Engine Failure in Cruise - Inflight Decision Making
Thread Starter
Engine Failure in Cruise - Inflight Decision Making
Just wanted to see what the pros opinion would be given the situation.
Aircraft in cruise
Heavy(ish) twin, Chieftain, 402/404 or something similar.
In IMC by day.
Aircraft is controllable and maintains SE service ceiling after engine feathered and other actions done.
Your options
A...return to base which is 100ft above minums for an NDB approach so you would need to do the NDB letdown almost to mimumums.
B...another airport is 40nm away similar distance but VMC but no facitites.
My instinct would be for option B, get clear of cloud and then make an approach in VMC, but with the added $$ of being at an off base airport.
Or
Would some chief pilots expect you to go plan A and you would get chewed out for doing plan B.
Talking about real happenings rather than a ME Training scanerio.
Thoughts anyone?
Aircraft in cruise
Heavy(ish) twin, Chieftain, 402/404 or something similar.
In IMC by day.
Aircraft is controllable and maintains SE service ceiling after engine feathered and other actions done.
Your options
A...return to base which is 100ft above minums for an NDB approach so you would need to do the NDB letdown almost to mimumums.
B...another airport is 40nm away similar distance but VMC but no facitites.
My instinct would be for option B, get clear of cloud and then make an approach in VMC, but with the added $$ of being at an off base airport.
Or
Would some chief pilots expect you to go plan A and you would get chewed out for doing plan B.
Talking about real happenings rather than a ME Training scanerio.
Thoughts anyone?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but with the added $$ of being at an off base airport.
B.
It's pretty obvious & common sense to most that it's a no brainer going where yr chances of survival are the highest.
What concerns me more is the fact that the other option was based more on commercial reasons, now that's the real worry!
Sure from a commercial point of view going where there is maint etc is preferred but not under a SE scenario in bad WX.
Some years ago now a C404 had a donk take an unplanned rest (****e itself) almost at the start of an NDB App so the driver continued the App as he was all set up but never got in due low cloud & made a missed App diverting to another Vic drome about half hr away where he did an NDB there & just got in, all on ONE engine ! Almost hero stuff that's for sure & bloody scary!
Returning to base where maint was available was over some higher terrain & much further so even under extreme duress the pilot did what I think most would have done. We are talking about piston Eng's at there max output for periods that would make me scream if I had to run faster than I could for even a few minutes.
The other piston donk still keeping you from yr maker is there to help not guarantee anything!
CMD decision making is all about NOT letting commercial pressure come first like a certain pilot did (my assumptions only here & possibly not fact) where his A/C is now part of an underwater aviation museum off some Is!
Save yourself FIRST!
Wmk2
What concerns me more is the fact that the other option was based more on commercial reasons, now that's the real worry!
Sure from a commercial point of view going where there is maint etc is preferred but not under a SE scenario in bad WX.
Some years ago now a C404 had a donk take an unplanned rest (****e itself) almost at the start of an NDB App so the driver continued the App as he was all set up but never got in due low cloud & made a missed App diverting to another Vic drome about half hr away where he did an NDB there & just got in, all on ONE engine ! Almost hero stuff that's for sure & bloody scary!
Returning to base where maint was available was over some higher terrain & much further so even under extreme duress the pilot did what I think most would have done. We are talking about piston Eng's at there max output for periods that would make me scream if I had to run faster than I could for even a few minutes.
The other piston donk still keeping you from yr maker is there to help not guarantee anything!
CMD decision making is all about NOT letting commercial pressure come first like a certain pilot did (my assumptions only here & possibly not fact) where his A/C is now part of an underwater aviation museum off some Is!
Save yourself FIRST!
Wmk2
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Far out hopefully no one would even contemplate option A, 100ft above minimums is fark all! Now if it were 800ft above minimums, meaning you still need to start the approach but its fairly certain youll make it in ( but not 100%) it may be interesting, at the end of the day I still most would do a visual approach in vmc than commence an NDB in IMC with one donk out, especially in the battered old twins flying around these days. Good post though, should promote some healthy discussion.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crikey there is no option. Why put yourself thru the stress of and asymetric NDB to the minimas when you have an airfield with VMC not far away. Stuff the heirachy, its your life and your PAX lives. NO OPTION.
Ozgrade3.
I'm curious. Do you have an instrument rating? Do you carry passengers commercially, using that instrument rating?
Why would you ask such a question? With such an obvious answer!
I'm curious. Do you have an instrument rating? Do you carry passengers commercially, using that instrument rating?
Why would you ask such a question? With such an obvious answer!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 50
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't pretty much this exact scenario play out about three years ago with a Mojave out of BK.
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...sb-report.html
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...sb-report.html
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Talking about real happenings rather than a ME Training scanerio"
That's what disturb's me...what are they teaching you kids???
As a CP I'd ream you another ass...ole if you did option A.
That's what disturb's me...what are they teaching you kids???
As a CP I'd ream you another ass...ole if you did option A.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To think it is legal to fly around in a twin which won't meet single-engine climb gradients whether after take off or in a missed approach, is ludicrous.
Folks,
Here is CAO, for those of you who are flying twins (not EDTO certified) I direct your attention particularly (d).
Except for EDTO operations ( and even then, most times) in a twin you must land at the nearest suitable airport.
Remember the Order is written to cover all multi-engine, not just twins
As Thornbird said ---- what the hell is being taught out there in some schools.
Tootle pip!!
Civil Aviation Order 20.6 (as amended)
made under subregulations 5.11 (2) and 303 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988.
This compilation was prepared on 9 August 2010 taking into account amendments up to Civil Aviation Order 20.6 Amendment Order (No. 1) 2010.
Prepared by the Legislative Drafting Branch, Legal Services Division, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Canberra.
Contents
Section 20.6 (Continuation of flight with 1 or more engines inoperative)
Page
1 Name of Order 1
2 Application 1
3 Requirements 1
Notes to Civil Aviation Order 20.6 2
Section 20.6
Continuation of flight with 1 or more engines inoperative
1 Name of Order
This Order is Civil Aviation Order 20.6.
2 Application
This Order applies as a condition on the flight crew licence of the pilot in command of an Australian aircraft.
3 Requirements
3.1 When an engine of an aircraft fails in flight or where the rotation of an engine of an aircraft is stopped in flight as a precautionary measure to prevent possible damage, the pilot in command must notify the nearest Air Traffic Services Unit immediately, giving all relevant information and stating the action he or she intends to take in regard to the conduct of the flight.
3.2 The pilot in command of a multi-engine aircraft in which 1 engine fails or its rotation is stopped, may proceed to an aerodrome of his or her selection instead of the nearest suitable aerodrome if, upon consideration of all relevant factors, he or she deems such action to be safe and operationally acceptable. Relevant factors must include the following:
(a) nature of the malfunctioning and the possible mechanical difficulties which may be encountered if the flight is continued;
(aa) the nature and extent of any city, town or populous area over which the aircraft is likely to fly;
(b) availability of the inoperative engine to be used;
(c) altitude, aircraft weight, and usable fuel at the time of engine stoppage;
(d) distance to be flown coupled with the performance availability should another engine fail;
(e) relative characteristics of aerodromes available for landing;
(f) weather conditions en route and at possible landing points;
(g) air traffic congestion;
(h) type of terrain, including whether the flight is likely to be over water;
(i) familiarity of the pilot with the aerodrome to be used.
Here is CAO, for those of you who are flying twins (not EDTO certified) I direct your attention particularly (d).
Except for EDTO operations ( and even then, most times) in a twin you must land at the nearest suitable airport.
Remember the Order is written to cover all multi-engine, not just twins
As Thornbird said ---- what the hell is being taught out there in some schools.
Tootle pip!!
Civil Aviation Order 20.6 (as amended)
made under subregulations 5.11 (2) and 303 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988.
This compilation was prepared on 9 August 2010 taking into account amendments up to Civil Aviation Order 20.6 Amendment Order (No. 1) 2010.
Prepared by the Legislative Drafting Branch, Legal Services Division, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Canberra.
Contents
Section 20.6 (Continuation of flight with 1 or more engines inoperative)
Page
1 Name of Order 1
2 Application 1
3 Requirements 1
Notes to Civil Aviation Order 20.6 2
Section 20.6
Continuation of flight with 1 or more engines inoperative
1 Name of Order
This Order is Civil Aviation Order 20.6.
2 Application
This Order applies as a condition on the flight crew licence of the pilot in command of an Australian aircraft.
3 Requirements
3.1 When an engine of an aircraft fails in flight or where the rotation of an engine of an aircraft is stopped in flight as a precautionary measure to prevent possible damage, the pilot in command must notify the nearest Air Traffic Services Unit immediately, giving all relevant information and stating the action he or she intends to take in regard to the conduct of the flight.
3.2 The pilot in command of a multi-engine aircraft in which 1 engine fails or its rotation is stopped, may proceed to an aerodrome of his or her selection instead of the nearest suitable aerodrome if, upon consideration of all relevant factors, he or she deems such action to be safe and operationally acceptable. Relevant factors must include the following:
(a) nature of the malfunctioning and the possible mechanical difficulties which may be encountered if the flight is continued;
(aa) the nature and extent of any city, town or populous area over which the aircraft is likely to fly;
(b) availability of the inoperative engine to be used;
(c) altitude, aircraft weight, and usable fuel at the time of engine stoppage;
(d) distance to be flown coupled with the performance availability should another engine fail;
(e) relative characteristics of aerodromes available for landing;
(f) weather conditions en route and at possible landing points;
(g) air traffic congestion;
(h) type of terrain, including whether the flight is likely to be over water;
(i) familiarity of the pilot with the aerodrome to be used.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Just around the corner
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that is hardly accurate.....
A correct statement would be;
There is pretty much no adequate performance to conduct a go-around at the published minima on one engine
OR
To achieve the performance required in a missed approach, the minima would have to be raised to an amount which is higher than the ceiling at the aerodrome is at.
To think it is legal to fly around in a twin which won't meet single-engine climb gradients whether after take off or in a missed approach, is ludicrous.
A correct statement would be;
There is pretty much no adequate performance to conduct a go-around at the published minima on one engine
OR
To achieve the performance required in a missed approach, the minima would have to be raised to an amount which is higher than the ceiling at the aerodrome is at.
To think it is legal to fly around in a twin which won't meet single-engine climb gradients whether after take off or in a missed approach, is ludicrous.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends. Most of the early Aero Commanders, the Piper Aerostars and a few others have only one hydraulic pump. They are certified with this. In my case, it's even on the critical engine. This means that you can not raise gear if that engine fails. Yes, at SL you might eke out a slight climb if you do everything right and the other engine is feathered, but you wont meet IFR climb gradients by any means. Add high altitude to this and you won't climb at all.
So the right answer is - it depends on what you fly and what the circumstances are.
So the right answer is - it depends on what you fly and what the circumstances are.
Last edited by AdamFrisch; 20th Dec 2012 at 13:38.