Engine Failure
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helis, I gather from a heli pilot I know, suffer a lot more because the engines are worked very hard but get inadequate cooling air.
OTOH they can land with autorotation almost anywhere.
And helis have hundreds of life-critical parts.
OTOH they can land with autorotation almost anywhere.
And helis have hundreds of life-critical parts.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High Key and Low Key
Jan Olieslagers
As to "High Key" and "Low Key"
I've had the privilege and honor in my life to both fly civilian and military. In my early civilian flying days when being taught the emergency procedure for engine failure it was always....Land in a field. More of a TLAR (that looks about right) approach. Now yes you pitched for the best glide and basically picked out a field and orbited above it until you landed. That that sounds like a good plan, but where exactly should you be in that orbit above the field?
In military training I've learn a specific ELP(Emergency Landing pattern).Think of "High Key" as and an actual point you fly through in the sky. Like a huge ring in the sky that you are trying to fly through directly abeam your intended point of landing. If you're in the right seat that would be to the left of your intended point of landing if in the left seat to the right of the intended point of landing. This way you can always keep in sight where you're landing. Now this may be different for every aircraft, but what worked great for the C-172 at 2200lbs is 2,000'
"Low Key" is like a base leg to final, which is approximately 1000' feet for a C-172 at 2200lbs.
You are then looking to be approximately 500' rolling out on final and then you S turn or slip the aircraft to lose any extra altitude if you have any.
The issue with TLAR and just orbiting over the field is what if you're too high or what if you're too low? Will you know if you are? If there are 150' trees you have to miss (which I had) will you make it?
Knowing exactly where to be and what altitude to be at will let you know that you're on a good glide profile and will help increase your chances for a safe landing.
Here is a blank ELP (emergency landing pattern) diagram. I recommend taking what ever aircraft you will be flying and climb up above your home airport to about 4,000' AGL and orbit at best glide to see what your actual numbers will be for an entire 360 orbit and then add a bit of altitude to that for safe measure. This will be your "High key" and "Low Key" numbers.
Hope this helps.
God bless,
Tony<><
P.S. 4 days after my engine failure my wife and I found out we are going to be parents!!!! Super excited!!!
As to "High Key" and "Low Key"
I've had the privilege and honor in my life to both fly civilian and military. In my early civilian flying days when being taught the emergency procedure for engine failure it was always....Land in a field. More of a TLAR (that looks about right) approach. Now yes you pitched for the best glide and basically picked out a field and orbited above it until you landed. That that sounds like a good plan, but where exactly should you be in that orbit above the field?
In military training I've learn a specific ELP(Emergency Landing pattern).Think of "High Key" as and an actual point you fly through in the sky. Like a huge ring in the sky that you are trying to fly through directly abeam your intended point of landing. If you're in the right seat that would be to the left of your intended point of landing if in the left seat to the right of the intended point of landing. This way you can always keep in sight where you're landing. Now this may be different for every aircraft, but what worked great for the C-172 at 2200lbs is 2,000'
"Low Key" is like a base leg to final, which is approximately 1000' feet for a C-172 at 2200lbs.
You are then looking to be approximately 500' rolling out on final and then you S turn or slip the aircraft to lose any extra altitude if you have any.
The issue with TLAR and just orbiting over the field is what if you're too high or what if you're too low? Will you know if you are? If there are 150' trees you have to miss (which I had) will you make it?
Knowing exactly where to be and what altitude to be at will let you know that you're on a good glide profile and will help increase your chances for a safe landing.
Here is a blank ELP (emergency landing pattern) diagram. I recommend taking what ever aircraft you will be flying and climb up above your home airport to about 4,000' AGL and orbit at best glide to see what your actual numbers will be for an entire 360 orbit and then add a bit of altitude to that for safe measure. This will be your "High key" and "Low Key" numbers.
Hope this helps.
God bless,
Tony<><
P.S. 4 days after my engine failure my wife and I found out we are going to be parents!!!! Super excited!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal,
1) I believe the FAA ruled it as carb ice....I'm still learning, but I just don't understand yet how you could get carb ice at 2400RPM in a climb at 3800'.
2) As to the beautiful girl. She was a friend in town and had never been up in a small aircraft before. Needless to say she wouldn't go up after that. However, her husband was ready to go up that night and wants to be a military aviator.
God bless,
Tony<><
1) I believe the FAA ruled it as carb ice....I'm still learning, but I just don't understand yet how you could get carb ice at 2400RPM in a climb at 3800'.
2) As to the beautiful girl. She was a friend in town and had never been up in a small aircraft before. Needless to say she wouldn't go up after that. However, her husband was ready to go up that night and wants to be a military aviator.
God bless,
Tony<><
Tony,
Thanks for the extensive description - and congratulations with your upcoming parentship!
I think I understand your explanation, and will certainly try to take the exercise whenever I can again afford to go flying.
One thing still unclear, though: all the altitudes you describe are indeed altitudes, they are read on the altimeter. However we need to know heights AGL - but in an out landing we can only estimate the elevation.
Thanks for the extensive description - and congratulations with your upcoming parentship!
I think I understand your explanation, and will certainly try to take the exercise whenever I can again afford to go flying.
One thing still unclear, though: all the altitudes you describe are indeed altitudes, they are read on the altimeter. However we need to know heights AGL - but in an out landing we can only estimate the elevation.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal,
1) I believe the FAA ruled it as carb ice....I'm still learning, but I just don't understand yet how you could get carb ice at 2400RPM in a climb at 3800'.
2) As to the beautiful girl. She was a friend in town and had never been up in a small aircraft before. Needless to say she wouldn't go up after that. However, her husband was ready to go up that night and wants to be a military aviator.
1) I believe the FAA ruled it as carb ice....I'm still learning, but I just don't understand yet how you could get carb ice at 2400RPM in a climb at 3800'.
2) As to the beautiful girl. She was a friend in town and had never been up in a small aircraft before. Needless to say she wouldn't go up after that. However, her husband was ready to go up that night and wants to be a military aviator.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony,
Thanks for the extensive description - and congratulations with your upcoming parentship!
I think I understand your explanation, and will certainly try to take the exercise whenever I can again afford to go flying.
One thing still unclear, though: all the altitudes you describe are indeed altitudes, they are read on the altimeter. However we need to know heights AGL - but in an out landing we can only estimate the elevation.
Thanks for the extensive description - and congratulations with your upcoming parentship!
I think I understand your explanation, and will certainly try to take the exercise whenever I can again afford to go flying.
One thing still unclear, though: all the altitudes you describe are indeed altitudes, they are read on the altimeter. However we need to know heights AGL - but in an out landing we can only estimate the elevation.
God bless,
Tony<><
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, I don't think the above is practical.
Upon an engine failure in a SE, one is going to get awfully busy awfully quickly - unless at FL150 above Lydd
You will pick a provisional course of action, then set 7700, make a radio call, then - unless you have a conrod sticking up through the cowling - try to sort out what caused the failure (electric fuel pump ON, etc).
There are basically two approaches: one is to orbit until at what appears to be the right height / aspect ratio and then fly the part-circuit to land, and the other is to turn into the wind, pick a site straight ahead, and try to put the plane down in a field there.
The advantage of the former one is that you get a better chance to inspect it before you go in.
The advantage of the latter one is that anybody can do it - well anybody who can fly a long final, perhaps a very steep long final, with s-turns to lose height.
I think I would go for the latter method, if there were fields all over the place (which is the case most of the time when over the UK and most other "flat" places) and the rest of the time one would have to be more imaginative...
Upon an engine failure in a SE, one is going to get awfully busy awfully quickly - unless at FL150 above Lydd
You will pick a provisional course of action, then set 7700, make a radio call, then - unless you have a conrod sticking up through the cowling - try to sort out what caused the failure (electric fuel pump ON, etc).There are basically two approaches: one is to orbit until at what appears to be the right height / aspect ratio and then fly the part-circuit to land, and the other is to turn into the wind, pick a site straight ahead, and try to put the plane down in a field there.
The advantage of the former one is that you get a better chance to inspect it before you go in.
The advantage of the latter one is that anybody can do it - well anybody who can fly a long final, perhaps a very steep long final, with s-turns to lose height.
I think I would go for the latter method, if there were fields all over the place (which is the case most of the time when over the UK and most other "flat" places) and the rest of the time one would have to be more imaginative...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are basically two approaches: one is to orbit until at what appears to be the right height / aspect ratio and then fly the part-circuit to land, and the other is to turn into the wind,
Reverting to my long distant gliding training I NEVER lose sight of the field I have chosen. Having turned downwind, as I too was trained to do, I choose a field and then, if necessary, do S turns up and down the downwind leg until going downwind at 1000' and level with the touchdown point. (Low point?).
Orbiting could lead to losing sight of the field. Straight in approaches sound extremely dangerous to me unless you know the field and you KNOW that you are have height in hand. You ever see a glider pilot doing either of these things?
Orbiting could lead to losing sight of the field. Straight in approaches sound extremely dangerous to me unless you know the field and you KNOW that you are have height in hand. You ever see a glider pilot doing either of these things?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight in is OK if you can see a sequence of green fields lined up "vertically" ahead of you.
Anybody can glide on an azimuth; it is judging the glide distance which is hard.
I think that at least 90% of the time (UK) one would meet the requirement.
Anybody can glide on an azimuth; it is judging the glide distance which is hard.
I think that at least 90% of the time (UK) one would meet the requirement.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: suffolk
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Io you are right about getting busy.
Real engine falures are nothing like PFL's.
With the engine quiet and the prop stopped its nothing like coming down with the prop windmilling.
From the average height of a cross country in this country ( allegedly 2500ft) there is precious little time to get down safely.The only time I bent the plane was the only time I tried to put out a may day.
I tried to retune the radio and in my haste overshot the frequency, by the time I had retuned and put out the mayday, and then concentrated what was going on outside the window I was down to 500ft( approx) which just about gave me time to brief my son for the impact and take what was in front of me.
My ONLY advice to anyone faced with an engine failure is forget everything else and FLY THE BLOODY PLANE.
A friend of mine had an engine failure and trashed the plane and nearly killed his passenger.His comment to me after the accident was that he had remenbered to do everything "by the book" and was proud of that and the only bit that went wrong was the last few minutes!THEY ARE WHAT COUNT!!
Real engine falures are nothing like PFL's.
With the engine quiet and the prop stopped its nothing like coming down with the prop windmilling.
From the average height of a cross country in this country ( allegedly 2500ft) there is precious little time to get down safely.The only time I bent the plane was the only time I tried to put out a may day.
I tried to retune the radio and in my haste overshot the frequency, by the time I had retuned and put out the mayday, and then concentrated what was going on outside the window I was down to 500ft( approx) which just about gave me time to brief my son for the impact and take what was in front of me.
My ONLY advice to anyone faced with an engine failure is forget everything else and FLY THE BLOODY PLANE.
A friend of mine had an engine failure and trashed the plane and nearly killed his passenger.His comment to me after the accident was that he had remenbered to do everything "by the book" and was proud of that and the only bit that went wrong was the last few minutes!THEY ARE WHAT COUNT!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The glide ratio with a stopped prop is better than with a windmilling prop, BTW.
At least with a stopped prop you know the engine is f*&^%$d and don't need to waste any time on restarting it.
At least with a stopped prop you know the engine is f*&^%$d and don't need to waste any time on restarting it.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the southern UK I assume that all the ground below me is 500' MSL unless I know otherwise! If I were to come in high, it is easy enough to shed a few 00 feet. If I am low.....oops. But one instructor used to teach me the long base, short final technique. If you are flying over somewhere with tons of fields that all look alike (like S UK) and you are not particularly high, you can set yourself up for a long base and at the right altitude, turn final.
Fuel?
At least with a stopped prop you know the engine is f*&^%$d and don't need to waste any time on restarting it.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The motor won't stop turning all the time you are flying well above Vs. Too much airflow.
To stop an engine (that is not mechanically broken) you have to pitch up aggressively (maybe 30 degrees up) and switch off the ignition / close the mixture.
I was in a C150 with an instructor who did it for fun. I also know somebody who flew with the same instructor who did it at 2000ft
IMHO if an engine stops turning, in any kind of normal flight, it is gone.
To stop an engine (that is not mechanically broken) you have to pitch up aggressively (maybe 30 degrees up) and switch off the ignition / close the mixture.
I was in a C150 with an instructor who did it for fun. I also know somebody who flew with the same instructor who did it at 2000ft
IMHO if an engine stops turning, in any kind of normal flight, it is gone.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal, I think IO540 meant that if the engine stops turning and the airspeed is normal (so there is persistant and adequate airflow over the prop blades), there must be something terribly wrong with the engine, i.e. mechanical damage (and not lack of fuel, spark or air) and its restart and further operation is likely to be beyond pilot's capabilities to do so from the cockpit.
Moderator
For general purposes, it is correct that if the propeller (metal) has stopped turning through no action of the pilot to stop it, don't concentrate on a restart, look for a place to land. I have stopped my C150 prop, but it was not easy. If metal has come adrift inside the engine, the starter is not going to be of any use!
That said, while doing un-feathering/restart evaulations of the Lycoming engine with the MT prop, in the DA 42 L360, I can tell you, that it was fairly easy to stop the prop (feathered or not), and un feathering did not cause it to windmill. A high speed dive did get it windmilling. Similarly, my evaluation of a Hoffmann 4 blade wood prop on the Scout suggested similar characteristics. On such installations, if I had let the engine stop, and thought that I had corrected the problem, I would be trying a restart.
A clip for you (and yes, I know it is feathered), but even with the outboard portions of the blades with a very favourable angle of incidence to encourage a windmill start, it was not a sure thing. The starter motor method worked very well!
Jims DAR Testing :: DA 42 L360 restart video by PilotDAR - Photobucket
With the popularity of the MT props (which is well desreved, in my opinion), it may more be the case where a stopped engine is worthy of an attempt to restart by starter motor.
As for setting up a gliding circuit, my practice, particularly after reading John Farley's excellent book, is to tend toward picking a landing sight nearer, and more straight ahead, and if possible flying a high, straight in approach, with lots of drag. I would much rather concentrate on configuration, drag management (side slipping), and glide path control, knowing I have good reserve, than to try to fly the perfectly configured glide, with half the circuit worried if I will really make the landing sight.
I do realize that this may conflict with convention methods, and I do not seek to challenge those time tested thecniques, but it works for me!
That said, while doing un-feathering/restart evaulations of the Lycoming engine with the MT prop, in the DA 42 L360, I can tell you, that it was fairly easy to stop the prop (feathered or not), and un feathering did not cause it to windmill. A high speed dive did get it windmilling. Similarly, my evaluation of a Hoffmann 4 blade wood prop on the Scout suggested similar characteristics. On such installations, if I had let the engine stop, and thought that I had corrected the problem, I would be trying a restart.
A clip for you (and yes, I know it is feathered), but even with the outboard portions of the blades with a very favourable angle of incidence to encourage a windmill start, it was not a sure thing. The starter motor method worked very well!
Jims DAR Testing :: DA 42 L360 restart video by PilotDAR - Photobucket
With the popularity of the MT props (which is well desreved, in my opinion), it may more be the case where a stopped engine is worthy of an attempt to restart by starter motor.
As for setting up a gliding circuit, my practice, particularly after reading John Farley's excellent book, is to tend toward picking a landing sight nearer, and more straight ahead, and if possible flying a high, straight in approach, with lots of drag. I would much rather concentrate on configuration, drag management (side slipping), and glide path control, knowing I have good reserve, than to try to fly the perfectly configured glide, with half the circuit worried if I will really make the landing sight.
I do realize that this may conflict with convention methods, and I do not seek to challenge those time tested thecniques, but it works for me!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Norfolk U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Once you get away from the certified engine scene, there is a huge variation in engine reliability."
May add my few pence worth? I've clocked up almost 1200 hrs in the last 19 years, all bar an hour or so in the same flexwing I learned to fly in (which is possibly a record in itself?). The only time the engine has stopped in flight is on the few occasions when I have turned it off.
I have experienced 2 instances of fuel starvation, due on both occasions to water condensation mixing with the oil in the fuel (50:1 premix for the Rotax 447) and partially blocking the fuel filter. The first time was during my GFT, and we managed to limp back to the airfield. The second time I happened to be passing a suitable strip, and immediately turned round and landed safely.
More recently I have suffered several misfires during climbout - on all occasions the engine recovered after throttling back. This took me some time to resolve, and eventually turned out to be the original engine wiring harness. Since replacing, it's run perfectly.
When I hear the experiences of some other pilots who regard engine failures as a regular occurrence, I have to wonder why... Maybe years of motorcycling taught me to take care of 2 strokes? I only use good branded Mogas from the same garage, and buy my oil in bulk. I don't take off without allowing the CHT to reach 200F, and I never throttle right back on approach until I'm assured of a landing - no fuel = no oil... My machine has a simple permanent warm air induction system which seems to be enough to prevent carb ice from forming, without noticeably affecting performance, another reason for keeping some power on during descent.
This goes against how I was taught, but I'm of the opinion that glide approaches are asking for trouble on older 2 stroke powered machines like mine. I do all my own engine servicing and rebuilding, and keep to the recommended decoke intervals, so I know I won't have any problems undoing bolts or removing gummed piston rings, etc.
Harking back to some of the earlier comments I'm not constantly looking for somewhere to land - if I really was that unsure of things, I would have quit long ago. I'm supposedly flying for enjoyment, and I take the view expressed by others of trying to minimise the likely hood of engine failure in the first place.
May add my few pence worth? I've clocked up almost 1200 hrs in the last 19 years, all bar an hour or so in the same flexwing I learned to fly in (which is possibly a record in itself?). The only time the engine has stopped in flight is on the few occasions when I have turned it off.
I have experienced 2 instances of fuel starvation, due on both occasions to water condensation mixing with the oil in the fuel (50:1 premix for the Rotax 447) and partially blocking the fuel filter. The first time was during my GFT, and we managed to limp back to the airfield. The second time I happened to be passing a suitable strip, and immediately turned round and landed safely.
More recently I have suffered several misfires during climbout - on all occasions the engine recovered after throttling back. This took me some time to resolve, and eventually turned out to be the original engine wiring harness. Since replacing, it's run perfectly.
When I hear the experiences of some other pilots who regard engine failures as a regular occurrence, I have to wonder why... Maybe years of motorcycling taught me to take care of 2 strokes? I only use good branded Mogas from the same garage, and buy my oil in bulk. I don't take off without allowing the CHT to reach 200F, and I never throttle right back on approach until I'm assured of a landing - no fuel = no oil... My machine has a simple permanent warm air induction system which seems to be enough to prevent carb ice from forming, without noticeably affecting performance, another reason for keeping some power on during descent.
This goes against how I was taught, but I'm of the opinion that glide approaches are asking for trouble on older 2 stroke powered machines like mine. I do all my own engine servicing and rebuilding, and keep to the recommended decoke intervals, so I know I won't have any problems undoing bolts or removing gummed piston rings, etc.
Harking back to some of the earlier comments I'm not constantly looking for somewhere to land - if I really was that unsure of things, I would have quit long ago. I'm supposedly flying for enjoyment, and I take the view expressed by others of trying to minimise the likely hood of engine failure in the first place.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feathering will of course stop windmilling. Unfeathering the prop should mean that at speeds a margin above the stall speed the prop should windmill but that depends on how much internal friction first needs to be overcome. I have no experience of the Lycoming version of the 42 but it is surprising how much speed is required to windmill the prop on the diesel version presumably attributable to higher levels of friction in diesel engines. It is interesting that the Lycoming version appears to require such a high speed to start windmilling. Have you any idea why this should be so?