Backcountry Flying Series Episode 2 - Maximum Performance Takeoffs

We explore how to squeeze the most performance out of every takeoff.
Music by our very own Will Gunselman
/ willgunselmanmusic
Flying is inherently dangerous, and backcountry flying even more so. The Fly OZ Backcountry Flying Series is meant for entertainment purposes only and does not constitute, nor are they an acceptable substitute for, actual ground or flight training from a qualified backcountry CFI. Fly safe!

[@haystax]

Great work! Thanks!

[@davidatatum]

Great work. Nice job being efficient with your message. I look forward to seeing more of your content. Thanks.

[@storiesfromthedepthsofspac6413]

Interesting, I’ve flown tailwheel airplanes quite a bit and prefer them. That being said, when I got back into flying after many years, I found a Cessna 150 and the price was right. I just retired and plan to hit some of those backcountry strips. I would like to visit your school.

[@Turk-tf6vp]

The great series thank you.

[@luscombe8fan358]

Awesome Vid. I will defiantly share with my friends and students here in TX!

[@ThePikeywayne]

Thank you, very clear and helpful

[@CorbinAviation]

Another great video FULL of information! This one makes me want to sell and get a backcountry plane instead......ugh.

[@franciscarpentier6533]

Great video 👍

[@russbeers9613]

In episode 1 and 2 there is no mention of how techniques differ in nose-dragger aircraft... I'd love to see that.

[@danielnofal]

Wonderful videos, excellent channel. Starting to fly a Husky.

[@PDZ1122]

This getting-the-tail-up-high thing makes no sense to me. Yes, the wing will have lower drag but initially it's low anyway. The tail will produce way more drag though keeping the back end up. Wheel drag is increased significantly. Go and lift up the tail of a Husky, probably a hundred pounds or more. That force comes directly out of your available thrust .But it's the fashionable STOL thing to do. Lifting the tail just enough to clear rough ground and letting the aircraft fly off at its minimum speed will likely result in a shorter take off. Don't believe me? Look at WW2 carrier take offs; do they shove the nose down until they are level? Hell no. They weren't stupid and they developed their technique over 20 years of trial and error and physics.

[@flyoz]

We don’t advocate a super aggressive high tail takeoff like you would see at Valdez and the like for normal ops. It’s hard to imagine that tail at level or slightly past creates a significant penalty to your thrust or lift when compared to having the tail a foot or so lower but still totally clear from turf and certainly it doesn’t come directly from the thrust vector. If the goal is absolute minimum drag you may or may not be correct, it would be difficult to measure considering the number of variables. In backcountry ops there are a number of other factors at play however. Lifting the tail to level or slight past greatly reduces your susceptibility to wind gusts and reduces the likelihood of being bumped up prematurely due to rough terrain. Any advantage you potentially lose in wheel drag is more than made up for in controllability. This is especially critical in an aircraft like a husky that may have poor aileron authority at the low speeds the wing will begin flying at. WW2 carrier takeoff were performed off of smooth decks in heavy aircraft, that’s a very different environment than a sub 1 ton aircraft with a super high lift wing off of a very rough surface. Thanks for the input! Always good to challenge our presuppositions.

[@dwightschrute1904]

Did you mean to say “dump” full flaps at 2:00. You added them appropriately of course. Good stuff.

[@flyoz]

Good catch on some potentially confusing phrasing. I think I have a habit of using the phrase “dump” to refer to the general rapid movement of the flaps, but I think you’re right that most people think of flaps coming up when they hear the phrase “dump”. Great input, last thing you want is to confuse the guy in the front seat into doing the opposite of what you meant with poor word choice!

[@dwightschrute1904]

FLY OZ minor thing from an old guy that has 40 years of bad flying habits. Happy to be a fan of your work. Your efficient and thoughtful presentation is effective and appreciated. Please keep it going.

[@aviationresults2292]

What about airplane without flaps?

[@flyoz]

My experience with J-3's, Pa-11's, 12's, Citabria's and the like has been that the same procedure demo'ed here minus the flap manipulation works best. So keep the rolling start - tail up quickly and firm rotation into ground effect. You can also still utilize the counting technique through the takeoff roll just like in any other aircraft.

[@aviationresults2292]

@@flyoz thanks brother. Trying to dial in my J-5. Great videos, I subscribed.

[@elvenairscout]

I fly a Luscombe, 85hp and no flaps, and use this same technique minus the flaps and counting. One thing I find worthy of attention during the roll (which is often more than 10 seconds), which wasn't mentioned here, is the pitch attitude. As mentioned in other Fly OZ videos, I look out at the wing tip and put the undercurve of the wing slightly below horizontal - in my airplane this is a 0 degree angle of attack and minimum drag. 85 hp, every pound of drag counts.