless authorized by the Administrator" comes into play there.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
I'd bet that the FARs have the same sort of provisions, and that the statement "unless authorized by the Administrator" comes into play there.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The restrictions are typically removed after a required test flight period. Even at that, exemptions can be granted during the test flight period.
 
Dan Thomas said:
In Canada, homebuilts are restricted to certain operating limitations in their first 25 hours of flight (with "certified"-type engines) or 50 hours with converted auto engines or whatever. After that period has been passed with no major complications, the restrictions are removed. They can carry passengers or fly at night or IFR if equipped appropriately, or over congested areas, or whatever. I'd bet that the FARs have the same sort of provisions, and that the statement "unless authorized by the Administrator" comes into play there.

Dan
Click to expand...
Once the initial FOE hours are completed the "Administrator" authorizes the use of the homebuilt via the stated operating limitations, which generally are no more restrictive than what you get with a certified aircraft.
 
CTLSi said:
Yea, I know what I see. The FAA also apparently knows. Experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas. And R&D classified planes may only fly each time with permission and be met at the airport by FAA guys.
Click to expand...

WRONG!
 
48dodge said:
Having just taken the written I can attest that the "correct" answer is experimentals are not allowed to fly over congested areas.
Click to expand...

Then you as well do not have a thorough grasp of the rules, this is what happens when you 'study the test' typically. Note the part where it says 'Except as allowed by the administrator' or something to those effects. This is where the meat of the matter is. Every Experimental is issued operation limitations which define the 'allowances of the administrator.' Initial allowances are low for your first 20-40hr designated fly-off period to test the plane. During this time you will typically not be given an allowance to fly over congested areas.

Once you have done your initial fly in period in your typical Ex-AB, your operating limitations are upgraded and you are issued allowance to fly unrestricted.
 
Henning said:
Then you as well do not have a thorough grasp of the rules, this is what happens when you 'study the test' typically. Note the part where it says 'Except as allowed by the administrator' or something to those effects. This is where the meat of the matter is. Every Experimental is issued operation limitations which define the 'allowances of the administrator.' Initial allowances are low for your first 20-40hr designated fly-off period to test the plane. During this time you will typically not be given an allowance to fly over congested areas.

Once you have done your initial fly in period in your typical Ex-AB, your operating limitations are upgraded and you are issued allowance to fly unrestricted.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you missed the quotation marks.
 
48dodge said:
I'm guessing you missed the quotation marks.
Click to expand...

I saw them, they quoted a right answer for a test question. That's why I pointed out that studying the test and not the material as a whole leaves one woefully thin in knowledge and especially understanding. There is a plethora of material not covered in the test, far more than is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top