PA-28-161 Engine failure
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Small dot in the Caribbean
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA-28-161 Engine failure
Engine failed 15 miles NW of PLS/MBPV, Turks and Caicos Islands, 9,000 ft. up, tried until 3,000 ft. Forgot to open door before impact but it opened on impact. They were on a raft, police helicopter was there until a boat picked them up. Three of them, Pilot, her sister and an instructor. I believed she has her PPL so maybe it was for instrument rating? Pilot, instructor un-injured but the sister has some bruises. Accident site 11 miles out.
Reg.: N162ST
Owned by Silver express
Date and time : 21st June 2007, 2152 UTC
KTMB to MBPV IFR flight.
The water is said to be very deep so taking the plane out is not going to happen I guess, and the fact that there was no major injuries, all survived, there isn't much motivation to go through the trouble of getting it.
Reg.: N162ST
Owned by Silver express
Date and time : 21st June 2007, 2152 UTC
KTMB to MBPV IFR flight.
The water is said to be very deep so taking the plane out is not going to happen I guess, and the fact that there was no major injuries, all survived, there isn't much motivation to go through the trouble of getting it.
Last edited by nano404; 25th Jun 2007 at 21:56. Reason: Mistake in distinction between location of failure and location of accident
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thank God they made it ok. lucky they didn't flip over on landing when the gear dug in.
I hope you will post the reason for the failure...certainly they tried carb heat? switching fuel tanks, boost pump, mags...
I had an engine lose power on takeoff in a pa 28 161 and carb heat brought it right back to life...you know how it is.
I hope you will post the reason for the failure...certainly they tried carb heat? switching fuel tanks, boost pump, mags...
I had an engine lose power on takeoff in a pa 28 161 and carb heat brought it right back to life...you know how it is.
From 11 miles out @ 9000ft, it should be just be possible to glide to land. Very dependent on wind direction and getting to best glide speed (83mph rings a bell).
Good outcome all things considered.
Good outcome all things considered.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Small dot in the Caribbean
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well apparently it was 15 miles out at the time, i'll paste the Flight/Accident summary from the accident notification:
So i guess 4 minutes, 4 miles, apparently for 6000ft they were trying and the instructor said he thought it was going to start once or twice. I think they gave up at around 3000 ft. Media seems to think that the pilot is always a male, local T.V. station and paper says he though it was a female pilot, human imperfections i guess, as the first thing that would come to most persons mind seeing 2 ladies and one man coming from a plane crash is that the man is the pilot.
Flight/ Accident Summary : N126ST departed Tamiami airport on a private IFR flight en-route to Providenciales International Airport, estimating arrival at 2151 UTC.
At 2150 UTC the pilot, who had been in earlier contact with the Providenciales control tower, reported a total loss of engine power and advised that the airplane will not be able to reach the Providenciales International Airport. At the same time, she further reported the aircraft position at 15miles NW of Providenciales airport and advised that she would be executing a water landing.
The last contact with N126ST occurred at 2154. Shortly thereafter, the pilot landed in very deep waters approximately 11 miles NW of Providenciales airport.
At 2150 UTC the pilot, who had been in earlier contact with the Providenciales control tower, reported a total loss of engine power and advised that the airplane will not be able to reach the Providenciales International Airport. At the same time, she further reported the aircraft position at 15miles NW of Providenciales airport and advised that she would be executing a water landing.
The last contact with N126ST occurred at 2154. Shortly thereafter, the pilot landed in very deep waters approximately 11 miles NW of Providenciales airport.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: EGJJ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there might be a case of running out of fuel here.
PA28-161 has useable 40 Imp Galls, uses 8 IG per hr and the distance from KTMB to MBPV is 500NM, at 100kts air speed, elapsed time is 5hrs and endurance 5 hrs!! This is assuming a direct flight and still air.
When I last flew on that route there was normally a headwind on the leg thru the Bahamas to Turks and Caicos.
Seems they were pushing their luck but got away with it.
PA28-161 has useable 40 Imp Galls, uses 8 IG per hr and the distance from KTMB to MBPV is 500NM, at 100kts air speed, elapsed time is 5hrs and endurance 5 hrs!! This is assuming a direct flight and still air.
When I last flew on that route there was normally a headwind on the leg thru the Bahamas to Turks and Caicos.
Seems they were pushing their luck but got away with it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
9000ft/15nm/@ 90kts, 3nm/1000ft, that works out to 27nm by my calc.
15nm should have been easily achievable, even at 750fpm, which should have given 3nm/1500ft, giving a straight line glide of 18nm.
sounds like they got very lucky, especially as they were picked up @ 11 miles - 4 miles over 9000ft? they're a mile and a half up for goodness sake!
15nm should have been easily achievable, even at 750fpm, which should have given 3nm/1500ft, giving a straight line glide of 18nm.
sounds like they got very lucky, especially as they were picked up @ 11 miles - 4 miles over 9000ft? they're a mile and a half up for goodness sake!
PA28-161 has useable 40 Imp Galls
At altitude, properly leaned app. 8 gall/hr, gives you 5 hrs with IFR reserves.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B2N2 you are correct in US gallons, whereas welkyboy talks of Imperial gallons. In any case this could be cutting it a bit fine..... I learned to fly on the -161 and my old POH says 10 gal/hr @ 75% and 8.8 gal/hr @ 65% at best power cruise settings. You can bring this down, of course, but you'd have to make a very conscious effort to wring the last drop of Avgas out of it.... Fuel starvation does indeed sound plausible here.
PS: all my figures above are US gallons
PS: all my figures above are US gallons
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Small dot in the Caribbean
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems they could've made it, but I guess too busy trying to start, I'm sure gliding isn't the first thing on your mind when you loose your engine.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: york
Age: 50
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Pratt is spot on there
PFL's were allways, trim for best glide, check wind direction(although over water obviously head for land takes precedence) do a left right check to see if it can be re-started. Then open the door and jam it with something. Lastly get on the radio.
PFL's were allways, trim for best glide, check wind direction(although over water obviously head for land takes precedence) do a left right check to see if it can be re-started. Then open the door and jam it with something. Lastly get on the radio.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We had a case up here in Canada about a week ago, similar story. A bunch of folks were headed from Montreal to Alaska. They ran into some weather and headwinds on the leg taking them to Thunder Bay, and a Cherokee 140 lost its engine and had to ditch in Lake Superior. The pilot/owner managed to get out, but his wife drowned. I believe in their case the bird ended up upside down in the drink.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure I would always immediately trim for best glide.
At say FL150 I have something like 20 mins of glide at Vbg, but anywhere more than 20-odd nm from land I will ditch anyway (assuming nil wind) so I would immediately
pull alternate air (fuel injected engine, note)
fuel pump on
change tanks
and then trim for Vbg (95kt).
One can do the above 3 within a few seconds; the speed will barely have time to decay, so trimming for Vbg will be pointless.
The only time I would go for a landing without trying anything else first is in case of an obvious catastrophic mechanical failure: a big bang and the prop flies off, or the prop suddenly stops, or I see a conrod sticking up through the cowling, or there is massive vibration (e.g. a blade gone partially or wholly missing) and I have to shut off fast.
At say FL150 I have something like 20 mins of glide at Vbg, but anywhere more than 20-odd nm from land I will ditch anyway (assuming nil wind) so I would immediately
pull alternate air (fuel injected engine, note)
fuel pump on
change tanks
and then trim for Vbg (95kt).
One can do the above 3 within a few seconds; the speed will barely have time to decay, so trimming for Vbg will be pointless.
The only time I would go for a landing without trying anything else first is in case of an obvious catastrophic mechanical failure: a big bang and the prop flies off, or the prop suddenly stops, or I see a conrod sticking up through the cowling, or there is massive vibration (e.g. a blade gone partially or wholly missing) and I have to shut off fast.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tend to agree with IO540. Yes, you must trim for best glide as soon as possible, but trimming for best glide will take something like 10 seconds at least. But when the engine stops, your exhaust temperature will drop to ambient in, what, three seconds or less? And once the exhaust temperature has dropped, carb heat (for instance) won't help anymore.
So in case of engine trouble leading to partial or full loss of engine power, here's the drill that I hope I'm going to remember (PA-28 with carbs):
Immediate action items:
- Full power & mixture full rich
- Carb heat on
- Two turns upwards on the trim wheel (assuming cruise trim - this gives me roughly Vbg, fine tune deferred to later)
If very low, don't bother restarting the engine. Trim for best glide, check wind and look for a field. Mayday to ATC, passenger briefing, open door, brace. If time allows, secure the plane before impact (fuel off, electric master off).
If time allows:
Left to right actions:
- Change tanks / aux fuel pump on
- Check ignition on both
- Check primer in & locked
- Check T&Ps, fuel quantity
If engine stopped, try to restart.
Fine trim for best glide, pick a field
Mayday to ATC
Passenger briefing
Jettison loose objects
Think about what I've forgotten...
So in case of engine trouble leading to partial or full loss of engine power, here's the drill that I hope I'm going to remember (PA-28 with carbs):
Immediate action items:
- Full power & mixture full rich
- Carb heat on
- Two turns upwards on the trim wheel (assuming cruise trim - this gives me roughly Vbg, fine tune deferred to later)
If very low, don't bother restarting the engine. Trim for best glide, check wind and look for a field. Mayday to ATC, passenger briefing, open door, brace. If time allows, secure the plane before impact (fuel off, electric master off).
If time allows:
Left to right actions:
- Change tanks / aux fuel pump on
- Check ignition on both
- Check primer in & locked
- Check T&Ps, fuel quantity
If engine stopped, try to restart.
Fine trim for best glide, pick a field
Mayday to ATC
Passenger briefing
Jettison loose objects
Think about what I've forgotten...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Small dot in the Caribbean
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a rather careless statement - with a comment like that i wonder if you're even a pilot.
.How much is weight taken into consideration?
Correct registration is N162ST, made an error in typing.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Small dot in the Caribbean
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I guess after roughly 580-600 miles (anyone can clarify?) your tank would be nearly empty (clarify?) and it was only 3 persons but the more weight would decrease the glide distance by at least a little? in comparison to just the pilot? Not excusing them for not gliding, just wondering.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I find a bit amazing here is that
a) with an instructor on board is appears they were trying to attempt a flight that is 506 NM in a direct line and would simply not be doable in a standard -161, even in perfect conditions (at least not with legal reserves)
b) to make matters worse, the last stretch of said flight was over open water, depriving them of any alternative
c) with pilot and instructor on board, they didn't glide better. In a two-pilot situation normally one would handle the trim/glide while the other (in a PA28 the left seat, as that's where the fuel-tank selector is) would attempt to re-start.
Not throwing stones here, I have no idea if there are any -161s out there equipped with long-range tanks and yes, the 'There but for the Grace of God....' always applies, but still makes me wonder if any fuel planning was done.
On a slightly different note: Quite often after reading accident reports it seems to me that two pilots on board often make a situation worse. I am speaking in a spamcan GA environment here, not professional flying. Could it be that there is a certain mistaken reliance on the other or a hesitation to query a flawed decision ? Just wondering.
a) with an instructor on board is appears they were trying to attempt a flight that is 506 NM in a direct line and would simply not be doable in a standard -161, even in perfect conditions (at least not with legal reserves)
b) to make matters worse, the last stretch of said flight was over open water, depriving them of any alternative
c) with pilot and instructor on board, they didn't glide better. In a two-pilot situation normally one would handle the trim/glide while the other (in a PA28 the left seat, as that's where the fuel-tank selector is) would attempt to re-start.
Not throwing stones here, I have no idea if there are any -161s out there equipped with long-range tanks and yes, the 'There but for the Grace of God....' always applies, but still makes me wonder if any fuel planning was done.
On a slightly different note: Quite often after reading accident reports it seems to me that two pilots on board often make a situation worse. I am speaking in a spamcan GA environment here, not professional flying. Could it be that there is a certain mistaken reliance on the other or a hesitation to query a flawed decision ? Just wondering.
Last edited by 172driver; 26th Jun 2007 at 07:09. Reason: typo
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect some of the facts around where they were at the point of the engine failure are not quite correct. While glide distance varies a bit with weight, it is impossible to be so gash as to loose 9000 ft in 4 miles in anything like 'normal' flight.
Re - 2 pilots (or pilot and instructor) There is a piece on Avweb about Instructor Induced Stupidity (IIS). It is fairly common for PPLs (particularly with different experience levels) to defer authority to 'the other one' resulting in no one taking the command decisions. This is why it is so important to breif the roles people are playing (i.e. is the guy in the right seat PIC because of his experience, PNF and helping, or interested passenger)
Re - 2 pilots (or pilot and instructor) There is a piece on Avweb about Instructor Induced Stupidity (IIS). It is fairly common for PPLs (particularly with different experience levels) to defer authority to 'the other one' resulting in no one taking the command decisions. This is why it is so important to breif the roles people are playing (i.e. is the guy in the right seat PIC because of his experience, PNF and helping, or interested passenger)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could it be that there is a certain mistaken reliance on the other or a hesitation to query a flawed decision ? Just wondering.
Couldn't agree more. It's easily done, too.
Couldn't agree more. It's easily done, too.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My house
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sir.pratt "9000ft/15nm/@ 90kts, 3nm/1000ft, that works out to 27nm by my calc.
15nm should have been easily achievable, even at 750fpm, which should have given 3nm/1500ft, giving a straight line glide of 18nm.
sounds like they got very lucky, especially as they were picked up @ 11 miles - 4 miles over 9000ft? they're a mile and a half up for goodness sake! "
I am not sure why you calculated it in that way to get 27nm?!
In most trainers a glide ratio of 12:1 would be good.
I only have the POHs for a c150 and c182 RG to hand, which give best glides of 15 and 16miles respectively.
These figures are for test pilots in perfect conditions. A 10:1 glide ratio is much more realistic.
Clearly the 4 miles progress reported can not be correct, either they went round in circles, exceeded a Vne dive, went very slowly into a head wind, or got the initial position wrong.
The important point here for me is that they executed the ditching weel, and were properly prepared for the result. The fuel situation will become apparent later.
15nm should have been easily achievable, even at 750fpm, which should have given 3nm/1500ft, giving a straight line glide of 18nm.
sounds like they got very lucky, especially as they were picked up @ 11 miles - 4 miles over 9000ft? they're a mile and a half up for goodness sake! "
I am not sure why you calculated it in that way to get 27nm?!
In most trainers a glide ratio of 12:1 would be good.
I only have the POHs for a c150 and c182 RG to hand, which give best glides of 15 and 16miles respectively.
These figures are for test pilots in perfect conditions. A 10:1 glide ratio is much more realistic.
Clearly the 4 miles progress reported can not be correct, either they went round in circles, exceeded a Vne dive, went very slowly into a head wind, or got the initial position wrong.
The important point here for me is that they executed the ditching weel, and were properly prepared for the result. The fuel situation will become apparent later.