Practice engine loss and the fatal 180 degree turn to departed airport

[Rnglgdj]

Hello All

Going to get some discussion going!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was just wondering about the new pilots to be, doing training using FS to practice an engine loss and the emergency procedure including finding a field to land in and actually landing which you usually do not do in actual flying and simulation of an engine loss on take off.

And, how many people have tried the 180 degree turn, mostly fatal, to see if you can do it with an engine out, single engine of course.
And have you done it from various altitudes?
The normal procedure with an engine out on take off is to land straight out.

As some comments from "those that know" say that FS is not a learning tool!!!! Interesting that most people not starting off with a 747 right out of the box and would practice on the FS the actual manuevers they do on a RL training flight. Even clearing the area before doing any practicing like stall, turns, altitude changes, turns around a point, or figure s across a road etc.

If a person were to do the whole 1 hr session including the preflight that can be done to a point except checking fuel, oil, would go through the process under the watchfull eye of a CFI, they would develop habits they they would actually use in RL training.
You can even do the panel scan, and traffic scan with the hat switch.

IMO

Don R

[lnuss]

You could certainly practice procedures in FS, but how much correct learning transfer there would be to the real world is an open question, for some things. FS aircraft don't behave in all respects as real world aircraft do and, depending on the kind of control setup you have at home, building a habit of reaching for throttle, trim, carb heat, etc., will have you reaching in the wrong places -- no keyboard in the real world aircraft, for example.

I'd certainly hate, for example, for someone to practice the engine out 180º turn in an FS 172, then discover someday that the real world 172 doesn't make it from the same altitude. Even weather conditions (wind, turbulence, etc.) and the pilot's mental state (fatigue, worry, personal problems, etc.) could make those thing vary from day to day in the real world, so...

Still, I've found over the years, as have many of my students, that sitting in an easy chair after the real world flight is over, then re-living that flight in your mind a few times (with mental "hands and feet" on the mental "controls") is very beneficial.

And there's no question that FS can be an excellent procedures trainer for such things as understanding a VOR and how to use it, getting your instrument scan going for IFR flight, and a number of other things, provided that they're practiced correctly.

A couple of the biggest drawbacks to using FS to practice for the real world are in possibly developing inappropriate responses when the real vs. FS differences really matter, and in developing bad habits which can be hard to overcome in real life, due to possibly practicing things incorrectly without the supervision of a CFI (near cruise speed down final, for example, instead of proper approach speed, or too much looking at the gauges), along with a few things that FS lets you get away with that the real world doesn't.

All in all, FS can help in some areas, and hurt in others.

[HR]
http://home.comcast.net/~lfn3/Cub_Pix/LarryCub03_s.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~lfn3/Peg_Ab...590Mklfn_s.jpg
Larry N.

[Rnglgdj]

Great reply Larry


I just wanted to get the discussion going if I could.


Don R

[theiceman]

Hi there

Whilst I know of one chap who has successfully landed back at the field after an EFATO (Engine Failure After Take-off) after completing an about turn, there are many who have not, at low altitude it will almost always end fatally.
In my pre-takeoff passenger brief (which I say out loud even if I am alone!) I always run through the EFATO scenario, goes something like this: “In the unlikely event of an engine failure after take off with insufficient runway remaining, I will select a field thirty degrees either side of the nose for landing, time permitting I will attempt a restart, if unsuccessful I will ask you to unlatch the door before touchdown….” Or words to that effect.

More often than not it ends badly when the pilot tries one of two things, trying to extend the glide and stalling at around 200 ft or trying the 180 degree turn which would be steep, bleeding off speed very quickly and the chances of entering a spin are appallingly high.

I don’t think any instructor worth his salt would ever encourage a student to practice this maneuver!

So far I have been lucky enough to never have experienced a true emergency in the air, closest I came was an above limits crosswind landing in a 172 and then there was the time I thought I smelled something just after take off…turned out to be nothing, but it was an interesting minute or so!

Let the discussion continue!

Ant

[Rnglgdj]

Thanks for the input Ant.

No, I really am not advocating anyone intentially practicing the 180 degree return turn.

I was just wondering how many people have tried it on the FS since it is talked about and also if you read the NTSB accident reports, actually tried in RL with the fatal results.


http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp

Don R

[ladamson]

>Thanks for the input Ant.
>
>No, I really am not advocating anyone intentially practicing
>the 180 degree return turn.
>
>I was just wondering how many people have tried it on the FS
>since it is talked about and also if you read the NTSB
>accident reports, actually tried in RL with the fatal
>results.
>
>
>http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp
>

There certainly are pilots who will try this manuver in real aircraft from much higher altitudes, to get a realistic assessment of just how much altitude is lost while maintaining sufficiant airspeed to avoid a stall/spin. For some, it's good to know; especially if there REALLY is sufficiant altitude, and conjested cityscapes lay straight ahead. :7

Of course, we can practice this with a desktop simulator or R/C aircraft, just to remind us of a possible helpless spinning manuver into the ground!

Personally, after seeing many R/C's (including my own) stall and spin into the ground during this 180+ degree turn; I'd never do it in a full size plane, unless I knew for sure that altitude, airspeed, and other factors were sufficiant, including a bit of margin.

Once again, the sim is only good for seeing possible results, as it can vary far too much from the real life scenario.

Ladamson

P.S.--- FWIW, I seen a Stearman biplane do a 180 from downwind to final, in not much more distance than the width of our four-lane road leading to the airport. For this aircraft, it obviously works rather easy. Now try that in a little Cessna or Piper... :o

[theiceman]

Hi there

Oh yeah at a safe altitude when clear of built up areas I often practice stalling and recovery, as well as when doing my South African permit to fly check ride I had to learn spin recovery, this was new to me as I had done my initial training in Piper Warrior's which aren't cleared for spinning, so it was a rather spectacular first attempt!Luckily I was at eight thousand feet at the time, which was good because I managed to put the aircraft into an inverted dive and only managed to level out at around 6800...could have been less, my second attempt was far better as I knew what to expect and went through the drills quickly for a good recovery.(Ailerons neutral, opposite rudder,throttle closed, 80 knots pull back positively but smoothly, as the attitude passes through the horizon smoothly apply power and your away!)
I, on the other hand, had this ridiculous knee-jerk reaction of opposite ailerons...which only makes things worse very quickly!!


Something else to consider when doing stalls, incipient spins and spins, is to be very careful with your speed, for example, the 172 I flew back in SA needed a lot of coxing to drop its wing, therefor in order to induce the wing-drop we had to fly with power on about 2000 rpm, plus at a 10 degree turn pulling back further and further on the control column to bleed off the speed, it feels very unnatural!
Anyway so then if it still doesn't go, then you can add a bit of opposite rudder, then she'll go and quick,you'll be surprised how quickly the speed approaches VNE (the never exceed speed)if you dont close that throttle immediately!
You go from 50 knots up to 160 in about 5 seconds with ground pointing right at your face, pretty spectacular!
Not supposed to be like that but it was my first try!
Interesting to note here that I don't recall feeling any acceleration, what I do recall was feeling some positive G-Forces when pulling up to level off.

Oh the memories!

Ant

[FITZY]

It was almost two years ago now, but this guy attempted a return to MHT 17 after loosing an engine departing MHT 6. It was a twin turbo as I recall, possibly a C-441.

http://www.wmur.com/news/5277019/detail.html

[Rnglgdj]

NTSB Identification: NYC06FA027
Nonscheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Tuesday, November 08, 2005 in Manchester, NH
Aircraft: Embraer 110P1, registration: N7801Q
Injuries: 1 Serious.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On November 8, 2005, about 0720 eastern standard time, an Embraer 110P1, N7801Q, operated by Business Air, Incorporated as Air Now flight 352, was destroyed when it impacted a department store garden center shortly after takeoff from Manchester Airport (MHT), Manchester, New Hampshire. The certificated airline transport pilot was seriously injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight rules flight plan had been filed for the flight to Bangor International Airport (BGR), Bangor, Maine. The unscheduled cargo flight was being conducted under 14 CFR Part 135.

According to the pilot, the preflight inspection, start-up, taxi and takeoff with flaps set at 25 percent were all normal. However, just after raising the landing gear, the pilot heard an explosion from what he thought was the right engine. But when he checked the engine instruments, he saw that all of the gauges for the left engine had gone to zero. The pilot visually checked the left engine and saw that the left propeller had completely stopped.

The pilot added full power to the right engine, and left the flaps at 25 percent. The airplane began a left turn, and although the pilot "stood on the right rudder," he could not stop a left turning descent. The pilot advised the tower of the emergency, requested a landing back at the airport, and was issued a clearance to land on runway 17. However, before the pilot could fly the airplane back to the airport, it descended into the garden center.

In the garden center, the airplane struck several trailer-sized metal storage containers. The cockpit separated from the rest of the fuselage, and slid to a stop on its right side. The pilot undid his harness, fell down to the right side, and crawled out the back opening, where bystanders helped move him away from the wreckage.

The accident occurred during daylight hours, in the vicinity of 42 degrees, 56.9 minutes north latitude, 71 degrees, 26.4 minutes west longitude.

AIRPLANE INFORMATION

The airplane was a 1979 Embraer (EMB) 110P1 Banderante, powered by two Pratt and Whitney PT-6 engines. The airplane had been converted from a passenger configuration to a cargo carrier and was carrying small packages at the time of the accident. The airplane's maintenance was conducted according to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Approved Aircraft Inspection Program (AAIP).

PILOT INFORMATION

The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate with a multi-engine rating and an EMB-110 rating. According to the pilot, he had previously flown Part 135 operations in Alaska and Michigan, and had been part owner of a Piper Navajo operation in North Carolina prior to his employment with Air Now. He had been with the company about 5 months.

According to company records, the pilot had logged 3,612 total flight hours, with 137 hours in the EMB-110, and had flown his captain's check ride in July 2005.

Prior to the accident, the pilot had been scheduled to take assistant chief pilot training at company headquarters, to assume that position for the company's Cessna 208 operations in its southern region.

The pilot's latest FAA second class medical certificate was obtained on April 4, 2005.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

Weather, reported at the airport at 0653, included calm winds, visibility 10 statute miles, broken clouds at 11,000 feet, temperature 45 degrees Fahrenheit and dew point 30 degrees Fahrenheit.

Weather, reported at the airport at 0753, included winds from 270 degrees true at 5 knots, 10 statute miles visibility, scattered clouds at 8,000 feet, temperature 50 degrees Fahrenheit, and dew point 30 degrees Fahrenheit.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The wreckage path, which headed 190 degrees magnetic, began at the top of a light post about 60 feet from the garden center. It continued along the garden center roof and two more light stanchions. Past the roof, there were impact marks on numerous 40-foot, tractor trailer-sized metal storage containers that lined both sides of a pathway that led to a chain link security fence. The initial opening between the two lines of containers was estimated to be about 30 feet. The containers on the left side of the path were aligned with the department store wall, while those on the right side of the path angled away from the wall by an estimated 30 degrees.

An indentation, consistent with the position of the airplane's left wing, was found in the first container on the left side of the wreckage path. There were also scrape marks on the top of the container.

The left wing, including the left engine, was found fractured in sections, along the containers on the right side of the wreckage path, and further ahead, next to the left side containers, was a turned-over and charred forklift. Next to the forklift were the charred remains of the right engine. Just beyond the forklift was a destroyed section of the chain-link security fence, containing the burnt remains of the airplane's right wing and center wing/fuselage section. Next to those were the mostly-charred remains of the airplane's empennage.

About 60 feet beyond the empennage, was the airplane's unburned cockpit area, laying on its right side.

The left engine propeller hub was still attached to its engine, and the propeller blades appeared to be angled about 90 degrees from the direction of rotation. There was no significant leading edge damage to the propeller blades.

The right engine propeller hub was detached from the engine, and one propeller blade was separated about 8 inches from the tip, while the other blades exhibited curling, missing blade material and leading edge damage. The blades also appeared to be angled 90 degrees from the direction of rotation.

Control surface actuator positions were measured on the accident airplane, then applied to a similar airplane at company headquarters, with the resultant trim positions observed: flaps were at 25 percent, the rudder was at neutral trim, and the aileron was at full left trim.

TESTS AND RESEARCH

The two engines were retained for further examination.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Due to the terrain, no radar track information was available. In addition, a check of local businesses and the airport revealed that no security cameras or ATM machine cameras were pointed at the airplane during the accident sequence.
Index for Nov2005 | Index of months

[theiceman]

Hey

Goes to show that an engine out during twin opps (piston) usually buys you precious little time when you are at low altitude.
It really does give you enough power to reach the scene of the crash.

Anyway very glad to hear that the pilot made it out of that one!

Doesn't look as if there was a post crash fire, which is probably one of the main reasons the pilot made a lucky escape!

Ant