Doesn’t the lack of nosewheel steering, and the consequent need to use differential braking, result in an extended takeoff and landing roll on types like the SR22?
I doubt it. The rudder becomes effective within seconds of starting the takeoff roll. It’s a long time since I’ve flown a Cirrus but on the DA40 you rarely needs to use the brakes even at taxi speeds.
It certainly don’t seem to affect these Alaska STOL landing/take off competition dudes 
I would think it does have an effect on heavy, powerful tail wheel planes like WWII prop fighters. But that is mostly because they have tail wheel. Of the ones I have recently flown, the Saab Safir has free castering nose wheel. Even on that plane, the technique to taxi is to not use the brakes, but rudder as much as possible. Works fine unless you want to make a hairpin turn (which for other reasons is a stupid idea on the Safir). On take off there is not nearly enough power from the engine to cause any problems, no need to use brakes to steer. Maybe in a severe cross wind, but then you would also do the same with a steering nose wheel.
Peter wrote:
Doesn’t the lack of nosewheel steering, and the consequent need to use differential braking, result in an extended takeoff and landing roll
No, because you only need differential braking to steer at taxi speeds. Especially on takeoff, the rudder is effective before you even begin to move. You’re already pointed into the wind and you’ve got a lot of prop blast over the tail.
In a tailwheel aircraft like ours with a free castoring tailwheel, you may need a jab of differential brake on the rollout in a gusty crosswind, but I doubt it’s going to make more than a trivial change to rollout distance.
I doubt it’s going to make more than a trivial change to rollout distance.
I have not noticed much on calm days neither in tailwheels, Cirrus or else…it’s seems like a tiny noise? for tailwheels, in days crosswinds you do get more ground and takeoff roll but it’s not clear how it’s attributed? say, slow speed “jab and kick” (from differential breaking), high speed “asymmetric drag” (from cross controls) plus whatever symmetric flying after liftoff (from low level turbulences)
Propwash at take-off power makes the rudder immediately very effective on tailwheelers. If the engine dies at speed, it’s more difficult. The Jodel DR1050 differential braking came on before the rudder pedal reached full travel. No toe or heel brake pedals. I used it mainly in strong crosswind taxiing, or if caught by a gust at low speed on the landing.
Peter wrote:
Doesn’t the lack of nosewheel steering, and the consequent need to use differential braking, result in an extended takeoff and landing roll on types like the SR22?
Depends and No. Currently flying a friend SR22 I can say you just align at line up with a lead angle compensating for the drift until you have aerodynamic steering capability. Feels awkward at first, but works like a charm. For landings you have to be more precise on numbers but won’t notice a difference.
Nope. Not in the slightest either for my sr22 or the tail dragger. The 22 will stol in and out of 400m easily.
In the Ps28 I need some right brake in order to keep it on the runway. Not directly after applying power but in the medium speed range. Feels wrong but since the plane still needs less runway than the usual 50 year old trainers it’s not an issue.
Does it affect takeoff performance? It must but without precise measurements we’ll never know by how much.
It must but without precise measurements we’ll never know by how much
Theoretically plausible but it’s not why you end up in the hedge
