I remember back in the 90's that commercial planes would line up on the runway, stop, apply full power and then release the brake to take off.
Now I've been on flight where they've literally rolled from the taxiway straight onto the runway and then powered up without stopping.
Why has that changed? What were the reasons for the older style?
Whether to use a static or a rolling takeoff is usually at the discretion of the captain as long as performance is not an issue and ATC doesn't need you to wait on the runway.
Reasons to do a static takeoff include:
Reasons to do a rolling takeoff:
Not all airplanes provide performance information for rolling take offs. In this case, a commonly used technique is to ensure that takeoff power is set by a certain point on the runway and adding that distance to your calculated takeoff roll for planning purposes.
I remember back in the 90's that commercial planes would line up on the runway, stop, apply full power and then release the brake to take off. Now I've been on flight where they've literally rolled from the taxiway straight onto the runway and then powered up without stopping. Why has that changed? What were the reasons for the older style?
I'm very interested to learn if there are (m)any (major) (commercial) airports that have runways further away from the terminal(s) than Schiphol's Polderbaan. Which airport is "in the lead" in this respect? The northern end of the Polderbaan, the last runway to be constructed, is 7 km (4.3 mi) north of the control tower, causing taxi times of up to 20 minutes to the terminal. [...] Newest runway, opened 2003. Located to reduce the noise impact on the surrounding population; aircraft have a lengthy 15-minute taxi to and from the Terminal. Wikipedia
, I established contact with the tower and was told to "enter left base, runway 7, report 3 miles out." I interpreted the "report 3 miles out" as to give the tower a call when I was 3 miles away from the field, ie, when my GPS indicated I was 3 miles from the field. Now, it was the most windy day I had flown solo in so far (15kt gusts) so I wanted to make sure I had ample time to line up with the runway on final and get a feeling for how the winds were blowing since the ATIS reported them as being variable in direction. That said, what I ended up doing was making a wide base, except
Hi – Here’s the scenario: The flight starts night VFR, with broken ceiling at destination (class C airspace) and expected to improve according to the pre-flight abbreviated briefing. I'm IFR certified but prefer to stay VFR to dodge icy clouds along the way. Now I’m about 15nm from my destination, talking to approach control, and the ATIS calls the ceiling overcast: it's apparent I'll have...): a). do I ask approach directly for the IFR clearance, and what is the officially sanctionned phraseology? Also: do I have to cancel IFR when I’m on the ground/see the runway i.e. is the clearance
to switch to ground frequency with this clearance (assume I just landed)? N12345, right on E, cross 27 R, contact ground .9 Should I call ground (or switch frequency, so I no longer hear the tower) before or after crossing 27 R? My by-the-book assumption would be immediately, as there's no "then" or "after crossing" or similar, but somehow that feels wrong. I suppose normally it doesn't really matter, but in the case of someone (which includes me, everyone makes mistakes) doing something wrong, where would they call me as I'm about to cross 27 R? The reason I ask is that I saw exactly
This comes from a flight simulator experiment ages ago in the Boeing 737.... I'm on the runway. I engage the heading switch, followed by the altitude and thrust. The aircraft lifts off, although hardly in a clean rotation. Now I'm wondering: While it did work in the flight simulator, will the autopilot follow these commands in real life as well if I repeated this in a business or commercial jet? Is there anything stopping the autopilot from engaging a specified altitude or from following instructions which are utter nonsense?
Note before reading further that I'm asking this question purely on theoretical grounds, though you are more than welcome to talk about practical aspects as well. Now, my question. It's common... an aircraft to return to the airport perimeter or the runway? How much of it is simply pilot error in executing a possible manoeuvre, as opposed to pilots thinking that they can pull something off that is just impossible, no matter what? For the purposes of this question, we shall assume the following: there is only one runway, so a reciprocal turn is required (we shall assume 210 degrees
As a thought experiment, imagine a plane with minimal fuel/appliances on board with hundreds of heavy passengers that make up say 10% of the weight of the plane. Now imagine that they have a way to synchronize a jump where temporarily for 0.5s they are airborne in relation to the plane. (NOTE: If idea of so many heavy passengers is troublesome to you, assume this is a cargo carrier with spring loaded "widgets" that have ability to be programmed to "jump" at once.) Questions: Can flight dynamics be affected due to the jump at ANY phase of the flight? What % of the typical (cargo/passanger
I've now seen several landing strips up close and there are lots of tire tracks from planes' landing wheels. I wonder if it somehow modifies the properties of landing strips to make for poorer landing conditions. Do landing strips suffer from lots of tire tracks?
Let's say I call up Wx and have the wind direction and I know the runway headings from my charts and the pattern is empty. I can do the math, but it's tedious and slow and even worse when there are multiple runways. This is what I usually do: Runways are 13 and 31 Wind is 253° which rounds to 25 $25-13=12$ $31-25=6$ I'm going to use Runway 31 Is there a trick to determine best runway quickly without doing the math?