Short-field take-off techniques often achieve a shorter ground run by hurting climb performance.
While having more runway is great for safety, planning to use less of the runway is not a huge benefit: you always plan to have enough runway left if you need to abort during the take-off roll.
It's much better to have more height quickly in the climb-out: it gives you more margin against obstacles after the runway's protected area, and it gives you more height to land in case of an engine failure after take-off (EFATO).
The numbers for a normal take-off optimise for a good rate of climb, which has the greatest benefit to safety.
A short-field take-off gives you an extra option when the runway length is too short for that - at the cost of some margin if there's a problem in the climb-out.
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/998/Dan Hulme
First off as the pilot in command, you are free to do this if you feel it is the safe way to operate the aircraft in a given situation even if runway does not dictate it.
According to the FAA's handbook the short field take off requires a high degree of control of the aircraft, The pilot should be aware that, in some airplanes, a deviation of 5 knots from the recommended speed may result in a significant reduction in climb performance; therefore, the pilot must maintain precise control of the airspeed to ensure the maneuver is executed safely and successfully.
While an experienced pilot may be ok with this student pilots and newly minted ticket holders may feel less comfortable and thus choose to only fly from runways where this is not required, although it should be noted this is part of the ACS and thus part of getting at least a PPL here in the US.
Due to the degree of precision the maneuver may be used less than a standard takeoff.
There is an interesting article here worth reading on the topic.
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/3677/Dave
Short field takeoffs are more complicated than simple takeoffs.
That is why they are taught later, once you are familiar with normal takeoffs.
Depending upon the plane, there are several steps you need to take for a short field takeoff:
add flaps, line up before the piano, press brakes, full power, check engine gauges, release brakes, etc.
This is simply more complicated than full throttle/check engine gauges.
There are a thousand things that you need to keep in mind while flying.
It is best to keep simple things simple.
Of course you can always do short field takeoffs if it pleases you.
Most runways you will takeoff from will be long enough from a GA perspective.
In case the runway is short, you should of course use the short field technique. :)
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/23144/Prashant Saraswat
As Dave and others have already mentioned, short-field takeoffs result in taking off with significantly less airspeed than usual.
Your goal in a short-field takeoff is essentially to fly the plane just slightly above the point where it is not flyable.
As a result of this, the margin for error in a short-field takeoff is considerably smaller than in a normal takeoff.
In addition to the relatively poor climb-out performance mentioned in Dan's answer, you're intentionally trying to fly just beyond stall speed.
Relatively small wind gusts can put you back on the ground in a hurry, as could momentarily pitching up too much.
All-in-all the short-field takeoff is just a relatively more dangerous way to take off if you have sufficient runway for a normal takeoff.
You'll have less control authority and, so, less ability to correct the plane's attitude in gusty conditions.
You'll have less airspeed and be more susceptible to stalling at low altitude (whether due to gusty winds, accidental excess pitch, or a combination of the two.)
You'll also be less able to climb clear of obstacles at the end of the runway.
The flaps will also be providing additional drag, so you'll use up more horizontal distance in order to get up to speed for the climb-out.
Your only real gain for all of these trade-offs is that the wheels will have a shorter roll across the ground, so it's just not worth it unless you really don't have the runway to spare.
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/755/reirab
I used to fly a 4-seater Rallye Minerva, and, if I recall correctly, the recommendedshort field take off involved putting on full flaps (30°) just before liftoffspeed (the flaps were operated by a handbrake sort of affair) and then basically flying level until an appropriate speed was attained.
While no takeoff was relaxing, this procedure was a little unnerving (it tookquite a bit of effort to latch the flaps in, and there wasn't always a secondchance), and certainly not one I would use on a regular basis.
A crosswind added tothe tension as the liftoff speed was fairly slow (something like 42KT).
This was a lot more work than I would want to do when operating from a busyairport, and generally reserved for shorter 'fields' (100m, yep, you read thatright).
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/3212/copper.hat
Furthermore, you want to minimize the time of full power to the engine to reduce the chance of its failing.
You also want to keep fuel burn down so there's more reserve at the end - or less to be loaded to start, allowing more payload.
A "normal" takeoff improves all the above along with airspeed margins, visibility over the cowling, cooling airflow to the engine and more.
All of which are benefits it offers compared to a short (or soft) field takeoff.
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/31011/JimHorn
Depending on the airframe, there are a number of techniques to reduce the Take Off Distance required. For example, deploying flaps.  What advantage is there to NOT using short field take offs, even when runway length is sufficient? Surely it's always advantageous to require the minimal amount of runway, thereby adding a larger margin for error?
Why don't we treat all takeoffs as short field in GA?
aviation.stackexchange.com
<general-aviation><pilot-technique>
aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/48480
aviation.stackexchange.com/users/2160/Dan
Normal runway length provides for optimum climb when the aircraft takes off and allows a margin for error in case something goes wrong. A short runway take-off reduces this margin for error and therefor is less safe.  You can always perform a short-field take-off if you prefer, there are no restrictions against it. However, with short-field take-off, climb performance is diminished, so there is less margin against obstacles or stalling. Due to the flaps, there is also additional drag. Short-field take-off is much more difficult and complicated and, as a result, more dangerous.
With short-field take-off, climb performance is diminished, so there is less margin against obstacles or stalling. Due to the flaps, there is also additional drag. You can always perform a short-field take-off if you prefer, there are no restrictions against it. Short-field take-off is much more difficult and complicated and, as a result, more dangerous.