P-51D engine failure on takeoff

[India Four Two]

An analysis by Juan Brown of a successful landing after a pressure-carburettor failure on takeoff:

You Tube

Click Quote if you cannot see the link.

[Pilot DAR]

Well done that pilot!

I usually leave the gear down until I could no longer land on the remaining runway, fearing exactly that event! But good job him!

[Sea Plane Driver]

Nice job, not much margin...None.

[B-757]

Originally Posted by Pilot DAR

Well done that pilot!

I usually leave the gear down until I could no longer land on the remaining runway, fearing exactly that event! But good job him!

.. He will do so also from now on..!!
Glad that both him and the plane can
be used again..

Fly safe,
B-757
​

[treadigraph]

No idea what the gear limit speed is on the P-51 but I seem to recall that on some warbirds it's rather less than 150kts which may be why retraction is usually so soon after lift off. Also if you need to put the aircraft down off the airfield, gear up is perhaps better as demonstrated by Mark Levy at Duxford a few years ago. Another bit of quick thinking...

Though of course it does also look cool. Nice work sir/madam...

[megan]

From the flight manual, gear speed is 170mph (148kts). Recommended climb speed 165mph.

ENGINE FAILURE DURING TAKE-OFF.
a. The chances of the engine failing during take-ofl can be greatly reduced and prepared for by observing the following practices:
(1) Run up engine carefully and check thoroughly before take-off.
(2) Retract the landing gear as soon as the airplane is definitely airborne.
(3) Raise the flaps as soon as the airplane reaches a safe altitude.
b. If the engine fails immediately after the take-off, act quickly as follows:
(1) Depress the nose at once so that the airspeed does not drop below stalling speed.
(2) If external fuel tanks or bombs are installed, release them immediately.
(3) Release the sliding canopy by pulling the emergency release handle on top of the longeron just to the right of the instrument panel.

IMPORTANT
When releasing the canopy, bend forward and lower head slightly so as to avoid a head injury from the loose enclosure

(4) Make sure landing gear has started to come up. There is no time to take further action, and even if it is only unlocked and on the way up, the gear will collapse on landing. Do not try to lower gear. There is less chance of personal injury if the airplane is landed with the gear up.
(5) Lower the flaps fully, if possible.
(6) Move mixture control to “IDLE CUT OFF" and turn "OFF" ignition switch. ‘ '
(7) Turn fuel shut-off valve "OFF."
(8) Turn battery-disconnect switch "OFF."
(9) Land straight ahead, only changing direction sufficiently to miss obstructions.
(10) After landing, get out of the airplane as quickly as possible and remain outside.

[Pilot DAR]

Though I don't dispute what the military flight manual for a P-51 says, I expect that the priorities for military operation of the P-51 were different in the day, from the civilian operating priorities for a rare warbird now. The only time I have ever retracted the gear right after takeoff has been a very few occasions where I needed the improved acceleration and climb performance as early as possible. I certainly agree that there are times when the forced landing surface would be unsuitable enough that the airplane is better bellied in, but the runway ahead of you is not that!

[ATC Watcher]

Do not try to lower gear. There is less chance of personal injury if the airplane is landed with the gear up.

The moral of the story here could be that once more best judgement by an exeptional pilot saved the day for him and the airplane instead of following the SOP.
SOPs are made for average cases, not for all cases and this is a perfect example.
That said should he had followed the SOP and left the gear retracted and crash the aircraft badly on the runway, seen the ramaining concrete available, I am sure some of our traditional armchairs judges here would still have questionned his actions..​​​​​​​

[sycamore]

Any idea where this was...?

[what next]

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

... instead of following the SOP.​​​​​​​

I think that the standard procedure of retracting the gear on a forced landing in this type of aircraft was put in place to prevent overturning. With a very heavy engine in front and the gear digging into soft ground, overturning is a serious threat and will almost certainly trap the pilot inside. Whereas landing flat on the belly will rarely result in overturning, no matter what kind of ground one lands on. Obviously this pilot was very confident that he would be able to glide to a landing on solid ground and therefore elected to extend the gear.

[ATC Watcher]

Originally Posted by what next

I think that the standard procedure of retracting the gear on a forced landing in this type of aircraft was put in place to prevent overturning.

You are absolutely right of course, also the P-51 is a military aircraft made for WW2 to be flown by low hours pilots ,and the POH reflects that. I was just being a bit sarcastic .

[Big Pistons Forever]

The reaction time from the engine failing and the gear being selected down concurrent with big nose pitch down is less than 3 seconds. This pilot was mentally prepared for what happened and reacted immediately, forcefully and deliberately. Could you ?

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by megan

From the flight manual,
......
(2) If external fuel tanks or bombs are installed, release them immediately.
......

Are these wartime instructions ?

I can't imagine, those living peacefully under the approach path appreciating getting the payload intended for the enemy......

[ATC Watcher]

Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever

The reaction time from the engine failing and the gear being selected down concurrent with big nose pitch down is less than 3 seconds. This pilot was mentally prepared for what happened and reacted immediately, forcefully and deliberately. Could you ?

Of course not, I would like many others kept the gear up and look for some flat grass somewhere as trained to do in this case. Kuddos to the guy for making that decsion against the SOP. and saving the aeroplane. . .

[sycamore]

Excellent handling by the pilot; I think it also should emphasise to every pilot the importance of using the `full` length of the runway,even if it is 10000ft long,never an intersection,as I`ve seen guys do,even on 6000ft r/ways, and the `final` Captain`s brief` of `What if`..?,before you line up,and push-up`...and always use `full power as early as you can,as you do no favours to the engine without the extra enrichment on big pistons....jets/t/props are different...

[Pilot DAR]

those living peacefully under the approach path appreciating getting the payload intended for the enemy...

When I have flown [now civil] aircraft with [possibly] jettisonable former military underwing items, the flight authority has been very specific that the system to jettison them must be disabled, and their attachment must be secure to present design standards.

Kudos to the guy for making that decision against the SOP. and saving the aeroplane. . .

The action that the pilot took might not have been against an SOP, as there could be more than one SOP for an airplane, depending upon how it is being used. Certainly with an engine and propeller which are very much more rare now, an operating technique which has a decent chance of preventing them being damaged is better than following a military SOP, which would certainly seen them ruined.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by Pilot DAR

...
The action that the pilot took might not have been against an SOP, as there could be more than one SOP for an airplane, depending upon how it is being used. Certainly with an engine and propeller which are very much more rare now, an operating technique which has a decent chance of preventing them being damaged is better than following a military SOP, which would certainly seen them ruined.

Hmm, that seems to be deviating away from the principle, the aircraft is owned by the insurer, once a serious issue develops. Moving to a case of risking human life, presumed to be highly valuable in wartimes (at least in Western countries, meat grinder barbarian Russia obviously isn't) and even more in peace time situations (do these exist nowadays ????).

[Pilot DAR]

Hmm, that seems to be deviating away from the principle, the aircraft is owned by the insurer, once a serious issue develops.

'Depends upon if/how it is insured. Depending upon how an insurance policy is written, an engine, which failed, and was the cause of a damaging forced landing, may itself, not be insured (the component which failed before the insurable claim). A wheels down forced landing might damage a very expensive engine, a wheels up forced landing, will certainly damage it. If it were me, and I enjoyed the airplane, I would like to apply my skill to attempt to leave it reusable, which this pilot certainly did.

And, I opine that most present day recreational P-51 pilots are probably pretty experienced and skilled - perhaps more so than the pilots fresh out of P-51 training during the war. so expecting a demonstration of skill greater than that for which a very old SOP was intended is not unreasonable...

[ETOPS]

I like the way the pilot didn’t go for more flap and risk ballooning and floating - can’t use the brakes if still airborne

[megan]

the flight authority has been very specific that the system to jettison them must be disabled

Quite a reasonable requirement DAR, photo of the modifications made to a local chaps vehicle when an errant dummy missile fell from an F-18.