The  whole incident, from start to finish  consumed about 3500 - 4000
 feet of
 the  6000 foot runway.She was off the ground before the 2000 foot
 marker.
 And today  was not a standard day -- DA this afternoon was about  8300
 feet.
 So yeah -- plenty of get up & go.

 Agree on  the slower  warm-ups vs blasting down the runway at full
 power...

 Live & learn  I suppose...

 Mark


 Mark,
 You might not need to make any more  high speed taxi tests, but a good
 suggestion was made by a friend of  mine. Run it without the wings on
 until
 you're ready to fly. You can  go as fast as you want without unexpected
 aviation.
 Bill  jEPSON


 On a canard airplane, if you take the wings off, be _sure_  to take the
 canard off too.  If not and you accelerate to near  rotation speed, the
 aircraft will likely flip over uncontrollably due the  center of lift
 being so far forward..  An early Varieze or Long EZ was  significantly
 damaged because of  this.


 Regards,

 Matt-

 Matt, et al,

 Other than to test the engine, what is the purpose of the high speed
 taxis sans wings? Do you have any concern about torque roll on the ground?
 You should  be able to get a good idea of tracking with slow taxi tests.
 Your brakes will  not be as effective at the weight which will be much
 liter since
 there will not  be much weight on the wheels (skidding).

 If your plane is ready to fly, do graduated speed runs aiming for a
 particular target airspeed, chopping the throttle and bringing the stick
 back. 5
 mph (K) increments would be good. At a given point, the nose will raise
 off
 of  the ground and allow you to gently put it back. (don't yank the
 stick back, but  give it just a little tug.) Because the thrust is now 0,
 the nose
 should settle  back.

 However, be prepared to fly the aircraft in case of a malfunction.

 This will give you some numbers as well as confidence handling the
 aircraft
 at takeoff speeds.

 If you use too much of the runway in this exercise, your runway is too
 short.

 Rich


 I'm not a fan of high speed taxi without the complete control system
 installed and functioning.  I think it's generally a dumb idea..  I
 was just making a comment about one of the (possibly not so obvious)
 hazards of doing so..

 I think ground running is a tough question..  You'd like to run the
 engine enough to gain confidence that it will function well, but you
 end up exploring areas of operation which are often irrelevant to how
 an airplane will be used - high power with zero airspeed isn't
 required of a normal airplane.  On a reciprocating engine you may
 cause a condition which makes it difficult to properly seat the rings
 on the freshly honed bore.  I don't know if that concern exists with a
 rotary - do the apex and side seals "seat?"

 Rather than extensive ground runs, I'd prefer that new engine installs
 be tested at an airport where landing after an engine failure or burp
 or hiccup is basically expected, and where damage because of such an
 event is unlikely..  A big airport with runways crossed in a triangle
 would be ideal..  Expecting a failure and being surprised by continued
 operation will help you be in the right mental state for dealing with
 whatever happens.

 Rich, your suggestion for how to sneak up on a first flight seems like
 a good one.  It's essentially what Rutan suggests, and is the method I
 used for checking myself out in my Varieze.  Gaining recent experience
 in the same type of airframe prior to first flight with a new engine
 setup should be just about mandatory in my opinion.  Or at least
 recent experience in airframes of several different types will be
 good.  Go get some glider, some tailwheel, some retract, some Cessna,
 and some RV time.  Spend some time transitioning back and forth
 between slow flight and cruise flight, both turning and level.  If you
 get glider time, practice rope-break exercises, and in a powered
 airplane, practice engine failures.  It will sharpen your flying
 fundamentals and get you used to dealing with the variety of control
 feel and responses you can encounter.  It will make it less likely
 that you will suffer PIO or porpoising..  Make sure the new airplane
 has zero control slop and friction in the elevator (for the same
 reason).


 Regards,

 Matt-


 If one has great concern about handling the aircraft they just built on
 initial flight testing, perhaps they should consider getting someone else,
 who is very experienced, to perform these preliminary flights.  Or, at
 least, get experience in a similar plane so that you don't end up testing
 your flying skills at the same time you're testing your aircraft!

 Georg Lasik

Paul & Group -

I got this from flightglobal.com
Begin quote :-
A Handley Page Victor bomber aptly nicknamed "Teasin' Tina" gave shocked
 onlookers more than they bargained for when it accidently took off during
 the Cold War Jets day at Bruntingthorpe Aerodrome. The Cold War bomber
 apparently took off as the co-pilot (who was an engineer and not a pilot,
 cue the "engineers can never be pilots" jokes) accidently hit the throttle
 when the aircraft was meant to just taxi down the runway for a photo shoot.
 The saviour came in the form of a retired RAF Group Captain Bob Prothero
 (cue the "RAF are the best jokes") who grabbed the controls and steered the
 bomber back onto the ground, where it eventually came to a stop at the end
 of a runway.
End Quote
Fly & Build Good -
--
Mr Bryan Wilkinson In England
07895 178 924


That story seems tough to believe - I have seen it floating around the
web recently..  Turbojets are so slow to accelerate and heavy jet
aircraft even slower to accelerate that it would seem to take a quite
sleepy Captain to allow a takeoff to occur.  This sounds like a
"Spruce Goose" type story..

However, here's reference from Wikipedia to that event:

"On 3 May 2009 during a "fast taxi" run at Bruntingthorpe, XM715 made
an unplanned brief flight (YouTube video), reaching a height of
between 120-130ft before being landed. The aircraft does not have a
permit to fly.[7] The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) stated that they
will not be conducting an investigation.[8] The causes have been
identified as the co-pilot failing to reply to the command 'throttles
back', thus resulting in the pilot having to control the throttles
himself, resulting in a brief loss of control of the aircraft, causing
it to rise. No legal action is to be taken by the CAA against either
of the crew aboard XM715 or the operators of Bruntingthorpe
Airfield.[9]"

OK..  Maybe not a Spruce Goose story, but possibly too much
bureaucracy in the cockpit.  Argh.


Matt-