"Light Twin" fatal at Hawarden
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I never got that far in instructing in GA.
I do however work as a line Training Captain flying an old heap twin Turbo prop which on paper is a Pref A. Well it was 35 years ago when it was released.
But realistically I think I would be in the same boat as a light twin at MTOW if one went.
I was very lucky to spend a shed load of sectors with the Empire Test pilot for my type. And as I had no interest in gardening I learned the vices of flying twin engine propeller aircraft.
Now commercial twins we get in general 2 sessions of 4 hours every year (6 monthly) mostly doing single engine work. Referred to as LPC and OPC. In each session we will do 8-10 engine failures on departure and approaches to GA. And 1 or two landings.
Mostly the low hour first officer pilots for the first two sessions tend to be nursed through the TRE is nice to them and gives them single failures and nice conditions. By the third session after getting there type rating. They get much better and the TRE starts applying pressure to increase their capacity giving them more lively conditions and multiple failures including killing the Captain.
Realistically we are talking 750-1000 hours on type and 1000-1500 normal approaches and 4-6 sim sessions before I would say they are "competent"
And my own sessions tend to get paired up with a lower experienced FO and once I get my required handling done they get to handle the rest of the session. So they get an extra hours handling. And at the end they get to play at being the Captain for 20 mins while I get my RHS qualification done.
I do however work as a line Training Captain flying an old heap twin Turbo prop which on paper is a Pref A. Well it was 35 years ago when it was released.
But realistically I think I would be in the same boat as a light twin at MTOW if one went.
I was very lucky to spend a shed load of sectors with the Empire Test pilot for my type. And as I had no interest in gardening I learned the vices of flying twin engine propeller aircraft.
Now commercial twins we get in general 2 sessions of 4 hours every year (6 monthly) mostly doing single engine work. Referred to as LPC and OPC. In each session we will do 8-10 engine failures on departure and approaches to GA. And 1 or two landings.
Mostly the low hour first officer pilots for the first two sessions tend to be nursed through the TRE is nice to them and gives them single failures and nice conditions. By the third session after getting there type rating. They get much better and the TRE starts applying pressure to increase their capacity giving them more lively conditions and multiple failures including killing the Captain.
Realistically we are talking 750-1000 hours on type and 1000-1500 normal approaches and 4-6 sim sessions before I would say they are "competent"
And my own sessions tend to get paired up with a lower experienced FO and once I get my required handling done they get to handle the rest of the session. So they get an extra hours handling. And at the end they get to play at being the Captain for 20 mins while I get my RHS qualification done.
Last edited by mad_jock; 19th Nov 2013 at 21:34.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I failed a candidate on a MEP skill test 2 weeks ago for failing to clean the aircraft up on the asymmetric DH go around and staling the aircraft. A very real demonstration of the need for the correct recovery technique.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you MEP examiners must have big balls of stainless steel. Its bad enough sitting in a simulator with the bells and whistles going off and unusual attitudes under 500ft.
At least we know all we are going to hear is "well I think we better reset that and try again"
At least we know all we are going to hear is "well I think we better reset that and try again"
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are but people won't pay for them.
I have been in a motion King air sim that you can swap the instrument panel and fit a set of mixture levels into some slots and turns into a generic MEP.
A FNPT II without any motion is horrible enough to be honest.
I have been in a motion King air sim that you can swap the instrument panel and fit a set of mixture levels into some slots and turns into a generic MEP.
A FNPT II without any motion is horrible enough to be honest.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Meldex
Just a question; does anyone know if this was a training flight, or was it a normal private flight?
mad_jock, thanks for the detailed reply too
Last edited by rustle; 20th Nov 2013 at 10:29.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been on the one at Dundee, King Air, multi, and frankly, whilst ok for doing some basic instrument procedures, and brushing up on IFR, I think it would be useless for any real upset recovery training and awareness.
I note you say people would not pay for them MJ. Do you know where any are situated within the UK?
I note you say people would not pay for them MJ. Do you know where any are situated within the UK?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doud't its EASA legal so there won't be one.
Personally when I did my IR I spent literally hours and hours doing figure of 8's onto the runway at leeds in an FNPT I generic.
I was very lucky as the school gave me a key to the door and free solo sim time as part of the course. So every Sat and Sun and the sim wasn't being used I was in there for 5 weeks. Must of been getting on for 60 to 80 hours solo time just battering away at single engine NDB approaches to go-around into the hold a couple of times swapping the failed engine then out bound again. Do that 4 times land reset the fuel and the runway and wind and do it again. And repeat.
I don't to be honest think having a motion or visuals will actually give you that much extra benefit. Its just banging the actions into your head and getting them automatic.
I agree with upset training and unusual attitudes its way outside the normal envelope that the FNPT is designed to be in. Remember FNPT stands for Flight Navigation Procedure Trainer. Which it is very good at doing. When you try and bastardise it into doing something it isn't it won't work.
Personally when I did my IR I spent literally hours and hours doing figure of 8's onto the runway at leeds in an FNPT I generic.
I was very lucky as the school gave me a key to the door and free solo sim time as part of the course. So every Sat and Sun and the sim wasn't being used I was in there for 5 weeks. Must of been getting on for 60 to 80 hours solo time just battering away at single engine NDB approaches to go-around into the hold a couple of times swapping the failed engine then out bound again. Do that 4 times land reset the fuel and the runway and wind and do it again. And repeat.
I don't to be honest think having a motion or visuals will actually give you that much extra benefit. Its just banging the actions into your head and getting them automatic.
I agree with upset training and unusual attitudes its way outside the normal envelope that the FNPT is designed to be in. Remember FNPT stands for Flight Navigation Procedure Trainer. Which it is very good at doing. When you try and bastardise it into doing something it isn't it won't work.
Last edited by mad_jock; 20th Nov 2013 at 11:19.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading all the posts here brings back memories of this....
ASN Aircraft accident British Aerospace 3201 Jetstream 32 G-SUPR Glasgow-Prestwick Airport (PIK)
ASN Aircraft accident British Aerospace 3201 Jetstream 32 G-SUPR Glasgow-Prestwick Airport (PIK)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this point i do want to highlight the training in light twins as not being adequate and more designed to pilots moving onto bigger, more performance aircraft rather than these minimal performance light twins.
IMO the training should be specific to looking at a number of scenarios.
" A light twin gives you more options, with more options come more choices, with more choices the option to make the wrong choice"
Start with that sentence and the training should be more at looking at the various options available to a light twin pilot.
One option maybe to close both engines, treat the aircraft like a single and land straight ahead into the nearest landing area possible.
Another option maybe to go for blue line and climb away but maybe that may be a mistake?
Another option maybe not to attempt to climb at all but setup level flight the thing that most light twins do best on one.
Yes even at 300 to 500 feet, then with single engine cruise trim the aircraft up until speed drops to say 100 kts and level again.
Build to cruise speed and step climb again slowly on the trim.
it does work!
Blue line maybe great in some scenarios but not all. It is the failure to maintain blue line maybe due to down draughts turbulence, weight panic etc which is the biggest killer in light twins.
I blame the training which is not adequate or specific enough to light twins
Pace
IMO the training should be specific to looking at a number of scenarios.
" A light twin gives you more options, with more options come more choices, with more choices the option to make the wrong choice"
Start with that sentence and the training should be more at looking at the various options available to a light twin pilot.
One option maybe to close both engines, treat the aircraft like a single and land straight ahead into the nearest landing area possible.
Another option maybe to go for blue line and climb away but maybe that may be a mistake?
Another option maybe not to attempt to climb at all but setup level flight the thing that most light twins do best on one.
Yes even at 300 to 500 feet, then with single engine cruise trim the aircraft up until speed drops to say 100 kts and level again.
Build to cruise speed and step climb again slowly on the trim.
it does work!
Blue line maybe great in some scenarios but not all. It is the failure to maintain blue line maybe due to down draughts turbulence, weight panic etc which is the biggest killer in light twins.
I blame the training which is not adequate or specific enough to light twins
Pace
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace, your profile doesn't give much away in terms of where or when you did MEP (or IR) training, however all the things you mention:
Start with that sentence and the training should be more at looking at the various options available to a light twin pilot.
One option maybe to close both engines, treat the aircraft like a single and land straight ahead into the nearest landing area possible.
Another option maybe to go for blue line and climb away but maybe that may be a mistake?
Another option maybe not to attempt to climb at all but setup level flight the thing that most light twins do best on one.
were covered in both my MEP and IR training in the UK.
In what realm do you consider the training
Start with that sentence and the training should be more at looking at the various options available to a light twin pilot.
One option maybe to close both engines, treat the aircraft like a single and land straight ahead into the nearest landing area possible.
Another option maybe to go for blue line and climb away but maybe that may be a mistake?
Another option maybe not to attempt to climb at all but setup level flight the thing that most light twins do best on one.
were covered in both my MEP and IR training in the UK.
In what realm do you consider the training
which is not adequate or specific enough to light twins
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rustle not having a go just a few questions.
How current are you personally flying twins?
And how often do you practise single engine work?
And how do you go about it?
I really don't have a feel for what people do in private twins. I know the only MEP renewal I did was after having not flown one since the last initial test doing an IR renewal. Then I went on to a TP type rating and have been in the 6 monthly test regime ever since for 10 years now.
How current are you personally flying twins?
And how often do you practise single engine work?
And how do you go about it?
I really don't have a feel for what people do in private twins. I know the only MEP renewal I did was after having not flown one since the last initial test doing an IR renewal. Then I went on to a TP type rating and have been in the 6 monthly test regime ever since for 10 years now.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rustle
I have about 3000 hrs in light twins of various types as well as an engine failure at grosse at 200 feet in the climb out in a Seneca 4 with 100 hrs total.
I now fly as a captain on Business Jets.
The Seneca failure was 3 sheared Rocker shafts, I estimated about 30% power and had awful vibrations.
Instinctively I knew with the weight if I feathered the prop and went for blue line the only way I was going was down.
Instead I elected to put one hand on the prop lever incase the whole shooting match blew and use that 30% power to coax a climb.
I got up to 800 feet agl very slowly by which time the unit was vibrating to bits and had to shut it down in level flight and then to a successful landing on one.
Was that taught to you to use every bit of available power or shut down?
Failure at 300 feet were you taught to ignore blue line and concentrate on level flight (most airfields are not in direct line of high terrain and will take a 300 foot circuit)
Unless the training has changed since the good old days I doubt it
There should be a whole host of possible scenarios looked at for training in light twins as well as the lateral thinking in making the right choice instead of the dogged blue line like a zombie at all costs which sadly lead to such a bad accident rate in multi engine light twins.
if you hold blue line you will be ok you may even descend at blue line but sadly most go short on blue and then its down hill all the way in every sense
Pace
I have about 3000 hrs in light twins of various types as well as an engine failure at grosse at 200 feet in the climb out in a Seneca 4 with 100 hrs total.
I now fly as a captain on Business Jets.
The Seneca failure was 3 sheared Rocker shafts, I estimated about 30% power and had awful vibrations.
Instinctively I knew with the weight if I feathered the prop and went for blue line the only way I was going was down.
Instead I elected to put one hand on the prop lever incase the whole shooting match blew and use that 30% power to coax a climb.
I got up to 800 feet agl very slowly by which time the unit was vibrating to bits and had to shut it down in level flight and then to a successful landing on one.
Was that taught to you to use every bit of available power or shut down?
Failure at 300 feet were you taught to ignore blue line and concentrate on level flight (most airfields are not in direct line of high terrain and will take a 300 foot circuit)
Unless the training has changed since the good old days I doubt it
There should be a whole host of possible scenarios looked at for training in light twins as well as the lateral thinking in making the right choice instead of the dogged blue line like a zombie at all costs which sadly lead to such a bad accident rate in multi engine light twins.
if you hold blue line you will be ok you may even descend at blue line but sadly most go short on blue and then its down hill all the way in every sense
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 20th Nov 2013 at 18:34.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember when I did my UK mep rating there was very little discussion on options. The course was geared towards controlling it on one and climbing away at blue line. This was on a Cougar which was a very poor performer.
I train at flightsafety in the US on a Baron sim every year where there is much more discussion and demonstration of various options. It reinforces in me how uncontrollable the airplane is when the live engine is at max chat and the speed is too slow. We do practical demonstrations of Vmca and try various methods of getting out of a tight spot. I consider this invaluable and learn more here every year than I ever did on my initial training. I was reluctant to do it at first, I fly for a living and had considered my annual JAA mep renewal a formality given that it's just for weekend flying. However having done it for a few years this way I feel more prepared than I ever did doing just the basic box ticking exercise it has become. It also cements my opinion that mep flying is the most difficult of anything I have done be it in pistons, turboprops or jets.
The only mep I fly now is the Baron, in various guises from 55 up to brand new G58. I am grateful for this, as the difference between this and the old Cougar I learned on is night and day.
I train at flightsafety in the US on a Baron sim every year where there is much more discussion and demonstration of various options. It reinforces in me how uncontrollable the airplane is when the live engine is at max chat and the speed is too slow. We do practical demonstrations of Vmca and try various methods of getting out of a tight spot. I consider this invaluable and learn more here every year than I ever did on my initial training. I was reluctant to do it at first, I fly for a living and had considered my annual JAA mep renewal a formality given that it's just for weekend flying. However having done it for a few years this way I feel more prepared than I ever did doing just the basic box ticking exercise it has become. It also cements my opinion that mep flying is the most difficult of anything I have done be it in pistons, turboprops or jets.
The only mep I fly now is the Baron, in various guises from 55 up to brand new G58. I am grateful for this, as the difference between this and the old Cougar I learned on is night and day.
Cut & Paste Intellectual
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Durham
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was very lucky as the school gave me a key to the door and free solo sim time as part of the course. So every Sat and Sun and the sim wasn't being used I was in there for 5 weeks. Must of been getting on for 60 to 80 hours solo time just battering away at single engine NDB approaches to go-around into the hold a couple of times swapping the failed engine then out bound again. Do that 4 times land reset the fuel and the runway and wind and do it again. And repeat.
It must be implicitly in a neural net and then refreshed often.
I hope the actual reasons for the accident become clear in due course but this thread is salutary and much can be affirmed in its contents from commentators who understand the critical issues concerning single crew IFR in light twins.
It has deeply affected me because I identify closely with the people who have lost their lives.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 55N
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether single crew or multi crew, when engine failure occurs in light twin piston aircraft at a critical phase of flight you are going to be in a very challenging position, and particularly if operating at or near MTOM (and this equally applies to the DA42 series). Recurrent and relevant training will help, but ultimately you have only a very short time to get all your ducks in line. Remember the accident at Glasgow to G-ILGW? Even with two pilots it can all go wrong.
Instead I elected to put one hand on the prop lever incase the whole shooting match blew and use that 30% power to coax a climb.
Was that taught to you to use every bit of available power or shut down?
What you describe is a partial engine failure. Of course there is no need to shut it down immediately if it is producing some useful power (all other things being equal e.g., no fire). Nothing new in that surely?
The same applies to singles. How often are pilots given a partial engine failure resulting in a slow descent (say 10 miles from base) during their PPL or even CPL training?
As you found out the hard way, not a scenario that is adequately covered in training!