What makes the truly short/soft field performer

[FenderManDan]

I always thought that tail draggers with the high wings are the best for it. But CS and others in some previous posts mentioned that the advantage of tail draggers is to have a bigger prop, which in turn probably helps the short field performance. The other day I was watching a video of the pipistrel pantera and
expected soft/short field performance seems very good for a slippery low wing.

What is really the key, discounting piloting skills (don't want to get into that one on this thread)?

[burhead1]

Big fat wings!!

Ps i contribute little.

[Shiny Side Up]

Having DHC in the type helps.

[Colonel Sanders]

Lots of wing area. If you can't get that, fowler flaps.
Vortex generators help, too. Light weight, of course.

[182-SS]

High lift wing. Light weight, and big power
.
The tail dragger is better on rough terrain not just for its prop clearance (allowing for longer props) but the fact that the little wheel is dragging instead of being pushed like on a tricycle gear makes it much more resilient to damage.
But being a tail dragger in itself is not a short field performance advantage, only a rough terrain advantage.

The introduction of better 3 blade props with more compact design have all but eliminated most of the long prop advantage. This as well as Steve at Pponk has finally been able to show some numbers backing up what many have been saying for a long time, depending on your set up a long prop is just eating hp by making noise, you lose thrust soon as the tips go mach.

Big HP, High lift wing, Skilled pilot = short field performance

[xsbank]

Dash 7 8^)

[old_man]

If you can't get that, fowler flaps.

Blower flaps are cool as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh8mn0DeKSs Check out about 7:55 for a 'short' take off. I thought it was neat.

Or b) just get a chopper.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

What makes the truly short/soft field performer

A collective cyclic and anti torque pedals.

[Colonel Sanders]

Repost, but these guys know STOL:

[esp803]

Ability to hover, or come as close to that as possible.

On a bit of a side note, for those of you who have not seen the documentary that the footage of the DHC-4 was taken from, I highly recommend it. It's titled "Frozen in Time" if I recall. Be warned though if you are an aviation enthusiast you will have to watch "The notebook" or "Terms of Endearment" or "La Vita est Bella" to cheer yourself up after... the documentary is the single most depressing movie I have seen, and to date the only one to make me cry.

[Moose47]

G'day

Lots of J.A.T.O. bottles!

http://vidgrids.com/last-jato-demo

Cheers...Chris

[Shiny Side Up]

JATO bottles can even make an ercoupe awesome!

http://vimeo.com/875011

[photofly]

Canards and big wheels: http://www.katmai-260se.com/video-stol-technique.html

[trey kule]

Smoking. over indulgence in alcohol, and not being able to find the Viagra .

Seriously, it is a combination of things. Everything from the tire sizes to the power/weight, wing combinations, and what the purpose is.. A super cub with a bigger engine, tires the size of 4930 floats, and one person on board can do some amazing things. But not really all that practical.. Purpose built planes like the helio or turbine porter do an amazing job. Even a 206 with a robertson kit can do some amazing things from short and soft fields..Twin otter..yep..The question is a little bit to broad to offer a specifc answer I think.

[PilotDAR]

Well, yes, all of the foregoing, but what is really important is a pilot with the skill to fly the plane within its capabilities, and the judgement to know that some places are just not right for that aircraft type.

A long time ago, I was the guy who would flight test following a STOL kit installation, primarily to assure that the stall warning was appropriately set up. Often I would take the owner for a flight in his newly modified aircraft, only to find that he was never getting near the capability of the aircraft. That's fine, if he is choosing to be cautious, I'm not going to criticize that, but with that pilot, the plane was not a good STOL performer. It did have lots of reserve safety though!

From time to time I've had a tower controller ask me if the plane I was flying was STOL kit equipped. Often I would explain that is was not, I was just flying it with an appropriate short field technique.

Understand that when operating any aircraft, but particularly STOL types, in that regime, you are on the edge of sacrificing some of the safety margins built in to the design. In particular, STOL kitted planes will safely glide at a slower speed. However, it is vital to understand that if you fly a power off approach at a slower speed than the original aircraft design recommends, you may have no reserve energy with which to arrest your descent, and you'll just mush into the ground when you try to flare to land.

Like aerobatics, alternative landing gear, and other "differences", STOL requires some familiarization training, and practice.

[trey kule]

Well, yes, all of the foregoing, but what is really important is a pilot with the skill to fly the plane within its capabilities, and the judgement to know that some places are just not right for that aircraft type.

If I read the OP correctly, he was trying to avoid a discussion about pilots and techniques, as I think we all know where that path will lead.

There is no question that real STOL flying is as much about art and luck as aircraft performance.

[Colonel Sanders]

real STOL flying is as much about art

I agree - it's more the pilot, than the airplane.

Here's a stock 180hp (only) Maule, taking off and
landing from the ramp in front of the factory:



When you consider that there are 235hp, 260hp
and 420hp versions of the same airframe ...

[atpl53]

Repost, but these guys know STOL:

Not being a tailwheel pilot, and at the risk of hijack:
I notice from the video that the rapid application of brakes made a couple of the ships almost nose over. Is this nose over arrested by simply releasing the brakes?

[Shiny Side Up]

I agree - it's more the pilot, than the airplane.

I dunno, with enough power anything can be made to do short take offs.




Landings are a different matter though.

[Colonel Sanders]

Is this nose over arrested by simply releasing the brakes?

Yes, because 99% of the time you already have full stick back.

[Taco Joe]

I agree - it's more the pilot, than the airplane.

I dunno, with enough power anything can be made to do short take offs.




Landings are a different matter though.

You just put a rocket facing the other direction

[slam525i]

You just put a rocket facing the other direction

They already tried that once. Didn't work out so good.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKCl3lfA ... age#t=120s[/youtube]

[Taco Joe]

You just put a rocket facing the other direction

They already tried that once. Didn't work out so good.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKCl3lfA ... age#t=120s[/youtube]

According to the video, it was successful. They just fired them too soon on the last flight.

[iflyforpie]

I notice the lack of wind socks in those STOL videos but quite a bit of wind noise on the mics. The 172 isn't too far off with a good stiff headwind... (landing anyways).