Silvaire wrote:
and at least partially align with the wind for run up
I think larger airports have more than enough space on the taxi ways in any case. But when thinking about it, I often do the run up while taxiing. I still line up the plane in the general direction of the wind, if I have to wait . When towing gliders I do the run up in front of the glider, but at an 30-40 degree angle (when I do run up). Also, on smaller fields with less traffic, the run up is often done just before take off, on the runway.
Silvaire wrote:
Certainly before I put a tail wheel aircraft into a less stable situation due to run-up power, I prefer to minimize any other potentially destabilizing influence. Minimizing the possibility of a gust yawing the aircraft into wind is one way of doing that. Otherwise, if the aircraft were to yaw during run-up (brakes on light tail wheel aircraft are typically just strong enough to hold the plane during normal run-up and ice under the wheels wouldn’t help), then the outboard main wheel runs into a rock, then the tail comes up, then… prop strike. Multiple ‘issues’ can compound quickly and damage the plane before you react.
I admit that there is now 20 years since I last flew a tailwheel plane and I have only ever flown two different types (Piper Cub and Pawnee), but I can’t remember ever turning into the wind for power checks specifically. It’s another matter that in a strong wind, you’d want to park the aircraft with the nose into the wind. But that goes for nosewheel types as well.
You have to separate airports with a large run-up area from those where you do it basically on a taxiway.
At my home base the run-up area is the southern part of the apron, you can easily maneuver into the wind and out again with 2 aircrafts without interfering with each other nor needing a reverse gear so to say. It’s definitely easier on the elevator if all air is going in the same direction, though below 8kt it’s probably just for comfort. But put the tail of a PA-28 upwind in a 12+ kt breeze, which is rather common here, you’ll quickly understand it’s not happy. Blowing turbulent air at it from a 2000rpm prop at a fix point will not improve the situation.
On a taxiway I’d turn as best I can into the wind, but not to the point of a 180 degree turn. Max 45 degrees left or right so I can just turn back onto the centerline, if the parking brakes fail the grass will catch me rather than running into somebody or causing a RWY incursion. When possible I prefer doing the run-up before the holding point, you don’t want to be holding the traffic behind nor blow stones at them. A failed or extended run-up should not put the whole place in lock-down.
Btw, I think Peter’s picture is quite hilarious. Imagine the “tailwind” they inflict upon each other. :)
At my home base the run-up area is the southern part of the apron…
At my home base there is no such thing as a run-up area. One has to do the runup on the taxiway, facing in the direction of the taxiway. Airliners and other aircraft which need ground runs after maintenance will be positioned on a piece of the parallel taxiway for that. If you ask for that to run up your Cessna 172 the comtrollers will most probably not understand what you are talking about.
I think Peter’s picture is quite hilarious. Imagine the “tailwind” they inflict upon each other. :)
Yes; exactly. If you run up say a PA28 a few m behind another similar plane, to 2000rpm or so, and they are back to back, and he’s not expecting the “hurricane”, you will smash his control linkages against the stops really hard. I have had that done to me… Afterwards I spoke to the school from which the other plane was rented and the FI told me they had already told the renter to not do that… So maybe this issue ranks similarly to transponder [non]use; there is a generation of pilots who just carry on outside of any training system, doing what they always used to do. They need to fly with an FI every 2 years but that signoff is assured so long as the FI survives the flight; there is no “fail” option.
This is the first time I’ve heard of NOT turning roughly into wind to do run-ups. 
As regards other checks, I’ve had elevator and rudder cables interfering due to the tunnel they run in getting stood on. Once in 1500 hours in type, but justified all the no-problems checks.
And a recent fatal on the NTSB site was elevator cables reversed.
what_next wrote:
At my home base there is no such thing as a run-up area. One has to do the runup on the taxiway, facing in the direction of the taxiway. Airliners and other aircraft which need ground runs after maintenance will be positioned on a piece of the parallel taxiway for that. If you ask for that to run up your Cessna 172 the comtrollers will most probably not understand what you are talking about.
Only thing I noticed when doing the run-up with nearly 20 kt tailwind is that the rpm is obviously not perfectly stable at 1700 rpm as recommended by our checklist (Aquila A211), but the variations are neglegible and still allowed us to carry out all checks.
MedEwok wrote:
It’s funny but the two of us seem to be in a minority here as most of the others seem to follow this idea more or less.
I don’t either…
Aviation is a very conservative industry and things change slowly, the flying training side of the business is still working with a syllabus developed in WW2 and this retains items of "good practice " that have become outdated.
If you go into your average U.K. Flying club you find they are teaching student pilots to run up into wind , not lean the mixture below 5000 ft and another strange practises, when you ask why ? The answer is usually " it is good airmanship " when in fact these are good practices for aircraft of a bygone age.
Unfortunately " airmanship" has become the label for anything instructors don’t fully undersand but do because they have been told to do it rather than airmanship being common sense applyed to flying.
