AggieDave 6 #51 April 20, 2005 QuoteIt's not that the aircraft itself is unsafe. I think what is being said is that the aircraft in those conditions is less safe in a takeoff emergency than one that uses less runway. It's really more about the runway conditions available, rather than the airplane. Thank you John, you were able to articulate what I was trying to get out much better then I did.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #52 April 20, 2005 A 182 that needs 1500 feet is NOT safe! Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #53 April 20, 2005 QuoteIt might be safe to fly a NEW airplane, at gross weight, to the red-line, on a hot day, etc. As airplanes age, they get heavier and slower, metal fatigues, engines no longer produce book-value power, etc. Ya, but new TO's didn't have -27 or -34 engines either. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,063 #54 April 21, 2005 QuoteA 182 that needs 1500 feet is NOT safe! Dave Say it was at Flagstaff, AZ on a 90 degree day? 1500ft would be damn good for a 182.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrisgr 0 #55 April 21, 2005 Quote If a jumpship appears to be having trouble clearing the fence, a jumper would be wise to say "gee, that plane sure is using a lot of runway. Maybe I should go ask someone..." Where do you usually jump? What type of response would you expect from the DZ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
