Is rotation closer to Vx, than Vr necessarily a bad idea?

[Racerx]

Need to fly out of a shorter runway. Then you'll learn why you stick to poh numbers. If it's not flying at 80mph you're way out of trim or have significant forward pressure on the yoke.

I used to have approaches fast for fear of stall. Then flew the numbers and landings became easier.

 

[SamSES]

You are forgiven.

It is a common misconception. Note that the FAA says "begins rotating the aircraft."

Yes, you do rotate some airplanes like the swept-wing Lear Jet and Falcon 50 I am typed in. But that statement doesn't say ALL aircraft are rotated.

In light aircraft like the Cherokee, which I have thousands of hours instructing in, the nose wheel is unloaded and the airplane gradually lifts off.

CAF?

 

[Roger Wilco]

tobnpr,

There are a lot of techniques that can be used to get an airplane to slip the surly bonds. At some point all the pieces fall into place and everything makes perfect sense (I’m still waiting for that moment to happen). You stated that it was your first pre-flight briefing, so the concepts that are being discussed will make more sense as your training progresses.

My perspective is that an airplane is an AIRplane, not a 180hp tricycle that won’t fit through a toll booth. Arbitrarily extending the ground roll is, in my opinion, bad technique and in some cases bad for the airplane. Given that, it's not the airplane that is “happier” rotating at 80, but the pilot (in this case, your CFI). That said, there are conditions, such as strong/gusty winds, in which it is safer to delay liftoff until a higher speed is attained, and you will learn more about this as your training progresses.

Regarding the matter of terminology, some replies to your post addressed the use of the term rotate. Rotate, and Vr, were not traditionally used in the operation of light aircraft, especially when your Cherokee was built (I’ve noted increased use of the terms over the past decade or two, to the annoyance of some). Simply put, rotate means that a pitch input is applied that results in the nose moving up or down. Less-simply-put, the nose describes an arc whose radius is referenced to either the main wheel axle while on the runway, or the CG when in the air. In light aircraft, Vr can be understood as a speed at which we apply a control input to establish the desired pitch attitude for takeoff. In the case of aircraft like a Boeing airliner, Vr has additional, and very specific, meaning.

During your pre-solo training you should gain a good working understanding of the relationship between pitch attitude and aircraft performance.* When we apply a nose-up pitch input to rotate during takeoff, our goal should be to establish the desired pitch attitude, which we determine by visual reference. Your CFI should help you to identify and consistently establish the correct pitch attitude.

If you’ve managed to read this far, thanks for your patience. In the GA world, there are almost as many techniques as there are pilots, and each of those techniques has worked successfully—at least once—to get an aircraft off the ground. If the AFM/POH provides guidance, that information should be considered valid and reliable under the stated conditions, and adjusted as appropriate for conditions other than stated. Among the vast and varied GA fleet, AFM/POH takeoff performance information varies from comprehensive to nonexistent, so it is important to grasp the basic concepts and when/how to apply them. During your training you will learn about the effects that runway condition (short, soft, standing water, snow, etc.), and environmental conditions such as strong, gusty winds, have on takeoff performance, and how to adjust your Vr (if you insist) and initial pitch attitude to achieve the best and/or safest performance. Know your airplane, know yourself, know your situation.

RW

* There’s an old adage, “pitch + power = performance,” and this holds true for most, if not all, fixed-wing aircraft.

 

[robin ardoin]

I have a pet peeve about people using uncommon acronyms without at least once specifying the meaning. It’s a particularly common practice in my field and it annoys me to no end.

SYBYHATO

 

[Huckster79]

You nosewheel folks looking at instruments on the ground…. I tell ya…

I put the bird in a flying attitude and she leaves terra ferma once ready…, not sure the exact speed I’m going…. Once airborn I’ll glance…

 

[SebIp]

You should also just ask your instructor if you don't know why. In this case be specific why the POH is like this and what does it mean the plane is happier.

My own instructor has a tendency to be opposite of verbose and his teaching style tends to be let you do stuff till he has to step in, and it works for the most part. However, I have also flown with other instructors in the same school and some of them are very specific about each step and explain at length. I just have to ask more questions then being told stuff with my CFI.

I honestly suspect the reason is just what state you are at. When I was new to all this and on the flight school planes, my guy would let me do stuff as long as it's not dangerous. Things like having some side load from not really knowing what to do in a crosswind, or being off altitude. Now that I am almost done and we are on a private plane, the bar is higher on everything.

 

[SebIp]

You nosewheel folks looking at instruments on the ground…. I tell ya…

I put the bird in a flying attitude and she leaves terra forms once ready…, not sure the exact speed I’m going…. Once airborn I’ll glance…

There should be something about caveat emptor or tongue in cheek... OP is training and need to meet some flight test standards. Can't just do whatever and see when the plane leaves the ground.

 

[PaulS]

There should be something about caveat emptor or tongue in cheek... OP is training and need to meet some flight test standards. Can't just do whatever and see when the plane leaves the ground.

I think an examiner would be more concerned about a candidate holding the airplane on the ground when it's obviously ready to fly versus lifting the nose a little and letting it happen when the plane is ready to go.

 

[Hang 4]

I fly a Cherokee 180 (Challenger, Archer 1, Hershey Bar wing with extended cabin). I am hard pressed to know what speed I lift off at. I look at the ASI when I get some speed to make sure it's working and glance again to see if I'm at where I expect to be speed wise vs my abort point. From there it's just feel.

 

[midlifeflyer]

There should be something about caveat emptor or tongue in cheek... OP is training and need to meet some flight test standards. Can't just do whatever and see when the plane leaves the ground.

Yeah, but the amazing thing is that if you feel and see the airplane is ready to fly, chances are, you will be on target for airspeed.

I do it with trainees far more on landings, but covering the ASI and flying based on visual clues alone has results that usually surprise the pilot. (Yeah, it surprised me too when it was done to me. One of the best post-training lessons I've had.

 

[schmookeeg]

I think an examiner would be more concerned about a candidate holding the airplane on the ground when it's obviously ready to fly versus lifting the nose a little and letting it happen when the plane is ready to go.

Finally, this.

OP you should practice answering potential questions from the Examiner. Consider this bit of checkride prep mad-libs:

Scene: You at 80mph bounding down a runway not lifting off for unknowable reasons.

Examiner: "WTF are you doing?"

Answer A: "My CFI said to make airplanes happy"

Answer B: "The POH says... and I didn't do because..."

Worth a think.

 

[texasclouds]

You nosewheel folks looking at instruments on the ground…. I tell ya…

I put the bird in a flying attitude and she leaves terra forms once ready…, not sure the exact speed I’m going…. Once airborn I’ll glance…

/thread

 

[AKBill]

For me, set trim for TO and let the plane lift off when it's ready to fly

 

[Clip4]

Bad, bad teaching. He's harming the student. From the Canadian Flight Instructor Guide:

View attachment 113798

Some detail:

View attachment 113799

So guess what that instructor learned on his first flights? The wrong stuff, and he's passing it on.

Actually the instructor needs to teach a variety of rotation speeds for the environmental conditions and the desired procedure. Having a student use a slight higher airspeed early in the training is not a primacy issue.

 

[Racerx]

Actually the instructor needs to teach a variety of rotation speeds for the environmental conditions and the desired procedure. Having a student use a slight higher airspeed early in the training is not a primacy issue.

But we're talking 20mph over vr...in a Cherokee. Cfi is teaching rotate in between vx and vy. What condition would require such speed to rotate?

 

[Huckster79]

There should be something about caveat emptor or tongue in cheek... OP is training and need to meet some flight test standards. Can't just do whatever and see when the plane leaves the ground.

valid point- but I do think we often train folks to think with more attention focused on staining at instruments while training them to be visual pilots….

I’m not saying don’t look at airspeed in a trainer but also feel too much attention put on instrument precision than just learning the feel to “fly the plane”.

 

[Clip4]

But we're talking 20mph over vr...in a Cherokee. Cfi is teaching rotate in between vx and vy. What condition would require such speed to rotate?

My point wasn’t that +20 would ever be required but under SA the pilot will adjust the rotation speeds for various conditions and tasks. It is also totally possible the student misunderstood the statement or the CFI misspoke - which in this account seems the most likely.

 

[FastEddieB]

You nosewheel folks looking at instruments on the ground…. I tell ya…

I put the bird in a flying attitude and she leaves terra forms once ready…, not sure the exact speed I’m going…. Once airborn I’ll glance…

Maybe again time to stress that a lot of this advice applies mainly to smaller, GA aircraft.

After a flying career spanning almost 50 years, I finally got the chance to fly right seat in a business jet, in this case a Beech Premier. I can tell you the airspeed is referenced often on the takeoff roll, with target speeds, including Vr, coming up and passing very rapidly. And at Vr, the nose is raised to a specified pitch attitude and the plane leaves the ground when ready, though admittedly quite quickly. I assume this is what’s done in commercial airliners, with little room for differing techniques based on pilot preference.

As such, I think as far as primacy goes, having a student include the airspeed indicator in their scan on takeoff roll is a good idea. A J3 Cub is not a 747, but certain fundamentals still apply to both.

 

[Racerx]

It is also totally possible the student misunderstood the statement or the CFI misspoke - which in this account seems the most likely.

I hope its one of these. But I overheard a CFI tell someone on an introductory flight that "small planes like these don't really have a set list of things to check, just look over the plane". The plane was a 172. I thought I misheard as I wasn't really paying attention to their conversation. Then the person I was with gave me a look and asked if it was true. I had a chat with his employer.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Having a student use a slight higher airspeed early in the training is not a primacy issue.

Yes, it is a Primacy issue. The first thing he sees is a long, high-speed ground roll. That's called a takeoff, as far as he is concerned.

You save the higher-speed stuff for the crosswind takeoff instruction. The right stuff in the right place at the right time. Anything else brings confusion and incorrect techniques.

And the rotation is not necessary in a light airplane. The nose will want to come up as the speed rises; that's how the airplane is designed. A Cherokee that needs a lot of yank to lift off probably has a far-forward CG. We used to fix that in the 172s with some ballast tied down in the baggage compartment. The 150s didn't need it; their CG range was already pretty short. The Citabria would gather speed and the tail would come up on its own; I taught the student to arrest the tail's rise when it was a few inches off, and the airplane rose off the runway when it was ready, and that same attitude was very close to the climb attitude. As the climb speed increased, the back pressure needed dropped to zero, if it was trimmed right.

Bringing transport-category practices into light GA seems to have been going on for 30 years or more now. Long approaches with power on all the way to touchdown. Long T/O rolls and rotations. It all means more runway used up, and the uninformed student learns to fly this way, then gets his ticket, then plans a cross-country to a small-town's 2500-foot strip and runs off its end in the landing, after having touched down a third of the way down the runway, in a fast and flat attitude. "But the POH says that 2500 feet is OK!" He doesn't recognize that he was taught to fly using techniques not found anywhere in the POH. Most students and PPLs seem to ignore the POH/AFM altogether. Too many airplanes don't even have one.

 

[Ed Haywood]

My philosophy is to have fun without getting kilt. Almost every takeoff without inexperienced nervous passengers or gusty winds is a soft-field takeoff. It’s just more fun to come off the ground, accelerate, and then climb. More relaxing too. Something about a long ground roll just makes it feel unnatural in a seat-of-the-pants “I am one with the machine” sort of way. I know that’s weird.

Nothing weird about that at all. That's how I roll too. Pun intended.

But students should learn the by-the-book method first. As they develop skill and feel, they can learn to vary their technique.

Per the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook:

When all the flight controls become effective during the takeoff roll in a nose-wheel type airplane, the pilot should gradually apply
back-elevator pressure to raise the nose-wheel slightly off the runway, thus establishing the takeoff or lift-off attitude. This is the
“rotation” for lift-off and climb. As the airplane lifts off the surface, the pitch attitude to hold the climb airspeed should be held with
elevator control and trimmed to maintain that pitch attitude without excessive control pressures.

 

[mondtster]

Yes, it is a Primacy issue.

Bringing transport-category practices into light GA seems to have been going on for 30 years or more now. Long approaches with power on all the way to touchdown. Long T/O rolls and rotations. It all means more runway used up, and the uninformed student learns to fly this way, then gets his ticket, then plans a cross-country to a small-town's 2500-foot strip and runs off its end in the landing, after having touched down a third of the way down the runway, in a fast and flat attitude. "But the POH says that 2500 feet is OK!" He doesn't recognize that he was taught to fly using techniques not found anywhere in the POH. Most students and PPLs seem to ignore the POH/AFM altogether. Too many airplanes don't even have one.

I’ve had a couple of advanced flight training students that fit that description perfectly. It is clear to me that their primary instructors did them no favors by using the techniques they were taught.

One of the guys was absolutely insistent about doing takeoff and landing distance computations on every flight, which is fine, except that his inability to actually perform the takeoff and landing according to the flight manual made those numbers completely worthless. I tried to inquire about the difference between his computed distances and the actual distances and I just got a blank stare. He had no idea what I was talking about because he would never benchmark his performance.

The other guy never computed his distances but he’d use 85-90% of a 3100’ runway for taking off or landing a 182. You wouldn’t think that was possible, but it is. My eyes got pretty big a few times during a takeoff or landing.

 

[Huckster79]

There should be something about caveat emptor or tongue in cheek... OP is training and need to meet some flight test standards. Can't just do whatever and see when the plane leaves the ground.

it’s not really tongue in cheek… I think it wud be better to teach the feel of flying- not “pull yoke at 67.5 kt”.

even a nosewheel once rolling w just a slight amount of back pressure will fly on its own when it’s ready. Yes on a nosewheel one has the freedom to look at airspeed I understand that… in a tailwheel we don’t typically, but it’s not near as necessary as it’s often made out to be…

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

unless the trim is set wrong....

 

[William Pete Hodges]

My first instructor taught me in a 150/152 at Vr to apply light elevator back pressure to lighten the nose and the airplane will lift off if by itself as it gains airspeed. Then I showed up one one windy day and the chief instructor took me flying but wouldn't let me log any time. He told me to throw everything I had learned out the window for today only, and proceeded to explain why today we would do things differently in order fly safely in very windy conditions. He had me hold the nose down a little bit to add 10 mph airspeed, then quickly pull back, pop off the runway, apply rudder into the wind to create a crab against a crosswind, and dive at the runway to build up airspeed so I wouldn't get out of ground effect. All these things occurred in just a few seconds and as I dove towards the runway the airplane began to climb up and away. It was the most exciting thing I had ever done in an airplane before.

There are lots of reasons to do things differently for different types of flying conditions. These are part of what you learn in your private pilot training. So what your instructor is suggesting you do today might not be what he suggests that you do tomorrow. As your experience increases so does your exposure to other types of flying conditions that you're going to have to learn about.

Your questions to us mean that you're thinking about these things. That is good. So now all you need to do is decide how you do things differently for regular take off, short field takeoff, soft field takeoff and landing, and windy day take off and landing.

Keep an open mind and keep thinking. You're going to do okay.

 

[tobnpr]

Keep an open mind and keep thinking. You're going to do okay.

Appreciate all of the input above. Some variation in opinions, but I see the reasoning/logic behind all of them.
I'll be flying with a new CFI as of next week, the one I started with is relocating. I'm actually looking forward to the change- not because of any concerns with my prior CFI, but because I think getting different perspectives, as well as being exposed to different teaching "styles" is beneficial.

My son's an AF pilot that's currently in PIT (FAIP'd from fighter training)- I'd asked why put "new" pilots in as instructors, and the answer was so that the SUPT students get a perspective from those that have just recently been through the program as well as much more seasoned pilots on assignment as instructors. Makes sense to me...

 

[Clip4]

Yes, it is a Primacy issue. The first thing he sees is a long, high-speed ground roll. That's called a takeoff, as far as he is concerned.

You save the higher-speed stuff for the crosswind takeoff instruction. The right stuff in the right place at the right time. Anything else brings confusion and incorrect techniques.

And the rotation is not necessary in a light airplane. The nose will want to come up as the speed rises; that's how the airplane is designed. A Cherokee that needs a lot of yank to lift off probably has a far-forward CG. We used to fix that in the 172s with some ballast tied down in the baggage compartment. The 150s didn't need it; their CG range was already pretty short. The Citabria would gather speed and the tail would come up on its own; I taught the student to arrest the tail's rise when it was a few inches off, and the airplane rose off the runway when it was ready, and that same attitude was very close to the climb attitude. As the climb speed increased, the back pressure needed dropped to zero, if it was trimmed right.

Bringing transport-category practices into light GA seems to have been going on for 30 years or more now. Long approaches with power on all the way to touchdown. Long T/O rolls and rotations. It all means more runway used up, and the uninformed student learns to fly this way, then gets his ticket, then plans a cross-country to a small-town's 2500-foot strip and runs off its end in the landing, after having touched down a third of the way down the runway, in a fast and flat attitude. "But the POH says that 2500 feet is OK!" He doesn't recognize that he was taught to fly using techniques not found anywhere in the POH. Most students and PPLs seem to ignore the POH/AFM altogether. Too many airplanes don't even have one.

If that is true, so is a normal no X wind take off because you didn’t teach him the x wind first and he might revert back to the first situation and technique he was taught.

I still believe is situation was a communication issue and the CFI really didn’t want home to rotate at that high of value.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

Long approaches with power on all the way to touchdown. Long T/O rolls and rotations. It all means more runway used up, and the uninformed student learns to fly this way, then gets his ticket, then plans a cross-country to a small-town's 2500-foot strip and runs off its end in the landing, after having touched down a third of the way down the runway, in a fast and flat attitude. "But the POH says that 2500 feet is OK!" He doesn't recognize that he was taught to fly using techniques not found anywhere in the POH.

Remember that applicants for the Private Pilot certificate have to demonstrate short field takeoffs and landings, which are usually found in the POH.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

I showed up one one windy day and the chief instructor took me flying but wouldn't let me log any time. He told me to throw everything I had learned out the window for today only, and proceeded to explain why today we would do things differently in order fly safely in very windy conditions. He had me hold the nose down a little bit to add 10 mph airspeed, then quickly pull back, pop off the runway, apply rudder into the wind to create a crab against a crosswind, and dive at the runway to build up airspeed so I wouldn't get out of ground effect. All these things occurred in just a few seconds and as I dove towards the runway the airplane began to climb up and away. It was the most exciting thing I had ever done in an airplane before.

That's an interesting story. I teach students to keep the airplane on the runway to add airspeed on gusty crosswind takeoffs. This is to make a positive transition to flight and avoid "crow-hopping" sideways if you lift off too early. Once airborne, I don't think you need to "apply rudder into the wind" because the airplane will naturally weathervane and crab. No rudder required. And I guess when you say "dive at the runway" you are describing how it's necessary to apply forward pressure on the yoke to stay in ground effect. That's not really a dive as much as a low-level level-off.

Why wouldn't you be able to log any time?

 

[IK04]

SYBYHATO

GTFOOTLL

 

[William Pete Hodges]

That's an interesting story. I teach students to keep the airplane on the runway to add airspeed on gusty crosswind takeoffs. This is to make a positive transition to flight and avoid "crow-hopping" sideways if you lift off to early. Once airborne, I don't think you need to "apply rudder into the wind" because the airplane will naturally weathervane and crab. No rudder required. And I guess when you say "dive at

Why wouldn't you be able to log any time?

I was 19 when I started and when I got there that day, it was too windy to legally teach a low time green student like me with less than 10 hours of flight time. No other instructors were there, and I was too green to know it was too windy to fly. The owner of the flight school was a real hot-dog of a flyer. He said I couldn't fly, but he could, and if I wanted to he would take out and show me some tricks to use in the wind. It was a real hoot and one of my favorite experiences.

 

[SkyChaser]

I was 19 when I started and when I got there that day, it was too windy to legally teach a low time green student like me with less than 10 hours of flight time. No other instructors were there, and I was too green to know it was too windy to fly. The owner of the flight school was a real hot-dog of a flyer. He said I couldn't fly, but he could, and if I wanted to he would take me flying and teach me about wind, but I couldn't log the time. He explained the challenges, and he explained how we would cope with them one by one. The wind was from the right and pretty strong. Full right aileron to keep the upwind wing planted, accelerate above normal speed, pop off the runway and immediately steer into the wind with rudder while keeping the wings level with aileron to establish a flat crab about a 30-40 degrees, look out the left side window to keep lined up with the center line, and then nose down to dive at the runway. He guaranteed the airplane would begin climbing before I could hit it! He even bet me I couldn't hit it no matter how hard I tried! The entire lesson was a hoot of a roller-coaster ride, and I loved it! I learned a lot of stuff that was way outside of the norm, and he opened up some about why he started the school and what he wanted to do. He was a really great guy. I really enjoyed flying with him that day and it is one of my favorite experiences.

Was the owner a CFI, or just a pilot? There's no limit on when you can fly and log dual for wind speeds...

 

[William Pete Hodges]

I was too young and green to be able to answer your questions. That was back in 1980. I stopped flying the following year and didn't start again until 2004. I've been flying ever since.

Was the owner a CFI, or just a pilot? There's no limit on when you can fly and log dual for wind speeds...