Engine failure after takeoff - turn back?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine failure after takeoff - turn back?
Yes, it's the age old dead horse again. But I hadn't seen this footage before. It's a Falke motorglider apparently, and the rwy is almost comically wide, but it shows that it can be done in certain circumstances. I apologise on these total strangers behalf for the dreadful music.
Last edited by AdamFrisch; 24th Jan 2013 at 05:57.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. But. The Falke is a motor GLIDER, with engine off glide ratio of aprox. 23 to 1. You can travel a long way even with only 23 to 1 glide ratio. The glide ratio of a Cessna 152 is probably less than 10 to 1. Interesting exercise before deciding to turn back after EFAT would be to check exactly how far a perfectly flown l52 would travel engine off (do this at altitude, please! they don't call them planks for no reason....)
Also I suspect they are speaking Russian.....
Also I suspect they are speaking Russian.....
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hong kong
Age: 49
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't like videos such as this.
This is a motor glider. The engine is operating.
This sends the wrong message IMHO.
Land straight ahead (within reason), avoid anything hard and / or expensive and maintain flying speed and therefore control down to the landing / crash.
I used to use an 8:1 glide ratio for the 152...And I think that may have been a tad optimistic
Best,
SSS
This is a motor glider. The engine is operating.
This sends the wrong message IMHO.
Land straight ahead (within reason), avoid anything hard and / or expensive and maintain flying speed and therefore control down to the landing / crash.
I used to use an 8:1 glide ratio for the 152...And I think that may have been a tad optimistic
Best,
SSS
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mare Imbrium
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing wrong with that video is the title and introduction - which both imply that what is shown is what to do in an EFATO in a light aircraft. as a demo of how a motorglider can fly its fine - but that isn't what its presented as. Dangerous stuff.
As others have pointed out
- its a glider
- the engine is running (in a motor glider the glide ratio with engine on tick over can be as good as 30:1)
- its a huge airfield
I would add
- motor gliders have airbrakes so glide can be controlled precisely
- what was the wind doing? there was clearly no danger of running out of runway landing downwind
As others have pointed out
- its a glider
- the engine is running (in a motor glider the glide ratio with engine on tick over can be as good as 30:1)
- its a huge airfield
I would add
- motor gliders have airbrakes so glide can be controlled precisely
- what was the wind doing? there was clearly no danger of running out of runway landing downwind
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other thing to consider is such a turnback requires quite a steep angle of bank and quite a steep rate of descent seeking the extra energy that turn requires.
Also when do you decide to turn back or not engine failure 100 200 300 400 500 etc?
As stated this is a motor glider in some other aircraft the outcome would not be so great!
Pace
Also when do you decide to turn back or not engine failure 100 200 300 400 500 etc?
As stated this is a motor glider in some other aircraft the outcome would not be so great!
Pace
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the Woodvale crash in which an RAF Bulldog being flown by a QFI spun in and crashed attempting a turnback due to an EFATO, the RAF carried out some formal trials to investigate turnbacks. Their teaching had always been not to attempt turnbacks and instead to land within 30 degrees of the centreline.
The trials formally investigated turnback performance with varying wind directions and speeds, and initiation at various heights. Height losses were found to be huge, with more turning required at earlier initiations, hence more height loss when starting closer to the ground. Aggressive turning was found to minimise height loss, but the risk of loss of control, stalling or spinning in the turn was high. There were also many wind height combinations where reaching the runway would not be possible.
The outcome of the trials was as far as I can remember an absolute bottom limit of 800ft in still air for the Bulldog and a recommendation of not attempting it below about 1500ft unless there were no areas in which a forced landing could be made ahead.
These were formal trials, very different to anecdotal opinion that we frequently read on this matter, and very different to a couple of guys making outube videos in a motor glider with an idling engine. There is a long history of people crashing attempting turnbacks and the conventional wisdom was certainly vindicated when put to the test. Moral of the story was don't do it unless trying to land ahead looks fatal.
The trials formally investigated turnback performance with varying wind directions and speeds, and initiation at various heights. Height losses were found to be huge, with more turning required at earlier initiations, hence more height loss when starting closer to the ground. Aggressive turning was found to minimise height loss, but the risk of loss of control, stalling or spinning in the turn was high. There were also many wind height combinations where reaching the runway would not be possible.
The outcome of the trials was as far as I can remember an absolute bottom limit of 800ft in still air for the Bulldog and a recommendation of not attempting it below about 1500ft unless there were no areas in which a forced landing could be made ahead.
These were formal trials, very different to anecdotal opinion that we frequently read on this matter, and very different to a couple of guys making outube videos in a motor glider with an idling engine. There is a long history of people crashing attempting turnbacks and the conventional wisdom was certainly vindicated when put to the test. Moral of the story was don't do it unless trying to land ahead looks fatal.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I can't resist it. (After all this crap weather preventing flying, I'm spending too many idle moments on PPruNE)
We have two Faulke motor gliders at our gliding club, used for teaching glider pilots how to choose a landout field, and how to set up a circuit.....this requires the altimeter NOT to be considered, as you would not know exactly the altitude of the field chosen.
One of our senior instructors finally persuaded his lady to come flying with him in the Falke....perfectly safe, he assured her.
So they pushed it out of the hangar, he helped her aboard, strapped her in, reassurance emphasized in the preflight briefing. With a calm masterful air he climbed in the other side, strapped himself in. They taxied to the end of 18, which is a nice long paved bit of runway that gives the falke plenty of room for takeoff; the Falke is a bit of a groundhugger and likes to have a good long run to acquire climbaway.
Engine running just fine, he turned round completely to make sure no traffic to affect them, straightened up, and confidently moved the throttle forward to full power. The Falke left the ground OK, and climbed to about 10 feet before the engine quit completely. Talk about EFATO! Fortunately there was just enough room straight ahead to land and stop before arriving in the clubhouse.....
Seems the last guy who flew it had TURNED OFF THE FUEL! Which is not usually done, and the skirts of his lady had hidden the valve, which is right beside the passenger's seat.....
She was not amused.
We have two Faulke motor gliders at our gliding club, used for teaching glider pilots how to choose a landout field, and how to set up a circuit.....this requires the altimeter NOT to be considered, as you would not know exactly the altitude of the field chosen.
One of our senior instructors finally persuaded his lady to come flying with him in the Falke....perfectly safe, he assured her.
So they pushed it out of the hangar, he helped her aboard, strapped her in, reassurance emphasized in the preflight briefing. With a calm masterful air he climbed in the other side, strapped himself in. They taxied to the end of 18, which is a nice long paved bit of runway that gives the falke plenty of room for takeoff; the Falke is a bit of a groundhugger and likes to have a good long run to acquire climbaway.
Engine running just fine, he turned round completely to make sure no traffic to affect them, straightened up, and confidently moved the throttle forward to full power. The Falke left the ground OK, and climbed to about 10 feet before the engine quit completely. Talk about EFATO! Fortunately there was just enough room straight ahead to land and stop before arriving in the clubhouse.....
Seems the last guy who flew it had TURNED OFF THE FUEL! Which is not usually done, and the skirts of his lady had hidden the valve, which is right beside the passenger's seat.....
She was not amused.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mary
Not many ladies I know would have Skirts that would hide anything
Maybe if he had had a younger model he would not have missed the valve but may have got distracted in other ways ??
Pace
Not many ladies I know would have Skirts that would hide anything
Maybe if he had had a younger model he would not have missed the valve but may have got distracted in other ways ??
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 24th Jan 2013 at 11:57.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourque Tonight
I am in compleat agreement with you, I have looked at the turn back performance of the Cessna 152 and the picture is not good.
Having tryed the turn back on a number of occasions the success rate at getting back onto the airfield was well below 50%, it required high angles of bank and a high skill level to successfully execute, also the aircraft arrived with a high ground speed.
The chances of the average PPL holder executing a turn back would be very low with danger of a stall / spin due to the high bank angles or arriving in the undershoot with a high ground speed. Far better to comply with normal practice and look for a landing within 30 degrees of the runway centre line with the wind on the nose reducing the ground speed.
I suspect that the RAF's airfield limitations for the Grob Tutor are based on giving the pilot to turn back option because the limitations are certenly not based on the aircraft flight manual take off and landing performance numbers.
Having tryed the turn back on a number of occasions the success rate at getting back onto the airfield was well below 50%, it required high angles of bank and a high skill level to successfully execute, also the aircraft arrived with a high ground speed.
The chances of the average PPL holder executing a turn back would be very low with danger of a stall / spin due to the high bank angles or arriving in the undershoot with a high ground speed. Far better to comply with normal practice and look for a landing within 30 degrees of the runway centre line with the wind on the nose reducing the ground speed.
I suspect that the RAF's airfield limitations for the Grob Tutor are based on giving the pilot to turn back option because the limitations are certenly not based on the aircraft flight manual take off and landing performance numbers.
Last edited by A and C; 24th Jan 2013 at 12:08.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems the last guy who flew it had TURNED OFF THE FUEL! Which is not usually done, and the skirts of his lady had hidden the valve, which is right beside the passenger's seat.....
he was lucky!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This scenario is also false in that the pilots are EXPECTING the EFATO and know exactly when it is going to happen.
All pilots should be of the mindset to EXPECT the engine to fail (and not just at take off) and be surprised if it doesn't, but life ain't like that.
Reality is that after hundreds, maybe thousands, of take offs where the engine just keeps on going as it should, if one day it subsides into zero power at 200 feet off a short runway there is a period of unacceptance, of 'this isn't happening to me' before Bloggs realises that it bluddy well IS happening. Hopefully, the aeroplane will still be flying so Bloggs can get the nose DOWN (and it will require DOWN! not ...down).
Indeed there was a tragedy a while ago where a PA38 pilot got an EFATO just after t/o and sent out a mayday instead of getting the nose down! He stalled and spun in from very low level with fatal results.
Turning back is a luxury to far for most PPL EFATOs (there are exceptions). Just GET THE NOSE DOWN and FLY THE AEROPLANE to a landing, or a crash if that's the only option. It's a better option by far than spinning in.
All pilots should be of the mindset to EXPECT the engine to fail (and not just at take off) and be surprised if it doesn't, but life ain't like that.
Reality is that after hundreds, maybe thousands, of take offs where the engine just keeps on going as it should, if one day it subsides into zero power at 200 feet off a short runway there is a period of unacceptance, of 'this isn't happening to me' before Bloggs realises that it bluddy well IS happening. Hopefully, the aeroplane will still be flying so Bloggs can get the nose DOWN (and it will require DOWN! not ...down).
Indeed there was a tragedy a while ago where a PA38 pilot got an EFATO just after t/o and sent out a mayday instead of getting the nose down! He stalled and spun in from very low level with fatal results.
Turning back is a luxury to far for most PPL EFATOs (there are exceptions). Just GET THE NOSE DOWN and FLY THE AEROPLANE to a landing, or a crash if that's the only option. It's a better option by far than spinning in.
Last edited by Shaggy Sheep Driver; 24th Jan 2013 at 14:56.
Further to post #6:
I spent many years as an AEF staff pilot,and flew (among others) Bulldog and Tutor. On both those, turnbacks were taught, checked, and approved in principle for qualified pilots. There was a minimum altitude, though I forget the figure. The turn needed about 45 deg bank, AFTER a large nose-down input, and in my opinion was a distinctly marginal manoeuvre. The most obvious way to screw up is to stall in the turn, but there's also the issue of very high groundspeed at touchdown on a windy day which could give you all manner of problems.
In my humble opinion, don't consider it unless going ahead would definitely kill you; and, in that case, consider another runway or not going at all.
I spent many years as an AEF staff pilot,and flew (among others) Bulldog and Tutor. On both those, turnbacks were taught, checked, and approved in principle for qualified pilots. There was a minimum altitude, though I forget the figure. The turn needed about 45 deg bank, AFTER a large nose-down input, and in my opinion was a distinctly marginal manoeuvre. The most obvious way to screw up is to stall in the turn, but there's also the issue of very high groundspeed at touchdown on a windy day which could give you all manner of problems.
In my humble opinion, don't consider it unless going ahead would definitely kill you; and, in that case, consider another runway or not going at all.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, I think most glider pilots would cope well with a SEP EFAT as all winch launches are an effective EFAT, when the cable back-releases.
I was told off once by an instructor as I pushed into -ve G as the cable dropped off.. He said we might have caught up the dropping cable! Anyway it got our speed to what was required.
I was told off once by an instructor as I pushed into -ve G as the cable dropped off.. He said we might have caught up the dropping cable! Anyway it got our speed to what was required.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: 15 DME
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To any student or inexperianced low time ppl flying a SEP/MEP with EFATO, DO NOT follow what is shown in this video.
Practice it by all means with a competant instructor on board and with sufficient height.
Practice it by all means with a competant instructor on board and with sufficient height.
Last edited by Richard Westnot; 24th Jan 2013 at 17:06.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maxred, if you have only managed ten feet when the engine goes quiet, yes, straight ahead (brick walls best avoided, go for the shrubbery....) But if you have managed 200 feet or so, with a sudden failure, it is not unreasonable to move 10 degrees to right or left if a more suitable landing site appears.
Gliding training would definitely be more useful than the standard EFAT drill which is never very realistic anyhow. A field landing is usually a non-event in a glider. Cross country glider pilots often get low and have to pick fields, even if a climb away from downwind happens, it is all good practice. Makes the power EFAT too easy, no panic.
But not enough attention is paid to engine loss of power that is less than total.
What would you do about that?
Gliding training would definitely be more useful than the standard EFAT drill which is never very realistic anyhow. A field landing is usually a non-event in a glider. Cross country glider pilots often get low and have to pick fields, even if a climb away from downwind happens, it is all good practice. Makes the power EFAT too easy, no panic.
But not enough attention is paid to engine loss of power that is less than total.
What would you do about that?
Last edited by mary meagher; 24th Jan 2013 at 18:15.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Malta
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that is Farkashagy airfield just outside of Budapest. The day after I was there a Gilder crashed and pilot was killed after spinning during the turn when the cable broke. That was 8 or 9 years ago now I think. Just over the hill at the end of the runway is Budapest. The poster's name is also a Hungarian name.
Here is a test: Without taking time to think I want you to immediately verbalize the actions for an EFATO on your airplane. DO IT NOW.
I am willing to bet that most readers had a longish pause followed by a few hums and errs.
My PPL students can rattle off the vital actions if challenged with no warning because I make them do it before every takeoff starting from the third lesson. After doing it 50 or 60 times it is burned into their brain. Equally importantly, I make them physically touch the controls starting with firmly pushing the yolk forward while verbalizing "glide attitude" and then touching all the controls in the emergency actions flow. This builds habit and instinctive reactions that will save your life. I also tell my students to fly straight ahead, turning only the minimum amount necessary to avoid major obstacles, if they experience an EFATO below 1000 feet AGL
I am willing to bet that most readers had a longish pause followed by a few hums and errs.
My PPL students can rattle off the vital actions if challenged with no warning because I make them do it before every takeoff starting from the third lesson. After doing it 50 or 60 times it is burned into their brain. Equally importantly, I make them physically touch the controls starting with firmly pushing the yolk forward while verbalizing "glide attitude" and then touching all the controls in the emergency actions flow. This builds habit and instinctive reactions that will save your life. I also tell my students to fly straight ahead, turning only the minimum amount necessary to avoid major obstacles, if they experience an EFATO below 1000 feet AGL
Last edited by Big Pistons Forever; 24th Jan 2013 at 19:37.
