For checklists I came to like this one http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/checklistPlacards.php placed at the sun visors. Has everything you need and practicable enough for real useage.
When I calculate take off distances, I usually add half of what came out of the calculation as my personal "albatros factor", mainly to leave some room for piloting errors.
There is a simple 50/70 rule: at half the runway length you should be at 70% of your liftoff speed.
The version of it I have heard is 2/3 of rotate speed in first 1/3 of runway.
Sound rule of thumb - certainly better than nothing, but it never ceases to amaze me how few runways have any indication of where you are on the runway (admittedly, I have a pretty small number of runways in my scope of experience). Can anyone corroborate this observation?
I would imagine most pilots powers of estimation would be fairly poor of where exactly they are with regard to proportion of runway used - to have a decent guess, you need to see how much you have used as well as what's ahead of you. I would have thought some simple coloured lines at the side of the runway would make the abort-takeoff decision far less fuzzy - if you haven't got up to x kts by the end of the red stripe - you abort - no guesswork involved.
My approach is to be very cautious on runway length assumptions until I am very familiar with my aircraft's performance. Particularly in a rented aircraft, I would always apply a significant safety margin to any AFM calculated distance. I also apply an, 'I am not a test pilot in test conditions in a brand new aeroplane' margin.
I think runway calculations are an area where light GA differs completely from jet ops.
What about a much simpler approach: you calculate your takeoff distance before your flight and during takeoff roll
NIce in theory, but my AFM for example doesn't cover grass runways at all, much less grass runways of different softness. You end up applying some WAG degradation factor.
OTOH, with my airframe (Arrow), ground roll is almost never the problem, what kills people is the 50ft obstacle distance...
There is a simple 50/70 rule: at half the runway length you should be at 70% of your liftoff speed. If not, abort. If the speed is more than 70% you will be able to liftoff before the end of the runway.
What about a much simpler approach: you calculate your takeoff distance before your flight and during takeoff roll, you check whether your engine makes 100% power (RPM + MAP) and if it does, you're fine. The only thing that could prevent you from taking off is a problem with the landing gear, e.g. brakes set but that should be easy to feel. I add two more checks during takeoff roll: airspeed alive and engine parameters OK (oil pressure, temps).
I do use checklists when IFR (electronic checklist on my Garmin 695) but usually not when VFR.
There is a simple 50/70 rule: at half the runway length you should be at 70% of your liftoff speed. If not, abort. If the speed is more than 70% you will be able to liftoff before the end of the runway. This simple formula does not take clearing obstacles or further climb performance into account.
For more info see: http://www.mountainflying.com/Pages/mountain-flying/takeoff_dist.html
Then, I watched once a video/DVD series once from a well known US instructor (can't remember the name now) and he demonstrated that then you go out and actually measure and test the takeoff distance roll as is stated in the performance charts in the POH of the aircraft, the actual distance is almost always much longer. So he claims that the performance in the books is often the ideal performance and not actual due to damage to the wing surface and other factors. Some for other data such as best-glide speed and so on. Lesson to learn from it: test it out before you depend your life to it.
For the sake of argument, since getting my PPL I have flown about 4 different Cessna 152s, with varying props, new and old engines and whose performance at take-off seems to differ quite perceptibly. I doubt the performance data for any of them is particularly accurate, and windspeed is likely to make much more difference for an aircraft this size relative to a jet (granted, jets may fly in higher winds).
If I did work out what speed I could accelerate to before being able to stop for a hysterical passenger, I think it would take me all morning and I'm not at all sure I'd believe the answer anyhow.
AeroPlus. I agree. The way I do stuff may be completely wrong for someone else. For people who fly one type a lot - whether rented or owned though, I strongly suggest making your own checklist not using the kitchen sink ones provided. So you think about what works for you and what you need.
Jason: I saw your method and lit ooks great to me. Leaving your hands on the landing gear until you see 3-greens sounds like a good sample of thinking smart about how to prevent fatal errors. I was talking in general and then I could imagine that flying the turbine takes more than flying the Cirrus with Perspective as it doesn't have any knobs to turn and not too much to forget or the Perspective system will remind you (flaps overspeed, even low airspeed, but not forgetting to set the flaps on departure, which can be fatal). But then again, there are pilots that look at a Cirrus with Perspective Glass Cockpit and would fear that again, so it is a personal thing I think. What works for one, might not work for someone else as well.
Well if you read what I wrote below you will see I use very short checklists and flows. This was written before the turbine.
Now I use an even shorter checklist on the ground. It covers what could kill me or cost me a lot of money ie leaving bleed air in while starting the engine or not having enough battery voltage. I got rid of all the set up radios, enter flight plan, adjust vents for comfort etc.
But I really do believe in doing things in a repeatable consistent way. For example I do not remove my hand from the landing gear lever until I see three greens.
