Rolling takeoff with a TFE-731

[gear_guy]

just use the auto throttles and forget about it

 

[SSDD]

scvta's quote makes more sense. Would you do a rolling takeoff on a runway limited, or obstacle clearance takeoff? On a short runway, I'm standing on the brakes until I see T/O N1.

 

[SoundBarViolatr]

In my humble opinion, stick to the book. As soon as you start using "techniques" to replace "SOPs", you are on your own. The performance numbers plotted by the manufacturers are based on the operational procedure performed at the time the performance was proven. Anytime you start drifting from it, you're a test pilot.

 

[Lead Sled]

In my humble opinion, stick to the book. As soon as you start using "techniques" to replace "SOPs", you are on your own. The performance numbers plotted by the manufacturers are based on the operational procedure performed at the time the performance was proven. Anytime you start drifting from it, you're a test pilot.

Well, not quite. If you made every takeoff according to the book you would sit at the end of the runway, set takeoff power and wait, for what? 45 seconds for the numbers to stabilize before releasing the brakes. Show me anyone who does that.

Like I said, I'm not advocating that you ignore book procedures. I'm the one who constantly harps that if you want to achieve book performance you have to fly the airplane by the book. What I am questioning is the wisdom of some pilots to dink around adjusting the power levers so as to set precisely a power setting that is guaranteed to provide nothing more than the minimum required takeoff performance - all while the airplane is accelerating like a raped ape and while all this is going on the guy in the right seat is missing the speed callouts. Tell me you've never had that happen. Set the power and don't mess around pulling it back to a precise N1 if you happen to go over a little bit. The engine folks aren't going to care; as far as they're concerned you can shove the power levers to the stops and leave them there for up to 5 minutes without exceeding any limitations - provided your computers are set up correctly.

LS

 

[gear_guy]

Good thread folks. We should have more discussions like these. It's wisdom sharing threads like these that make us all better informed pilots.

 

[Capt1124]

I talked to an engineer at Honeywell and he had never heard of the video I was talking about. He said rolling takeoffs were generally preferable particularly with some versions that had trouble with the carbon seals, and N1 is always N1, static or rolling.

Has anybody else seen this video?

 

[Lead Sled]

I talked to an engineer at Honeywell and he had never heard of the video I was talking about. He said rolling takeoffs were generally preferable particularly with some versions that had trouble with the carbon seals, and N1 is always N1, static or rolling.

Has anybody else seen this video?

I've never seen that video and I've been flying TFE-731 powered aircraft since the 1988 with recurrent every 6 months since then. I think that I've seen every training video offered at least once.

What the Honeywell engineer told you meshes with what I've been told since day one. Where were you when you were shown the video? Are you sure you aren't taking something out of context?

LS

 

[johnny taliban]

Doesn't N1 also guarantee minimum rudder control if you have an engine failure? That, if you pop an engine with a power setting above N1 there is no guarantee that full rudder deflection will compensate for the yaw moment? Or was that just the EPR settings on the 20 series lears?

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

I dont believe the reason for a static takeoff is based on engine reliability/performance/etc at any given point, I'm pretty sure the reason static takeoffs are put in place is to assure you meet the TOFL number based on the day's conditions. If a Westwind manual says do it, then I think the reason is for the TOFL numbers; where the Lear 45 may not say to do it, it might say by 80 kts the takeoff power must be achived.

Im pretty sure static takeoff requirements are for meeting numbers from the AFM. So based on the aircraft type, not the engine, some do require this and some dont.

 

[stupidpilot]

I have heard this restriction also. Next time you do a rolling takeoff, set T/O N1 and then look at it again about 80 knots. It will have reduced 1-2% from T/O N1. If I did a rolling T/O I would usually readjust the throttles at 60 knots back to T/O N1. Anyone else notice this?

Not sure about the -731. But the engines on the DC-10 (GE CF-6 C2B)normally roll back between 1-2% on takeoff roll. They say that this is normal and any readjust is uneccesary since the numbers take this into account.

 

[redW&blue]

Did a rolling start yesterday, 94.5% was set. @80knots it showed 94.5% @ 100knots it was still at 94.5 and the guess what, at Vr she was still at 94.5%.

 

[blzr]

We are in MTX right mow, so I asked an engine guy about the 731-3 that we have in regard to rolling t/o. He, as well as some other crust Sabre pilots chewed on that and came to the same conclusion;

1. if you are trying to get out of a 5000 ft strip at 23c, you would be FOOLISH to to a rolling T/O. DUHHHHHHH

2. If you are using an 10k ft rwy, rolling takeoff is fine. and again duuhhhhh.

In the sim, I always do static takeoff, in the real world, not always, but about 50/50 because we use alot of high altitude airports.

Just use common sense and yall fly safe!!!!

 

[blzr]

YES!!! almost to 1000 posts!

 

[Brett Hull]

Post whore!

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

Did a rolling start yesterday, 94.5% was set. @80knots it showed 94.5% @ 100knots it was still at 94.5 and the guess what, at Vr she was still at 94.5%.

DEEC's or no DEEC's? just curious...