At my local airport the airport restaurant is inside the FBO building. That’s true of many airports I’ve visited with the intent of taking on a few extra calories.
Being in the south where former military training facilities are plentiful — many of which are now municipally owned and open to the public — the runways tend to be long.
Admittedly, long is a relative term. What the Cub pilot thinks of as a long runway the B-737 pilot sees as entirely inadequate. To say it another way: In aviation, size matters. In fact, it matters a lot.
If an unwise person was to mix these details in their head, they might come to a very risky conclusion. Yet, they might not see the hazardous potential of the situation until something bad happens.
At that point it’s too late. The die is cast. A negative outcome is unavoidable. All due to the very human quest for convenience.
Consider this scenario: The pilot and their passenger fly to KXYZ for a tasty bite of the local cuisine. Their destination is a non-towered airport where pilots do not have the benefit of ATC to guide their decision-making.
The flight is smooth, the landing is survivable, the wait staff is efficient and friendly, the food is delicious, the fuel is reasonably priced — everything about this jaunt has been a dream come true.
Until departure.
As the pilot taxis from the ramp they realize the taxiway ahead gives them the opportunity to make a quick, intersection departure. By taking this option they’ll be off the ground in no time.
They perform a flawless run-up, make the appropriate radio call, roll out onto the runway for a midfield departure, and push the throttle to the stop. The decision to reduce the 5,000 foot runway to just 2,500 feet seems like a fine idea.
The aircraft accelerates normally, the wheels get light, and at the appropriate time the pilot eases back the controls to raise the nose just a tad. The aircraft leaves the runway as expected, climbs authoritatively at Vy, and gains altitude at the anticipated rate.
Until…
The engine coughs, or sputters, or begins to vibrate aggressively, or just winds down to a significantly lower RPM without warning or apparent reason.
This is where things get sticky.
The pals now find themselves low and slow, nose high, airspeed falling off rapidly, as the last bit of pavement disappears below their nose. They are low enough that the Impossible Turn has earned its name.
Ahead of them are homes and businesses, streets flanked by poles with powerlines attached, and not a single piece of flat, clear space to aim for. They’ve got nowhere to go at the exact same time gravity exerts its significant power to compel them to go anyway.
Is this avoidable? Perhaps.
Certainly the quick and easy solution of making an intersection departure played a role in the eventual unpleasant outcome to this flight.
Years ago, when I transitioned from single-engine aircraft to multi-engine aircraft, I was intrigued by the additional pre-takeoff briefing I was introduced to. It’s a standard for multi-engine pilots, yet a complete mystery for single engine drivers.
Over the years it has seemed more appropriate to me that all pilots lock these few lines into their pre-flight planning.
See if you don’t agree.
The pre-takeoff brief goes like this:
- If we lose an engine before liftoff, I’ll bring the throttle to idle and stop the aircraft on the runway.
- If we lose an engine after liftoff with runway remaining, I’ll bring the throttle to idle, land the airplane, and bring it to a stop as best as possible.
- If we lose an engine after liftoff without runway remaining, I’ll clean up the airplane, evaluate the situation, and make a decision based on whether I can climb, maintain altitude, or not.
I’m sure the exact wording varies slightly from pilot to pilot, training program to training program, but the crux of the issue remains the same.
We are vulnerable on takeoff. Our powerplants are straining to drag our weighty airframe, passengers, and cargo to altitude. Should anything happen to limit their power output, that ability to climb can go away in a flash, leaving us with no option but to descend at the exact time and place we least want to do so.
Too often we put that reality out of our mind in search of a more comforting, convenient perspective. This thought occurs to me as I see one aircraft after another take that all-too-handy mid-field takeoff option as they roll out following their oh-so-satisfying lunch at the diner.
Truthfully, modern aircraft are remarkably safe machines. And by modern, I mean anything manufactured from the mid-20th Century onward. Maintenance requirements go a long way toward assuring us that our flying steeds will perform as expected, keeping us from harm as we zip along, high above the traffic lights, snarled intersections, and obstructions in the road below.
It is our decision-making that is our most important protective device, however. If we discard that in favor of quick and easy access to the runway and without giving a moment’s thought to how we might handle an unanticipated failure, we do so at our peril.
The multi-engine pilot has the idea fresh in their mind. If something bad happens, they’re ready to take action immediately.
The unprepared pilot, on the other hand, has the unenviable task of thinking their way through a thorny problem suddenly thrust upon them, while the earth rushes up to meet them.
Intersection departures haven’t been part of my standard operating practice for a good, long time. Perhaps this is a good time for all of us to reconsider the practice.
OK I agree with the fuel but I do intersection take offs always as they save engine time, fuel, and I get out of the way of other aircraft quicker. Granted I fly an RV6 so I only need 600′ but as long as I have 1300 feet of runway in front of me I’m good. My home field (SC36 PVT) is only 1385′ and it has trees at both ends. I practice the impossible turn regularly and at gross weight I need 185′ agl to turn back to the numbers. I have my wife pull the throttle so I get the surprise after the briefed altitude. But I do require 1 hour of reserve fuel VFR and 1.5 for IFR flights, just to make me feel better.
My first instructor was 76 years old and told me on my first flight with him that two things that do you no good as a pilot are the runway behind you and the air above you. That has proven to be good advice over the years. I flew a ’46 T-craft BC-12-D, 85 hp. I seldom made intersection takeoffs unless it was busy. For my home base at the time, OME, an intersection takeoff would give me about 3000 ft. of runway to the west or north. That was plenty of runway for that little bird I normally used just a few hundred feet or less of the 5,000 feet available, and there was a road a short distance off the northern departure route and a beach off the western departure route. Some of this is situational. What are the circumstances of that particular airport? If, for example, I was flying out of an airport in the middle of a city like Merrill Field in Anchorage, I’d want every inch of available runway even with my small aircraft, because options of landing sites off-airport were virtually non-existent. It’s about knowing and respecting the location and situation at the individual airport and the requirements of the particular aircraft you’re flying.As a radical contrast, at OME, flying one of the 737s that go in and out of there, an intersection takeoff would be all but impossible, especially if it was carrying any kind of load. Common sense has to apply in each situation, although common sense doesn’t seem to be as common as it used to be. Lol!
Ok got it got it got it. But isn’t there a potential for paranoia here too? I mean it IS flying. Not without all levels of risk. Just sayin… (ok you can beat me up now)
There are some risks to flying that are unavoidable and to fly you must accept them. There are other risks that are avoidable and accepting them makes flying riskier than it has to be.
My wife has decided to take the classroom portion of the Pinch Hitter course to the next level and learn as much as possible about landing an airplane. She has logged about 12 hours and is doing a good job of learning the basics of flying..
Interestongly, just yesterday the window next to her in the flight school’s Cessna 152 popped open during her takeoff roll. For those of us who have been flying a while we have probably each experienced a window or door that wasn’t securely latched. It would seem safe to say that in most cases it isn’t much more than a distraction. However for a new student it can be a major distraction. Since she had never had this occur while she was in a general aviation aircraft she immediately did the correct thing and immediately pulled the throttle back to idle just prior to rotation. It ended up being an uneventful occurrence and there was a full runway ahead of her as well as an instructor sitting next to her. But it had all the possibility of a new student veering off a runway or having some other more severe problem. An intersection departure could have had a different ending.
I’m glad she’s learning how to control an airplane and use all the resources available.
Personal preference: We’ll always use the full length and seriously reconsider our options if it’s not available to us.
I’ve often wondered if a door or window popping open hasn’t been an untold contributor to aircraft accidents. Sorry to pick on one particular make and model, but a Cherokee140 has a single door on the right side, with a secondary latch. If you forget the second step to latching the door, there’s no way to fully close the door except to go back and land.
Just say no to intersection takeoffs, and use short field procedure all the time, everywhere. That is — hold for full power at least 30 seconds; stay in ground effect the entire length of the runway. This add steroids to any aircraft. Okay, completely untraditional … any arguments?
I’m glad that you “…use short field procedure all the time, everywhere.” Not bad advice.
However, I’m not sure where you learned your particular “short field procedure”….but I think I’ll go ahead and climb out at Vx, or a published Obstacle Clearance Speed (OCS)…and/or Vy, as required, as soon as I can.
If it takes the “entire length of the runway“ to reach the appropriate speed…maybe you should have done some more math before releasing your brakes.
Yes. You are offered an intersection departure by ground. You have done your homework and you know that from that intersection to the end of the runway is 5000′. You are flying a single engine 4 place Piper. You only need 2000′ to get air born. You have enough room for an engine failure at 100′ AGL and still land the plane.
Not taking that intersection departure means getting in line behind 8+ turbine aircraft all doing IFR departures (same as you by the way), so your departure would be delayed by no less than 30 minutes. That delay may impact your ability to land at where you intend for refueling.
Intersection departures are sometimes the best option. But you have to know all the data about the runway and how much is remaining from that intersection.
Yes – perfect example. And how many pilots decide to base at an airport with a 2000ft runway even when there is another one not far away with a 5000ft runway like Jamie’s. His point is well taken, but I bet Jamie does some ‘riskier’ things, like flying at night, flying in IMC, or even occasionally landing on and then departing a ‘short’ runway (not an intersection takeoff but literally a short runway) that could be avoided.
Sorry, that’s silly. Each case is always aircraft, airport, and atmosphere dependent. It’s all about risk assessment. Something every pilot should be capable of managing in a suitable manner for them and their aircraft.
Flying in ground effect the entire length of the runway is a ridiculous suggestion and totally defeats the purpose of beginning takeoff toll at the beginning of the runway. Why would you do that?? What happens if you find out the plane won’t climb AFTER you’ve skimmed the Earth for 8000 feet? I’d rather climb as normal. Then have plenty of runway left if the plane won’t climb. Better to find that out early in the process than at the end of the runway.
Besides… I believe you’re describing a SOFT field takeoff, not a short field takeoff.
The purpose of a short field takeoff is to get off the ground as soon as possible and clear any obstacles.
But even a soft field takeoff doesn’t necessitate flying in ground effect off the end of the runway.
Kool! It’s early so I get to be the guy to say it. Gas still in the ground and runway behind you. The two most useless things in flying.
I will offer that intersection take offs with greater than 5,000’ remaining are in my normal “acceptable” list considering that most of what I fly will operate out of 900’.. but that’s just my guideline having taxied the full length of KPSM back when there were no turn offs on their 12,000’ x 300’ runway.