How common are aborted take-offs?

First experience with DA

A few flights after my first solo i aborted a take off and managed to get the plane back on the runway and stopped with some room to spare.

As soon as the takeoff roll began the plane seemed to accelerate slower than usual but i continued the takeoff since rpm was good and all other engine instruments were in the green.

After lift off i needed an unusually lower pitch just to pick up some speed and climb at a rate slower than i was used too.

"Things" just didn't "feel" right so i pulled power to idle, announced aborted takeoff and let the plane settle back on the runway.

The flight school owner heard my aborted call and met me while taxing back. I explained why I aborted and he said it could just be density altitude. He took the plane around the pattern solo (this was a cessna 150), did a lap around the pattern and after landing he explained there was nothing wrong with the plane and what i had experienced was the effect of density altitude :D

Now i had read all about DA but had never experienced it during dual flight until that solo flight. So i got back in and did my patterns, full stop, at ease that there was nothing wrong with the plane - it was just me.
 
Jay Honeck said:
In 1600+ hours, I've aborted just one take-off, when I could not gain flying speed in our old '48 Ercoupe because I kept hitting piles of loamy soil dug up by moles, and the 'Coupe had insufficient rudder authority to raise the nosewheel off the sod.

The solution was to trundle back and forth enough times so that I had flattened all the mole piles. :lol:
Click to expand...
What does that mean, Jay?
 
Three, all in twins.

Bob Gardner
 
Very few in 13k hours over 50 years. Most memorable was when another guy got out of a Cessna. I saw him place the outboard portion of the seatbelt on the pax seat cushion, but didn't secure it to the in-board end of belt (a mistake I haven't repeated since). At rotation, the rat-tat-tat hammering of the belt-end against the lower fuselage created sufficient racket to cause an abort.
 
Later-day airliners all have a very sophisticated takeoff inhibit systems that alert pilots right away if any configuration - flaps, trim, parking brake, (hey, don't laugh...I tookoff in a Metroliner with the brake set - I haven't set the brake on a runway since) and rudder limiter configuration. The system also inhibits nusance alerts that might cause an erronious abort. Usually, the airplane will holler at you as soon as the throttles are advanced. In 25 years of airline flying I could count the times I've aborted on 2 hands - but in almost every case prior to 40kts. The ones you don't forget are the ones that scare you. One night in a heavy Chieftain out of Burbank one of the engines started detonating (I think) late in the roll, just under 100kts. It was all I could do to get the airplane stopped. My knees shook after that one.
 
I have only had one actual abort in my 260 hours. I did not notice that the AHRS for my panel never aligned and proceeded to start my takeoff roll. I noticed very quickly when I looked to see if my airspeed was alive and saw huge red Xs. :mad2:

Proceeded to pull off and wait out what our Chief CFI calls the penalty timer. The panel waits 2 mins after no motion is detected and then it goes into another 2 min alignment.
 
Last edited:
2 in about 850. Both engine failure on take off roll. Problem turned out to be loose muffler internals intermittently blocking muffler outlet in spite of the wire bails that are supposed to prevent that. 71 Cherokee 140. Stainless muffler inlet center pipe (with all of the holes) was as brittle as glass.
 
Jaybird180 said:
What does that mean, Jay?
Click to expand...

My guess is he meant to say limited elevator authority. I think limiting elevator travel was the method they used to prevent stall/spin accidents--you can't spin if you can't stall.
 
Only once since '82. Night take off from KAGS. Electrical breaker tripped, all NAV lights and radio went out. Taxied back to GA ramp, telephoned the tower and explained my problem. Reset breaker and line crew jumped me off. Never had another electrical problem with that plane. I have no idea why the breaker initially tripped.
 
One, and I was barely airborne when I called it on a very long runway.

Flaps were stuck at 40 after a night T&G.

Would have been a nerve-wracking trip around the pattern. Airplane could have barely done it.

Aborting was the better call.
 
I've rejected a few takeoffs in piston singles, turboprop singles, radial multis, and turbojet multi engine aircraft.

How common they are isn't really important; one should train for them because they're always a possibility. How common are engine failures? They're not common, but they do happen, and we train accordingly. We should aways operate with them in mind.

I've operated into burning canyons and wildfires for many years, and the issue of having an engine failure during that process is always a consideration. Especially when doing it with single engine aircraft. I had one, a complete power loss, in a single engine airplane inside a burning canyon. The procedures were the same, and my actions were the same. Did it matter what the odds were of it happening? Not at the time.

In a single, rejecting the takeoff is a given with a power failure. In a light twin it's usually the same. In large aircraft and transport category aircraft, a truth begins to emerge, however, which also has bearing on any rejected takeoff. Rejecting the takeoff is often more dangerous than continuing.

While one can't continue with a power loss in a single, one should understand the dangers of a rejected takeoff. In training, it's often done simply by the instructor pulling the power to idle shortly after the engine is powered up, and the student mashing the brakes. The student is given the false impression that the rejected takeoff is no big deal; just pull the power and hit the brakes. Stop.

It's not so simple, especially when rejecting at higher speeds. A failed tire during the takeoff might be a reason someone might consider rejecting; you have a tire come apart close to your rotation speed. Do you try to stop with much of the runway behind you in the middle of the takeoff, or do you continue the takeoff, evaluate, then land with a full runway ahead of you? Rejecting the takeoff might be done for a lot of reasons, but often very few of them are valid. Rejecting the takeoff is often not the right choice.

Sometimes it is. Don't hesitate to reject when you must, but don't be in too big a hurry to reject when it might not be the best option. Talk about or think about cases when you might consider rejecting, and evaluate each to see if there's a better choice.
 
Wow, I never thought of myself as overly cautious, but I've aborted dozens of takeoffs in the last 40+ years because when something doesn't feel right, the time to check it is on the ground. Although I've never personally witnessed a takeoff crash, I've seen a couple poor bastards wind up in the trees because they were too proud to go around.
 
Morne said:
A couple of recent threads have me wondering just how common it is to abort a take off. In the last year I have aborted three (3). One for the seat slide, one because the engine responded sluggishly on throttle up and I forget why on the third.

How about everyone else? For purposes of discussion, let's consider "aborted take-off" to be on the runway after throttle up and prior to lift off.
Click to expand...


More times than I can count, it doesn't take much for me to abort and search out a problem. With ferry flights it's often the nature of the beast.
 
I have never aborted a take off.

After reading the reasons for aborting in this thread, I should have aborted more then 10 times in 25 years. My primary instructor would pop open doors on take-off and tell me to never abort a take-off for a door. Also, my primary and other instructors would cover my air speed indicator and other gages and have me take-off do the pattern and land.

I have flown planes where the door won't shut, you had to use the seat belt to hold the door closed.

On the first flight after a pitot static check, at rotation, I noticed that none of my static port operated gages were working, I just told the control tower, did the pattern and landed. The mechanic said he could not find the problem, so I flew home using the alternate static internal port. I could have flown the 90 miles back home with out any of the gages.

Is training for new pilots differant now then 30 years ago?:rolleyes:
 
Garthur said:
Is training for new pilots differant now then 30 years ago?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think the risk tolerance in training has definitely gone down. I believe that aborting for a non-functional pitot-static system is more risky than just flying the pattern once (assuming of course it is VMC).

I like getting in a plane with a CFI an gently pushing at the boundaries of my personal skills. Flying w/o an ASI or Altimeter is a worthwhile skill for a pilot to invest some time in, then again so is practicing an aborted takeoff.
 
Here's a takeoff I aborted due to a bad nose-wheel shimmy:


I was a low-time solo student at the time. In hindsight it was probably unnecessary. I probably could have reduced or eliminated the shimmy with a little up elevator, but I was very inexperienced at the time so I made a quick decision to abort.
 
Static systems don't even come into the decision process for a VFR T/O, I've even continued when the pitot dumped. If that's the worst you ever have to consider an abort for you should make a career with no aborts, no worries. I'm certain that it's possible to fly ones entire life and never need to abort. I've never needed to abort a T/O in one of my planes. When jumping in a repo though and things start shaking as I pick up speed lol, you can bet I'm gonna figure that one out on the ground even if it means running off the end. I've also aborted because an engine wouldn't make RPM.
 
Just because you CAN fly without an airspeed indication, does that mean you should? If I start my takeoff roll and have a zero airspeed indication as I accelerate, it doesn't take a genius to figure out what the problem is. In that case, with the airplane still on the ground and plenty of room to stop, does it not make more sense to stop and resolve the problem before continuing?

Obviously if you're off the ground with little runway remaining, you continue the takeoff, fly the pattern and land. But with all three of my aborted takeoffs, the problem was obvious well before rotation speed.

Just because you can doesn't necessarily make it a prudent idea.
 
It's a very personal decision. Folks with enough experience may accept a takeoff that someone experiencing something for the first time, may not.

The key here is that you are PIC and you're accepting the takeoff. You believe a takeoff is a better option than any other options you have. If you choose poorly, we'll say, "What was (s)he thinking?!" at your funeral or hospital hallway outside your room.

All those nice plastic green cards in our pockets are licenses to continue learning, no matter how many words and ratings are printed on them.
 
Being able to see airspeed while VFR is only important in a twin; a single is flying or not, if you can't keep a single flying by feel and sound, then yes. Thing is on some planes you may not lose the AS until you pick the tail up and the water runs into the correct spot in the pitot. Then with 1200 HP and 700 gallons of some type of liquid death halfway down a runway, I am much safer to continue flying than to try and get it stopped.

Every decision to be made in aviation is situational.
 
The best I can remember, I have flown with 20 or so instructors over my flying life. The long time instructors that I know (been teaching for 50 years or more, 2 CFI's to be correct) are very different from the newer instructors. Both of them are very cool and calm in the aircraft. They always throw failures at me, cover instruments, pull power, turn on the auto-pilot when I wasn't looking, or pull circuit breakers with out me seeing it. Then they would wait to see how I handled it. One of the instuctors would always tell me that you don't need any of these fancy things in the dash to fly and he was right. Both of them would always tell me that the most dangerous thing in the plane is a pilot that panics. If all of the flying controls are working then you are OK. His favorite saying is, when something doesn't seem right in the plane then reach over and wind your watch (tells you how old he is).

The failure of an air speed indicator should not be a reason to abort a take-off (single engine). At busy airports with commercial jets behind you and in front of you, an aborted take-off could be the most dangerous thing you will do that year. Even at small airports with no traffic, how many times have I heard of planes going off the end of the runway. At some of the airports I fly at the runway is so short that if you abort at take-off you will be going off the end of the runway.

If my air speed indicator isn't working, the only thing I'm thinking about is how much is this going to cost me!
 
COFlyBoy said:
I think the risk tolerance in training has definitely gone down. I believe that aborting for a non-functional pitot-static system is more risky than just flying the pattern once (assuming of course it is VMC).

I like getting in a plane with a CFI an gently pushing at the boundaries of my personal skills. Flying w/o an ASI or Altimeter is a worthwhile skill for a pilot to invest some time in, then again so is practicing an aborted takeoff.
Click to expand...


I'd be hesitant to fly with a blocked pitot system. At least I'd weigh the runway length available. In every plane I've flown in the past decade rotation was around 110 kts and we do an airspeed check at 80 kts. If either airspeed isn't alive we abort. 80 kts is plenty slow to get stopped safely.

In a light SE rotation is around 60'ish knots typically. Unless its a VERY short runway (say under 2,500 feet) then why rotate with now speed? A 5,000' runway is plenty long for a 172 or P128 to accelerate, notice the ASI isn't working and stop safely.


Garthur said:
The best I can remember, I have flown with 20 or so instructors over my flying life. The long time instructors that I know (been teaching for 50 years or more, 2 CFI's to be correct) are very different from the newer instructors. Both of them are very cool and calm in the aircraft. They always throw failures at me, cover instruments, pull power, turn on the auto-pilot when I wasn't looking, or pull circuit breakers with out me seeing it. Then they would wait to see how I handled it. One of the instuctors would always tell me that you don't need any of these fancy things in the dash to fly and he was right. Both of them would always tell me that the most dangerous thing in the plane is a pilot that panics. If all of the flying controls are working then you are OK. His favorite saying is, when something doesn't seem right in the plane then reach over and wind your watch (tells you how old he is).

The failure of an air speed indicator should not be a reason to abort a take-off (single engine). At busy airports with commercial jets behind you and in front of you, an aborted take-off could be the most dangerous thing you will do that year. Even at small airports with no traffic, how many times have I heard of planes going off the end of the runway. At some of the airports I fly at the runway is so short that if you abort at take-off you will be going off the end of the runway.

If my air speed indicator isn't working, the only thing I'm thinking about is how much is this going to cost me!
Click to expand...


Why would it be dangerous for a C-172 to abort a takeoff at JFK with a line of jets behind it? Those jets aren't going to launch until you're off the ground and out of the way or off the runway. Planes on the ground with the parking brake set always take a back seat to planes in the process of flying and takeoff is part of that process. You own the runway. Why would it be dangerous? Those pilots aren't getting out of the plane to beat you up. I promise.

Besides, at a busy airport with 'commercial jets behind you' would imply the runway is more than long enough for you to accelerate to rotation and stop. That's the place you SHOULD consider stopping...not the 2,000' grass strip.



My point is aborting a takeoff has many factors. Whats wrong? What's the weather condition? CAN the plane fly? How much runway is left? Is it safer to stop or go?

On my last sim ride I was given a jammed elevator at rotation. Technically it's a 'go' at that point. BUT, it was 200' overcast and we were in KMEM. So, we stopped. A jammed elevator is flyable, but just. Going up into the soup is NOT where I want to be with that. We were on a long runway. All this went through my head in a split second and I made a decision...we stopped.


btw, I know a SE plane flies just fine VMC with no ASI...but why do it? If runway is long, as most are, then just stop. If not then fine, take it around the patch and probably go somewhere that has a nice long paved runway. More likely to have a repair station anyway.
 
Last edited:
denverpilot said:
It's a very personal decision. Folks with enough experience may accept a takeoff that someone experiencing something for the first time, may not.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's also situational. Did you notice at 30 knots or did you notice at 60 knots? How much runway to you have left? It's true that you should be able to fly around without an airspeed indicator but there's also nothing wrong with stopping as long as you have plenty of room and you weren't going very fast to begin with. Remember we are talking about small airplanes. Like other people have mentioned, jets and other heavier airplanes take a different mindset but that is because they have much more energy and acceleration.
 
Captain said:
btw, I know a SE plane flies just fine VMC with no ASI...but why do it? If runway is long, as most are, then just stop. If not then fine, take it around the patch and probably go somewhere that has a nice long paved runway. More likely to have a repair station anyway.
Click to expand...

My point exactly. Of course I CAN fly without the ASI, as any competent ASEL pilot should be able to do. But why should I? First link in the accident chain, and all that...
 
BrianR said:
My point exactly. Of course I CAN fly without the ASI, as any competent ASEL pilot should be able to do. But why should I? First link in the accident chain, and all that...
Click to expand...

That is the question you must ask at that moment because the answer will vary with the circumstances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top