Rumbo,

Oops ....

I really should keep track of which forum I am in ... a bit late in the day and after a sim session ... so fatigue might be a reasonable excuse ..... I thought I was in Tech Forum ... largely as the thread was revolving around routine Tech Forum things and some of the participants are regulars in that place.

My comments were out of order in this Forum and have been removed.

Rest assured that I was not directing those comments at anyone in particular.

I concur that the industry is rife with misconception and error .. but I still think that we can all do our bit to move toward the light in a sensitive manner where abruptness is not immediately necessary ..... What might be said with the best intent and good effect in a confidential, behind closed doors, flight standards management forum sometimes reads better if toned down in open forum.

Rest assured that your reasonable and considered observations will be welcomed in Tech Forum.

rumbo
 

Uninformed Balder......? aha !.

I have to ask you if a perf A aircraft can still make perf A performance with two engines out on one side ?

I think that it will not and so is no longer a perf A aircraft and should be flown like a perf E aircraft.
I have no wish to fly my Boeing in this manor but I consider it a major dis-service to the pax and the rest of the crew to have not considered the posibility of having to do so and having the option in the back of my mind.

I await your reply with interest.

A&C
The emphasis here being on the word MY in the above quote. This from the man who totally flamed me for writing in an e-mail my forum....... ;)

Just to keep this post slightly on topic, I did see the seneca that landed about half a mile away from the runway at EGKA when it ran out of fuel...... :rolleyes:

Rumbo, I have no idea what your type experience is. However, on the basis you now fly Boeings, I was rather hopeful that you had worked your way up from the filthy ranks of light aircraft through turboprops to jets. Certainly thats the impression you give on here regarding these "outdated types".

I find it a great shame that a man in our profession can be so ready to spit on the very aircraft that he/she probably learnt their trade, and for some are the only aircraft they will fly or indeed WANT to fly. All aircraft have their place in aviation.

I would imagine you are one of these guys that used to fly single engine over the channel without question in your early PPL days. Now it is seen as cras decision making by those that do. Just because you can sit in a warm multi engined aircraft now. I agree I will now try and go twin engine when flying GA across the water for jollies et al. But I will still do it if push comes to shove. It gets the adrenalin going and reminds me of all those exciting flights I did when really new to aviation. Very humbling.

You appear to be very dismissive of others which I would find very challenging if I was your colleague on board. Have you heard of a reasoned non-personal argument? Remember, you may be a professional in your field but this is a Private Pilots Forum that has contributers which may not have the experience and wisdom you have. Lighten up and allow people less experienced than you, to ask you informally any questions they like. Then the unitiated of us my feel inclined to ask and probe at your tales of wisdom. We could then all learn and perhaps work as a team! Flying is about learning from others so don't ignore every comment you hear, please.

I quite enjoy flying my 30 ton diesel powered aircraft. One day I would like to have a go at a Boeing. I just hope that when I do, I will not have forgotten what real flying is all about.

So, I am in my Aztec at Newcastle, using full length, gin clear day with a 15kt wind straight down the runway.

I rotate at 75kt, 330m of runway behind me, 2000m in front of me. I whip the gear up and I am at 100ft, 85kt when BANG, massive yaw to the left, severe vibration.

Someone tell me what to do. (Remember that no left engine means that if I want the gear down I have to either pump it manually, 40 strokes, or fiddle on the floor between my legs looking for the CO2.)

Come on...someone tell me that I am better off with the gear up than down.

W

Horses for courses don't you think Mr Collins? You have constructed a scenario in which in almost any light twin, there would be every reason to land ahead and sort the problem out on the ground.

This conclusion is underlined all the more strongly when you consider the limitations of the Aztec and its sad old hydraulics, together with the environmental conditions you cite.

By contrast, on a low vis day, where ground contact will be lost as soon as the aircraft lifts off, you would presumably acknowledge the value in cleaning up and climbing away ASAP.

The maths being what it is, even on a pleasant day of the sort you describe, you will rapidly reach a point in the climbout where landing ahead will cease to be an option, even on a long runway, as you approach that point, the gear will not benefit you by dangling down. We are talking about a few seconds delay in raising the gear even on a relatively long runway.


The real danger that this subsection of this often-heated thread reveals is that it is a big mistake to have a fixed view of your plan for engine failure. The plan will need to change, not only to take into account the aircraft concerned, but also the runway, the weather and your load. The GA pilot almost needs to think like a transport pilot before lining up, rehearsing his Engine failure plan for *this particular* departure to his imaginary first officer as part of the checklist.

Two donkeys:

Good comments especially the last par.

Rumbo and John:

For those with experience and knowledge to not post in the private pilot thread would then leave these people to wallow in ignorance.

Cat Driver:

2 Donkeys

Thank you. I agree with every word you say, and it is almost exactly what I said in the third paragraph of my posting of 1/1/03 for which I got flamed.

I agree that the more pros on this forum who know what they are talking about the better, but there is nothing more dangerous than the one with all the egg on his shoulders, all the letters after his name and all the hours in his logbook who can convince or browbeat the world that he is always right, and who is dangerously wrong.

WCollins' scenario is one that can be fairly easily mitigated by leaving the gear down for a little bit longer than usual.

Select gear up once you judge it no longer feasible to land on what's left of the rwy AND you have passed at least Vxse. The act of selecting gear up becomes your 'go / no go' decision.

There are caveats to this method though. It depends on the circumstances of the day.

Is there an obstacle that must be cleared?

Is it a short runway that requires maximum climb angle?

Is D.Alt such that a one-inop climb is not feasable?

...doh just been beaten to it!....Well, here's my input anyway....In your scenario, the gear should still be down, and only put away when "out of usable runway". However, if said gear was up, if I couldn't climb or avoid high ground, then no decision to make, I'd put her straight back down, even if it meant no gear. I certianly wouldn't initiate a crash trying to put the gear down as that'd look really stupid in the AAIB report;) Better to land on the runway Gear up, than on a field, house, Dixons, KFC etc..

Cheers
EA:)

My absolutely last and final twopennorth in this forum...

AirProx,

I worked my way up through light singles, twins, helos, glider tugs, gliders, old turboprops, new turboprops, little jets, bigger jets, line flying, teaching, managing... I used to drive a knackered old car. Now I don't have to. I used to fly in old turboprops, now I don't have to. I did say 'no offense', and I meant it.

A and C,

I suggest you go and find out what the definition of a Perf A aircraft is. And are you a cockney? I'll be very happy if you keep your aeroplane out of my MANOR!!

Chuck,

Thanks for that.

WCollins,

I really do believe you need to do a lot more studying and thinking. Good luck.

Happy wallowing all!

rumbo
 

Down the goldhawk road it is considered bleedin obvious that whatever the "perf " group of an aircraft if for what ever reason thrust can not overcome drag it will soon be going down.

No matter what the aircraft if the thrust vs drag problem can not be quickly overcome then a controled landing in a field is a much better option that maintaining height with reducing speed untill you stall or reach Vmca.

Regards A and C , the boy from the bush.

I have just written A&C a personal apology and I am apologising here for an earlier comment I made in this thread. A case of mistaken identity and I hope it hasn't caused A&C any embarrassement.

Thank you "L" for the apology I was a little confused by the remark but the mistaken identity explanes all !.

Now all I need is for Rumbo to enlighten me as to how "perf A" aircraft have re writen the thrust vs drag thing.

Regards A and C.

For the record :)

Today (5.1) we took an Aztec "E" through it's paces.

Temp was about 1-2 C or ISA-13/14

2 POB, full fuel

Left EFATO at 270' (approx 870' AMSL)

Blue-line climb was 600fpm indicated, gear up, flaps up.

Later we tried the full power to both, blue-line climb from take-off (approx 300' AMSL) and acheived 1700 fpm.

We were probably an hour lighter (fuel) and 3-4 degrees warmer (so ISA-11/12)

On the flight to which Rustle refers we failed the critical engine.

Does anyone have any idea what the difference in performance is between critical and non-critical engine (on average and percentagewise) or is this a silly question?

W

WC, I suppose the odds of the critical engine failing are 1 in 2, but I don't know if that answers your question.

I found this interesting link on one engine out procedures for light twins. It has some interesting information on why one engine is referred to as "critical", with specific information on the differing yaw requirements. The whole writeup is dedicated to information on one engine out procedures.

one engine out in light twins

Flight Safety

I will look at the link, thank you.


I don't think that I phrased the question carefully enough. I meant "Will the performance of the aircraft be significantly different following a critical engine failure as opposed to the other engine failing, and if so, by approximately how much?"

W

WCollins

I think you may be hoping/expecting for too much precision here. The differential in engine-out peformance between the critical and non-critical engine will vary significantly between types.


Less seriously, and in many ways more interestingly though, I do note a slight difference of view on the engine-out performance of an Aztec.

In December you said

Rustle tells us that in a very similar aircraft :D 1200 fpm was achieved with both engines with a considerably lighter loading. With that same loading, he was only able to achieve 600 fpm after EFATO on a very cold day.

Do you think that it is simply a question of rustle's technique needing to be brushed up, or is it down to the clapped out aircraft he was flying in? :p

2

Ah! A rare example of your inability to read.

Put on the right glasses and read what Rustle rote

W