Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

[SII]

I'm not sure how T/O preformance of a king air 200 is a flight training issue, I think the moderator who moved this might have his head up his rectum. What flight schools use a king air 200?

[lownslow]

What flight schools use a king air 200?

But... But... The school told me they had one so I could get TURBINE TIME!!!

I landed a taildragger in dead calm once that turned to a tailwind around the time I touched down. The plane corrected it to a headwind, then a tailwind, then the wind was mostly my cursing as the dust settled.

LnS.

[SII]

What flight schools use a king air 200?

But... But... The school told me they had one so I could get TURBINE TIME!!!

I landed a taildragger in dead calm once that turned to a tailwind around the time I touched down. The plane corrected it to a headwind, then a tailwind, then the wind was mostly my cursing as the dust settled.

LnS.

which also has nothing to do with the TO and landing preformance of a king air 200

[fish4life]

Anyone taking off or landing with a wind over what is published in the charts should give their heads a shake, sure 95% of the time you will be fine but the problem is if anything happens your room for error is gone. Lose an engine on a 25 knot tailwind take off and I doubt you'll make it over the trees, or lets say you have to reject and go off the end of the runway and it was shown that you had even a 15kt tailwind an insurance company will eat you alive. The point I'm getting at is WHY do it, maybe to save your company a few $$ in fuel? is that worth a potential lawsuit against you? or worse being in a fatal accident? any reputable company would much rather have you backtrack and take the headwind if it will be over a 10kt tailwind, WHY? It has been written in blood and they know a few extra lbs of fuel burnt is cheaper than an accident. So unless your landing with a 30kt tailwind because your plane was on fire and about to blow up it is reckless and dangerous.

PS look at the charts in the book if you notice takeoff and landing distance get exponentially greater for every kt on the tail.

[Cat Driver]

The other day I watched a Beech 200 take off with a 20-25 kt tail wind.

I can't believe there are pilots defending and justifying anyone doing the above.

[iflyforpie]

Every tailwind is a headwind when you turn the aircraft around.

Unless you are dealing with a large slope, take the extra time to fly a headwind.



Anyone else notice this topic is four years old? And why is it in Flight Training? Is Montair still flogging their King Air to unwary and rich students?

[SII]

so 25 kts on the tail at a 10%/2kt increase adds an extra 2500' on a 10 000' runway who cares?

[MichaelP]

There's a formula with regard to the increase in energy with small increases of speed.

The aircraft might just need another 2,500 feet of takeoff distance, but should a failure occur how much distance will it need to stop?
There's balanced field length.... I suppose this might be shorter if one plans on using trees, buildings, and other obstacles to shorten the stop distance.

At one field I watched 737s and CRJs take off with 10 - 20 knot tailwinds... On one occasion a CRJ went off the end of the runway, smashed into the ice in the lake beyond and 55 people died!
Was a tailwind a factor? I don't know, but give me an energy reducing headwind any day.

Is this another case of people doing something that history has proven to be hazardous, and getting away with it?
I've been asked the question why do we do it this way? many times. Sometimes I don't have a ready answer; it's because flying training has always been done this way... Sometimes pilots go against this classical training and the reason becomes apparent in an accident.

Has anyone read "Sagittarius Rising"? Cecil Lewis tried a downwind takeoff in a Sopwith Camel and thought it worked out very well. Perhaps that's why we need more hours training than he did?

[fish4life]

so 25 kts on the tail at a 10%/2kt increase adds an extra 2500' on a 10 000' runway who cares?

That's the thing it isn't a linear increase in distance required to take off it is exponential, for every kt in tailwind you add your takeoff distance increases susbstantially, for the aircraft I fly it increases our balanced field length upwards of 1500' for just 10kts of tailwind. How much is that increased by 25Kts? I don't know but I sure don't want to kill anyone trying it out

[iflyforpie]

I imagine it would be fun if you had a stove quit early in the takeoff roll with a 25 knot tailwind...

...or just after takeoff with obstacles...

[lownslow]

What do the Cessna charts say again? Something like, "Decrease takeoff distances 2% for every ten knots headwind. Increase by 10% for every two knots tailwind."

LnS.

[SII]

I've done it before, used 4000'/4500' of a 11 000' runway. that left me with 6500' to stop. remeber kids your going airborn even with a V1 cut so the max g/s your doing is 115kts. now I'm not sure if you realize with that 6500' left, you have enough room to go from a complete stop accelerate to V1 reject the takeoff and come to a complete stop twice in a zero wind condition with that much room left.

[MichaelP]

6,500 feet OK, but brake fade perhaps, loss of directional control, there's all kinds of factors that would make me feel a lot more comfortable having the wind reducing the groundspeed rather than increasing it.
Then there's minimum climb gradient. Is this factor calculated before departing with a tailwind?

Are we doing the safest thing possible?

[Liquid Charlie]

My problem with a thread like this is it has a tendency to form absolutes in a persons mind -- plant the seed tail winds are bad -- very bad for t/o and landings. This sometimes has the ability to hide something that could be more risk than the tail wind - absolute rules of thumb can work in areas where there are choices and really no need to accept a down winder except for convenience but there are areas when down wind could be the prudent choice -

Iqaluit -- then Frob was the scene of such a choice gone wrong(weather related) -- DC-3 chooses to land downwind off the approach - non event - T-Otter decides to circle after his approach because of same wind and kills 9 people

You have to know your airplane - and what it will do so when the day comes and you are backed against the wall it helps create an uneventful outcome -

I personally have landed 40 kts downwind when my alternate went flat after missing destination -- very uneventful except to maintain the glide scope - no other choice but I also knew from past experience that the landing was not going to be an issue.

Biggest problem for most pilots doing a down wind landing -- float ---- hit the target and life is good - don't worry about the arrival -- we all slam them on from time to time -- pride is cheep

[SII]

Thanks liquid Charlie

that's what I meant.

as for lossing directional control in a 200, Don't

as for lossing an engine, never an issue in the 200

as for flying into shit, look where your going

[MichaelP]

My problem with a thread like this is it has a tendency to form absolutes in a persons mind

Agreed. Being sensible is all anyone can ask.
Instructors teach forced landings... Considerations should include wind, Sun and slope.
A small tailwind while putting a low Sun behind you, or an upslope field in front of you is good PDM in most circumstances.

Taking off or landing with a 25 knot tailwind when there's an option to do otherwise is bad PDM, I have never met such circumstances in my life as a pilot.
Please enlighten us.

I personally have landed 40 kts downwind when my alternate went flat after missing destination

I'd love to learn the circumstances of this. I think there's a lot of pilots on here who would wonder what the PDM was that justified this in any aeroplane. We all need to learn.

[Cat Driver]

I personally have landed 40 kts downwind when my alternate went flat after missing destination

I'd love to learn the circumstances of this. I think there's a lot of pilots on here who would wonder what the PDM was that justified this in any aeroplane. We all need to learn.

Sometimes you have no choice as weather has a way of changing rapidly with no warning, especially in the far north.

I once got caught in a bad situation and was forced to land with a fifty knot ninety degree X/wind and zero zero in blowing snow..... like Liquid Charley I knew it was doable...

[SII]

it happens, That's what PDM is and I do accept all your appolagies

[Liquid Charlie]

I'd love to learn the circumstances of this. I think there's a lot of pilots on here who would wonder what the PDM was that justified this in any aeroplane. We all need to learn.

When you lose your alternate due to bad forecast(wx that moved in and went from vfr to 100x and 1/2 mile and winds 40kts in 15 minutes) - missed destination and no gas to go anywhere else -- this can and will happen when you are flying in the Arctic - it's all about doing what you need to to survive - hopefully no one has to experience this but we all expose ourselves to this every day - aircraft are getting more dependable, wx forecasts little more reliable -- in this day and age there are a good percentage of pilots who might never experience an event like this or even an engine failure throughout their whole career - but there is always that chance - the day that it all unravels and we are making those types of calls and PDM is all you have -