And a Cessna 152 is a single engine aeroplane with a fixed pitch propellor. I enjoyed the exercise in them where we’d shut the engine down and stop the prop from rotating, then start the engine without using the starter.

(Interestingly, I recently reminded myself of the procedure because I was going through a run-the-tank-dry-to-confirm-its-actual-useable-capacity-in-smooth-air exercise in a new (to me) aircraft, which has a lightweight (fixed) prop. There was a ‘higher’ unknown probability of the prop not continuing to windmill during the tank changeover. Add to that the remote chance of the starter not working. However, it turned out to be the usual non-event.)

This depends on the engine type.

Rotaxes, Jabiru and some others do not windmill.

Are you also suggesting that the “attempt restart” drill which flying schools have been teaching for many years is now somehow invalid and no longer safe?

Of course the attempt restart drill is taught. With the power at idle, not turning the engine off.

I’ve flown Single Engine Pipers for a long time and NONE had electric flaps!! You’d been thinking Cessna…

I guess it comes down to 'remembering' what the POH says for emergency procedures.... the ones where you don't have time to look up.

There was a Rockwell 114 that ended up in the water off Redcliffe Aerodrome some time back. Sadly it tipped over resulting in the deaths of all on board! :(

How much fuel was in the tank/s feeding the engine when the engine stopped?

err… Comanche 260 and 400? Both of which I flew a very long time ago, but my memory occasionally fails me, so maybe their flaps were Bluetooth activated.
But read my previous post…I was wrong it seems with regard to the lesser bugsmasher Pipers. and I already admitted it.

Clare: The air start exercise I’m talking about involved pulling the throttle to idle, pulling the mixture to ICO then slowing the aircraft until the prop stopped windmilling. This was usually achieved without stalling the aircraft. Then nose over to accelerate until the prop started windmilling again, mixture to full rich and slowly advance the throttle while slowly pulling the nose back to the horizon. Fun!

(As an interesting aside, I’m told that a ‘popped’ Bonanza cabin door can be closed in flight by slowing the aircraft. I’ve never tried it, but have had a couple of ‘popped’ Bonanza doors.)

Lead - I've done that same exercise on piper singles. That was nearly 40 years ago, perhaps it's a bit old fashioned now. Pulling a bit of G at the end of the dive also helped with some assymetric airflow to kick the prop over.

OK I see what exercise you mean,
As you can see that's exactly what happened as she raised the nose and the tail touching the water caused deceleration...In a ditching you have to make sure the rear end hits the water first so as not to flip but not stall it in and risk a pitch down or wing drop. It's a fine line especially with glare also.



MAch there are some who say the Commanche isn't a "real" Piper! ;)

Answered precisely in the ABC interview with the pilot at the 7 minutes 30 seconds mark in the second link I posted (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-...each/102250564 or just go directly to the audio file at https://mediacore-live-production.ak...01/hi/Z/5h.mp3 direct). Go on, go back and have a listen! I insist you do. It is as if she was answering your exact question.

A complete transcript of the interview posted here would be most welcome, and make good reading for people interested in what to do in this situation. It reflects well on the pilot and Clare Prop too. Level headed decision making under duress, doing what you have been trained to do and doing it as well as you can.

Rant mode on: (For all the other people reading, see a pattern here - all the persistent questions that have been answered in the article and audio interview seem to be by people that have been unable to be bothered to check the reported facts. I'm sorely tempted to be rude, but that would be unwise, unkind, and possibly awkward)
I see the article has also been updated to include the ATSB dithering if it will investigate. Maybe the comprehensive solutions guesses offered here in these forums will be final report we hear about it? I hope the cause is found as it impacts (sorry) many others in the GA industry who may come across a similar situation in the future.
Rant mode off.

ATSB will want to know if it is an airworthiness issue, that's as far as they usually go with something like this, as they do whenever there is a Mayday declared. The next step may be for CASA to ask more questions and may be a look at the engine for any evidence of the cause of the loss of power.

Thanks for the post above. I did advise her not to go to the media but she had seen some of the rubbish being posted online and chose to publicly put the record straight, which I think she did very effectively.

This is not quite correct.
No insurance company will insure the engine.
They will insure the hull only.
Also, not even the hull if the aircraft has 3rd party insurance only.
Regardless, good advices as no aircraft is worth of your life.

Bosi72…. Are you sure? Most unplanned landings usually involve engine damage.. In that instance, are you saying insurance only covers hull/airframe repair but not engine overhaul? And in the event of a write-off, how do they evaluate the worth of the hull minus the engine?

(Apologies in advance for thread drift, but it’s an interesting side bar)

Here’s the definition of “aircraft” in my current hull insurance:

The hull includes the engine. I own and operate a PA-28-180 and I assure you that the entire aircraft is insured. My insurance company did not decide they would only insure parts of it.

Now, if your engine blows up and you land the aircraft without additional damage, the insurance company is not going to pay for a new engine. If the aircraft is destroyed in a landing attempt after engine failure they would pay agreed hull value less any deductable (USA policy).

I am very interest to know why this engine quit. My Lycoming 0-360-A4A has over 3,000 hours since overhaul and I have no expectation that it will suddenly stop working.

I can only assume that you do not own an aircraft nor hold an insurance policy on one. If you do, I urge you to read your policy before next flight as it may have impacts on you’re decision making process.

I was interested in the ABC interview with the pilot (link posted by Thirsty above).

There were two things that struck me; the first being the clear and direct responses to the interviewer by the pilot. Given the recency of the event I was very impressed, and in a perverse way I think she delivered a great advertisement for aviation - not in the least showing presence of mind, the value of her training, and consideration for those on the beach nearby.

The second thing was the description of the engine failure itself. Having had many engine failures (not necessarily in aircraft!) this sounded a lot like a fuel issue, as opposed to catastrophic mechanical failure, or even ignition (although I recognise the possibility [of ignition failure] remains). The pilot has stated there was 60L of fuel remaining, and a more recent report suggests there was some fuel leakage, which leads me to wonder about some form of blockage, or pump failure.

It's seems uncertain if there's going to be an investigation (?) but I'd have thought finding out what happened would be useful. It's been a while since I worked on, or flew, a Cherokee but my recollection is that there's an auxiliary electric pump switched via the panel, and a directional fuel tap to the left lower of the pilot in or near the footwell? I should imagine the pilot switched on the electric pump and/or swapped tanks at the first signs of trouble, but if the one of the pumps had failed in the wrong way (valve stuck shut?), or the primary inlet line blocked somehow, such moves may have been in vain.

Clearly I'm speculating on a possible cause here, it could well have been something completely different. Nevertheless I'd be interested to hear from those with greater or more recent knowledge than me as to likely fuel delivery failure modes, and whether there's anything that might be worthwhile inspecting more closely during regular maintenance or preflight inspections?

FP.

I can assure you that engines are covered by insurance.
Over the years I've had to make a few claims from prop strikes and the engines and props have always been covered.
In most cases they will pay out pro-rata on the remaining life of the engine. In one case I got a brand new engine for a half life one.
The way things are at the moment, with the 1970s era four seaters, an overhauled engine can be around 3/4 or more of the value of the whole machine. Sadly, many of them are now worth more dead than alive.

More than likely it's fuel related, not the engine itself. Faulty fuel selector, fuel leakage, blocked fuel line, carb ice, carb failure, fuel pump failure, just to list a few possibilities. I know she said it was too warm for carb ice, but it can form at fairly warm temps and she was on descent, I assume at lowish power. Carb heat was applied after the engine failed from the sound of it, which may be too late (where is the hot air coming from if the engine is not running as well as the ice has already blocked the flow of air). Dual mag failure for it to be ignition sounds unlikely and oil loss or other catastrophic engine event would seize the engine, so the prop would not have been rotating as seen in the footage.

And the whole aircraft except expendables is insured. You insure it relative to 'hull value', but the insurance covers all major fixed items, engine, avionics etc... If you are found to be negligently at fault, or operating outside the scope of the policy the insurer may not cover at all or request partial payment from the pilot. I know several pilots who needed to pay extra above the excess due to fault or being outside coverage limits, ie landing somewhere they should not.

PS; apart from the obvious water damage the only significant panel damage appears to be the right outer leading edge, so it may fly again.