ndt wrote:To throw another question out there for float pilots (a variation of Hedley question), when departing from Lake Superior (realistically if lake was 5 mile diameter), would you taxi to the other end of the lake for take-off. If there is a vote, I go with Cat's statement.
Nope. You get her airborne in the 800 feet of calm water you have in your little cove before the waves rip your floats off.
So...I'm going to jump in here and risk being shot down.
I am paid very little to be a pilot. I am paid a great deal of money to be a risk manager. For every action I take as a pilot there is a consequence. My job is to assess the consequences. That will then tell me which decision is the most appropriate.
I depart CYKF Rnwy25. I elect to take the full length available, 7,000'. I fly to CYYZ. I then leave CYYZ using Rnwy23. Tower asks me if I am willing to depart from Bravo, 10,200' remaining. Having just departed out of 7,000' I might feel that 10,200' is sufficient. However the risk management side then kicks in and assesses the current OAT, TOGW, surface winds, visibility and past aircraft performance. It is then that I weigh the consequences of my actions based on these elements. There is never one solution which works every time. Today I may accept the intersection departure, tomorrow I may not.
The most dangerous position which I can find myself in is the one called complacency. It worked last time, it'll work this time as well. Many times off of the gravel strips, in the early spring, backtracking would cause undo hardship on the aircraft both to the nosewheel and the prop. So a rolling start 200' up the runway may be appropriate. However to then chose to do that every time sets me up for the "it worked fine last time" scenario. The same can be said of landing at outpost airports. Just because the runway was good yesterday doesn't mean it is today.
