Serious problems on takeoff

[John Farley]

I am an out of date professional pilot.

In my day when flying an aircraft without parachutes following a serious failure close to unstick I would turn at 30 deg of bank onto the reciprocal of the runway I had departed and fly level at 1000ft agl. If a visual circuit was not possible due to weather conditions I was taught to fly a timed downwind leg for 1 to 2 mins (depending on how soon I had started the turn to downwind) before turning back on to finals and descending to attempt my landing.

Can a modern pilot please explain to me why this is apparently not the normal and best way to fly today?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I saw this at Heathrow many years ago John. A Caravelle had just taken off when it made a sharp turn somewhat off it's expected route. He just said: "We have problem". I asked for his intentions and he just replied "Downwind.." We just had time to get the fire wagons out. It turned out that there had been serious smoke on the flight deck and his action probably saved the day.

[bzh]

I think it's the stats showing that most attempt return after an engine failure after take off in a single engine end up in stall, spin and fatalities.... The teaching has become to land in an open area strait ahead and reduce the risque of a stall trying to return... It's all debatable....

[tommoutrie]

Nothing wrong with it at all. Serious fire, smoke or similar, thats exactly what I'd do. I'd probably do the same if all engines were significantly playing up - fuel contamination or similar. Whats prompting the question?

[16024]

Can't believe I'm having a discussion about in flight emergencies with John Farley, except to say that a manoevre that worked at Boscombe Down might put the cat amongst the pidgeons at LHR or CDG.
However, subject to the usual maydays and terrain and traffic awareness, why not?
I've done it myself in the sim, thankfully not for real. It would depend on how much my tail was on fire...

[JEM60]

HD. I remember a similar incident, many years ago, when, as a mere spectator, I saw a Caravelle take off on 27R,then it turned right very early, then turned left pretty sharpish and landed downwind back on the same runway, which was now, of course, 09L. Even in those days, I realised he must have had a serious problem. Could be the same incident?

[Yaw String]

Hello John,
It is not a risky manoeuvre if briefed prior to takeoff,for worst case scenarios.
Distance away from field and minimum altitude for obstacle avoidance.

Any aircraft can be prepared for an immediate turn back, in just a few minutes,obeying basic preparation of altitude/distance,..flap/speed....max Autobrake/gear....very short announcement,serving passengers and cabin staff in one...
Modern cockpit is stacked full of situational awareness tools!

Well said Mr Pew..as an ex tuggy..LGC.

[blind pew]

The obvious answer is because they can't John...unless they fly tugs or crop dusters.

[JEM60]

JF. You may, as you describe yourself, be an out of date professional pilot, but I bet you could still show a lot of younger people how to fly!!!.:)

[green granite]

The teaching has become to land in an open area strait ahead and reduce the risque of a stall trying to return... It's all debatable....

That's ok if you've got somewhere to land, you might drop it into a reservoir ok at Heathrow on a west bound take off but there's almost nowhere not covered by houses east bound.

[763 jock]

This incident report makes for very interesting reading.

B737 at Amsterdam. Glad I wasn't sat in the back.

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1762.pdf

[ATC Watcher]

Single engine : today book says ; straight ahead, but in practice I would say it is depending on 2 factors, can you maintain altitude or positive rate and how high does the failure occur ? if negative vario, and low. then straight ahead is definitively your best option.

Now this is what I WOULD do :
positive vario , get 1000ft , downwind normal circuit.
negative vario : less that 500ft, straight ahead with max turns 30 degr either side.
between 500 and 1000 ft, tear drop 45 degr, with 30 deg bank max , 180, landing back opposite.
1000ft or more and not too far , downwind followed by a "U" shaped app.

[fantom]

Many times have we flown this disaster in the sim.

Take off - disaster - turn R/L 80 degrees then pretty quickly the other direction 260 degrees and land on the recip rwy.

I have always thought this was the quickest way back home.

[John Farley]

Thanks fantom

I think I would favour a circuit to give ATC more chance to clear the runway for us plus into wind is good if overweight.

tommoutrie

What prompted the question? A thread on R&N.

[BOAC]

I think I would favour a circuit - me too, and I don't think there really is much in it time-wise, plus the 80/260 is very high workload while a circuit is not. Added advantages?

Headwind (of sorts).
You will not meet someone going the other way.
We practice circuits (don't we?) so it 'fits a known pattern' whereas the 80/260 is rarely flown visually (Chambery engine out?)?
As someone else said, it will 'fit' ATC's expectations better too.

[redsnail]

I brief to either fly out straight ahead if the flygprestanda gives no specific departure/emergency instructions.
I also brief a visual circuit for an immediate return. Left or right pattern as best fits and the max altitude for the circuit.
We do practise this in the sim every now and then. :)

The Chambery 80/260 is for any departure off rwy 18. It's easier with 1 out...

[ShyTorque]

I think it's the stats showing that most attempt return after an engine failure after take off in a single engine end up in stall, spin and fatalities.... The teaching has become to land in an open area strait ahead and reduce the risque of a stall trying to return... It's all debatable....

I took it that the emergency referred to didn't include total power failure! Flying level at 1,000 feet wouldn't work too well in that scenario.....

[NigelOnDraft]

JF

I am assuming we are talking airline type Ops?

The "modern" teaching is all Mgmt, CRM, Autopilot / FMS. Many of us older school types might decry it, but I am pushed to think of accidents where a quick whip round a circuit would have saved the day?

The 2 scenarios where training is "ASAP" is Smoke/Fumes and unextinquished confirmed fire. Even for the latter, the general brief is downwind ~3000' for a 10NM final.

Those of us who might prefer something more dynamic can hope for it, even brief it, but I suspect in doing it will be pretty much on their own, leaving their colleague out of the loop / comfort zone. Not really the way now.

If the R&N thread is what I think you are speaking of, I would not categorise that as "serious" after takeoff from what I've seen/heard. It did later develop to that.

NoD

[IXUXU]

It depends...
Kind of aircraft( single engine, twin, airliner), operation( IMC, VMC), airport and surrounding area....available height, are you familiar/trained with the intended maneuver.. and so on.
You need to adapt your intended action to the circumstances. Therefore is not about the action but the final result.

[John Farley]

Thank you Nigel

You have explained clearly why a modern pilot is unlikely to do an immediate circuit.

Your answer is what I feared was the case.

The problem for me (when I have lost bits on takeoff and have systems failures as well) is that I simply can't know whether it is all going to deteriorate further and perhaps quickly.

Therefore as captain I would choose to land from an immediate circuit because I think that would give me the best chance of not hurting myself. In looking after myself I am also doing my best for everyone else on the aeroplane.

I would not wish to increase my risk of dying by following the book.

I might even try to get the book changed.

[Denti]

As said above it depends on the situation. Standard OEI is based on climbing straight ahead, running the checklists taking all the time one needs to do it. However for catastrophical events we use an immediate return checklist which doesn't have to be completed and is based on the shortest return, for example a visual 1000ft pattern on a single runway airport. With crossing or parallel runways there are more options depending on weather.