Lost Engine- when to pitch for Airspeed

Jaybird180

Jaybird180

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
9,034
Location
Near DC
Display Name
Display name:
Jaybird180
I was thinking about a training flight awhile back that never quite sat right with me. It's a (silly) reason I don't like to fly with this CFI again...and he yells, albeit quietly.

We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg. I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.

I also believe that any attempts at engine restart should be after efforts to communicate situation and position to ATC.

POA: What say ye?
 
Low time, single engine pilot- push first, ask questions later. At least on climb out. In cruise, maybe different.

Aviate, navigate, communicate - ATC can’t help me with my engine out.
 
Depends when it happens. If you lose it on takeoff with a high(er) angle of attack, you’re going to be pushing forward immediately. If it happens at altitude, than yes, your CFI is correct in that you’ll have to pull back to bleed off airspeed in order to reach Best Glide.
 
I use: Ask HIm For Power (airspeed, carb heat, ignition on both, primer in and locked’. I think pitching up for airspeed may mean the difference between getting over a fence or trees or not. Do that first.
 
somorris said:
I use: Ask HIm For Power (airspeed, carb heat, ignition on both, primer in and locked’. I think pitching up for airspeed may mean the difference between getting over a fence or trees or not. Do that first.
Click to expand...

That memory aid strikes me as the tail wagging the dog, but if it works for you, it works!
 
If you establish the proper pitch attitude for best glide, the airplane will get there eventually.

if you need every inch of distance you can glide, pitching up to slow the airplane and then establishing the glide attitude will get you a little further. I believe Barry Schiff did some experiments on that. He wrote a couple of articles on it, and I think one of his conclusions was that you shouldn’t need every inch of glide range. ;)
 
Jaybird180 said:
I was thinking about a training flight awhile back that never quite sat right with me. It's a (silly) reason I don't like to fly with this CFI again...and he yells, albeit quietly.

We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg. I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.

I also believe that any attempts at engine restart should be after efforts to communicate situation and position to ATC.

POA: What say ye?
Click to expand...
I say absolutely no to your last statement. Aviate, navigate, communicate, and you have some serious aviating that needs doing. As far as the how to get to Vg thing, there are different schools of thought. There's the pull stick back right now thing which gives you a little gain in altitude. But that reduces your forward progress. There's the maintain your pitch attitude and let the airspeed bleed off to Vg and then pitch to hold Vg. For engine outs on departure I agree you should push forward as a first response. Holding a climbing pitch attitude while the speed bleeds of to Vg when your already slow, like at Vy or x isn't a good idea. It's going to happen fast. Like maybe about 1 second. Wait until then before pushing the stick forward and you are probably going to go below Vg. Or Vbn. Thats V bad news, like getting into stalling territory
 
Last edited:
In real life, what kills people is not pushing the stick/yoke fast enough if the engine suddenly quits in a climb attitude moments after the wheels leave the ground. Pushing the nose down needs to be your first and immediate response, or else you will deplete your airspeed and set yourself up for a stall without enough altitude to recover, but high enough to really hurt when you get back to the ground.

Anytime later, pitching for best glide is important to reach an airport or a suitable off-airport landing site, but a few seconds sooner or later should not make the difference between a safe outcome or a crash.

- Martin
 
Imho, what kills people happens much closer to the ground when they try to stretch the glide, not the immediate pitch to blue line. Maintaining airspeed close to the ground when it appears the ground is rising up to smite thee takes some discipline.
 
If you look at the actual performance numbers you will find that typically it doesn't matter much if you slow down to Vg or not.
Also rarely in an emergency do you need maximum distance. What you normally need is to be able to safely execute a relatively normal approach and landing.
So unless you think you might need a best distance glide focus more on maintaining control of the airplane, if possible resolving the engine problem, then executing a relative normal approach landing as possible.

The Manual says Vg = 65kts (75mph) As you can see from the chart below. It may actually be closer to 90mph, but makes little difference if you fly 80,90, 100mph, But going from 80- 70 mph starts making a larger decrease in you glide distance.
BTW probably of more importance is making an adjustment for wind. Rule of thumb is to add 1/2 your headwind to you glide speed.
Also FYI L/D translates directly to Glide distance so with an L/D of 10.9 from 1000 feet you can glider 10,900feet (just over 2sm (10,560ft))

What flying 75mph vs 100mph does give you is more time to deal with the emergency. Notice how the sink rates change with speed. So 75 is a bit of compromise between best glide and minimum sink speed which is actually a bit slower (70)
upload_2022-1-19_11-3-24.png
Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 

Attachments

  • c172performance.pdf
    30 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Depends when it quits. Off the end of the runway I'm pitching to glide and communicating. Then might try to restart. Cruising at 10,500, I'll have to process why it quit. Fuel starvation or mixture etc. Those only take a few seconds to run through. When that doesn't work I'll pitch for glide and communicate. The few seconds lost at cruise shouldn't be as critical as after takeoff.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I was thinking about a training flight awhile back that never quite sat right with me. It's a (silly) reason I don't like to fly with this CFI again...and he yells, albeit quietly.

We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg. I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.

I also believe that any attempts at engine restart should be after efforts to communicate situation and position to ATC.

POA: What say ye?
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight....you're cruising along at 50+% over your best glide, your engine goes quiet, and your first reaction is to LOWER THE NOSE and INCREASE SPEED and reduce your glide range?

Did you eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?
 
Jaybird180 said:
We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg.
Click to expand...

Hi.
ASSuming you are in a phase of flight at high alt, cruise... and are simulating an Emergency, I agree with that procedure. It is something that does not take a lot of time and you can concentrate on doing other things you need to do. Other phases may require a modified approach.
I do agree that if you are not comfortable with the CFI use someone else.
 
Yeah, I think my training has me spring loaded to pull up if in cruise and probably not spring loaded enough to push if climbing out.

My other thought
while it's interesting to beat these details up for training and when hangar flying, my gut feel is that it's much more important..... Significantly so...., to maintain a calm clear head and make good decisions fast, regarding which way to head toward a landing spot, trouble shooting the problem, etc...

In a typical non-hotrod trainer type GA plane, you're really not gaining all that much altitude pitching up from cruise speed to Vg...any additional potential energy you can get in the trade is of course good, but I don't think that a momentary easing of pressure before converting the extra energy to climb is going to cost enough in most cases to matter much.
It's not like any of us would violently push into a dive if we're in level cruise flight or hold the dive...notice the OP said pitch to at or below the horizon.... so really wouldn't this mean just a momentary easing just enough till you can verify you're not about to stall....I really doubt if they meant to a stuka like dive angle....
 
I’d also suggest that the answer to the OP’s question might change, depending upon experience. There are things that we teach newbies as a “simplified” procedure, and there are techniques probably better suited to advanced/experienced pilots. Pitching up to gain altitude and get to glide speed quicker may seem like a more advanced procedure.

For the most part, I’ve always told my students that where they see differences in technique (and that’s really what this is), they can choose whichever they prefer. Just be prepared to explain to me WHY you chose that technique. As long as I don’t get the impression that the goal is to be a mediocre pilot, I see it as putting thought into what you’re doing rather than just doing something “because my instructor said to”.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I was thinking about a training flight awhile back that never quite sat right with me. It's a (silly) reason I don't like to fly with this CFI again...and he yells, albeit quietly.

We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg. I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.

I also believe that any attempts at engine restart should be after efforts to communicate situation and position to ATC.

POA: What say ye?
Click to expand...

I can tell you all the reasons you are wrong, but if you do it your way on the practical test, you will fail the test.
If you do it your way during a real emergency, you increase your risk of serious bodily harm or death.

Your CFI is instructing you the maneuver the way the FAA wants it done.


Per the test standard: The applicant demonstrates the ability to:

Establish and maintain the recommended best glide airspeed, ±10 knots.

Configure the airplane in accordance with the POH/AFM and existing conditions.

Select a suitable landing area considering altitude, wind, terrain, obstructions, and available glide distance.

Plan and follow a flightpath to the selected landing area considering altitude, wind, terrain, and obstructions.

Prepare for landing as specified by the evaluator.

Complete the appropriate checklist.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Per the test standard: The applicant demonstrates the ability to:

Establish and maintain the recommended best glide airspeed, ±10 knots.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t say HOW to establish best glide speed, which is the OP’s question.

the only thing I can find from the FAA is in he AFH:
… the pilot should maintain altitude until the airspeed decreases to the recommended best glide speed.
Click to expand...
That’s not specifically talking about engine failures, but it seems like the FAA wouldn’t want you to use different techniques for training and testing.
 
brcase said:
If you look at the actual performance numbers you will find that typically it doesn't matter much if you slow down to Vg or not.
Also rarely in an emergency do you need maximum distance. What you normally need is to be able to safely execute a relatively normal approach and landing.
So unless you think you might need a best distance glide focus more on maintaining control of the airplane, if possible resolving the engine problem, then executing a relative normal approach landing as possible.

The Manual says Vg = 65kts (75mph) As you can see from the chart below. It may actually be closer to 90mph, but makes little difference if you fly 80,90, 100mph, But going from 80- 70 mph starts making a larger decrease in you glide distance.
BTW probably of more importance is making an adjustment for wind. Rule of thumb is to add 1/2 your headwind to you glide speed.
Also FYI L/D translates directly to Glide distance so with an L/D of 10.9 from 1000 feet you can glider 10,900feet (just over 2sm (10,560ft))

What flying 75mph vs 100mph does give you is more time to deal with the emergency. Notice how the sink rates change with speed. So 75 is a bit of compromise between best glide and minimum sink speed which is actually a bit slower (70)
View attachment 103875
Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
Click to expand...

If I may add one more concept here is that the slower speed can reduce the risk of worse injury or death, as long as one doesn’t slow to fall-outta-the-sky speed (Vbn per @luvflyin )
 
somorris said:
I use: Ask HIm For Power (airspeed, carb heat, ignition on both, primer in and locked’. I think pitching up for airspeed may mean the difference between getting over a fence or trees or not. Do that first.
Click to expand...

SkyDog58 said:
That mnemonic makes absolutely no sense to me.
Click to expand...
makes perfect sense… ;)

Ask—Airspeed
Him—carb Heat
For—ignition on both, doh! I’m a F****** idiot
Power—Primer
 
MauleSkinner said:
This doesn’t say HOW to establish best glide speed, which is the OP’s question.

the only thing I can find from the FAA is in he AFH:

That’s not specifically talking about engine failures, but it seems like the FAA wouldn’t want you to use different techniques for training and testing.
Click to expand...

I kind of remember reading somewhere or seeing a video about someone doing a test on this or maybe an analysis. It was probably in a magazine, one of the usual regular columnists from EAA, AOPA, Flying, or similar....
Is it better to try to balloon up to convert speed into altitude
vs to do as the quote you reference from the AFH....maintain altitude and let the speed decay?
From the back of my mind in the dark recesses of fuzzy memory I want to say the verdict was ballooning up wasn't worth it's down sides. I can't recall if one was any more than negligibly better than the other but I do believe the verdict was to maintain altitude.

And I believe that plays into what I posted a while ago.....
My assumption that the OP is only talking about more or less going to level flight ...not pushing into a dive. (unless he's too slow already)
Doesn't that kind of make sense that the natural result of that, for most pilots, would be to push hard if you're in a steep Vx climb...but if in level flight with the nose already level just pause a moment and collect yourself while you shoot for Vg?
 
Life is easy:

1. Collective full down- Enter autorotation.
2. Airspeed- Adjust for best glide speed.
3. Land- Into the wind if possible.

What's that you say? You're in an airplane? Sucks to be you. That requires decision making.
 
MauleSkinner said:
This doesn’t say HOW to establish best glide speed, which is the OP’s question.

the only thing I can find from the FAA is in he AFH:

That’s not specifically talking about engine failures, but it seems like the FAA wouldn’t want you to use different techniques for training and testing.
Click to expand...

If reduces the pitch below the horizon and makes a radio call before running the checklist, he is going fail test.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.
Click to expand...

Muscle memory is irrelevant. The appropriate action will depend upon the pitch and trim setting at the time the failure occurs. The muscle action required may be a push, pull, or neither. I suggest using your brain instead of trying to train an automatic reflex.
 
Jaybird180 said:
We were practicing engine out procedures and he insisted that I pull the nose up to bleed airspeed to get to Vg. I disagree with this practice for muscle memory reasons. I believe it's more appropriate to train the reflexes to put the nose at or below the horizon as immediate action in lost propulsion situations.
Click to expand...
It depends a little on the situation, but I generally agree that I would rather be conditioned to relax/lower the nose in an engine failure than pull up right away. I would not train to automatically pitch up in an emergency and would not want to train with an instructor who did advocate that.

The exception would be if you were flying a PA46 at 17,000 feet and you lost the motor. In such a case, by all means, pull that nose up and quickly convert your airspeed to altitude, but realistically that is not really something that needs to be conditioned. In those kind of situations, you'd be cruising around on autopilot, so 'conditioning' in those types of instances is not that important.

Jaybird180 said:
I also believe that any attempts at engine restart should be after efforts to communicate situation and position to ATC.
Click to expand...
I would suggest re-evaluating that belief. Not all engine failures are the same and they need to be treated differently. You need to recognize the situation as part of your reaction.

As Richard Collins once said, if your engine quits and you have smoke coming out or oil streaming on your windscreen, then that engine is probably done for the day.

In such a case, Aviate, Navigate and Communicate and put it down safely.

BUT, if the engine just suddenly dies, without fanfare, chances are it is fuel related. In such a situation, shifting tanks/turning on boost pump/adjusting mixture depending on the aircraft are important immediate steps that can resolve the emergency quickly and the quicker you address it the more likely you'll be able to get the engine back. To me, those steps are part of the Aviating.
 
Clip4 said:
If reduces the pitch below the horizon and makes a radio call before running the checklist, he is going fail test.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t much matter what he does with pitch if he prioritizes “communicate” over “aviate” and “navigate”.
 
This list helps me:

A - Airspeed (attain best glide speed)
B - Best Landing spot (look for and identify a candidate for landing)
C - Checklist (To restart engine)
D - Declare an emergency (7700, ELT, 121.5 or ATC facility you're talking with)
E - Egress (Tight seatbelts, open doors, secure loose items, etc.)
F - Fire (Turn off fuel, mags, master (after setting flaps, gear, etc.))
 
IK04 said:
Life is easy:

1. Collective full down- Enter autorotation.
2. Airspeed- Adjust for best glide speed.
3. Land- Into the wind if possible.

What's that you say? You're in an airplane? Sucks to be you. That requires decision making.
Click to expand...

Truth. With 3 engine failures in helicopters under my belt I would agree. I always taught, down collective, aft cyclic, right pedal, check collective (for rotor rpm)

Airplane wise, you forgot the "what the heck?" moments that will come into play that will already have you slowing to best glide.
 
The average training spam can is going to lose speed so fast with a complete engine failure that if you pull the nose up your going to end up just shoving it back down seconds later. The difference between letting the aircraft decelerate in level flight verses climbing is going to be inches. Adjusting glide speed for wind would be far more important. The best advise I got when flying high performance aircraft and things went wrong was to wind the clock first. Meaning take a bit of time and think. Trying to do a big pull up followed by a pushover is going to result in speed overshoots negating any value and take away from your ability to locate a suitable landing area relative to the wind and trouble shoot the problem. Never add complexity to a emergency if it’s not needed. None of this even gets into how to handle the situation if IFR where the proper response is again to maintain altitude and tell the controller you will be descending in X number of seconds.
 
Martin Pauly said:
In real life, what kills people is not pushing the stick/yoke fast enough if the engine suddenly quits in a climb attitude moments after the wheels leave the ground. Pushing the nose down needs to be your first and immediate response, or else you will deplete your airspeed and set yourself up for a stall without enough altitude to recover, but high enough to really hurt when you get back to the ground.

Anytime later, pitching for best glide is important to reach an airport or a suitable off-airport landing site, but a few seconds sooner or later should not make the difference between a safe outcome or a crash.

- Martin
Click to expand...

I have to disagree a bit here. What kills people is not 'not pushing the stick/yoke fast enough', but actually pulling the nose up unnecessarily. Trim is highly underutilized in engine failure training. Most airplanes will seek the best glide speed automatically when trimmed all the way up, or pretty close to it. Whether this works in your airplane is something you should know already from practice. It does take a couple of seconds to re-trim, but during that time the airplane will actually pitch down too much instead of pitching up too much. So there is no risk of stall, but there is a risk of too much altitude loss. For all this to work you have let go of the controls, and don't yank or push aggressively. Any kind of aggressive or abrupt handling of the controls should avoided. At least that's my view.
 
Last edited:
Communicate, navigate, aviate????
After 11 years and nearly 9000 posts on this forum and the order of things is not known yet?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Doesn’t much matter what he does with pitch if he prioritizes “communicate” over “aviate” and “navigate”.
Click to expand...

I think communicate does typically come first.

Most pilots will say or yell their favorite expletive(s) before doing anything else.

:yikes:
 
I would have thought that pushing would be the proper response to a loss of power on the climb after takeoff. When I went out to do it in a Maule, I found that, from a normal takeoff attitude approximating best rate plus 10knots, no push was required. The nose dropped quickly on it’s own and that drop needed to be arrested if energy was to be preserved.

Now the turn back to the runway is where the skill is required but that’s a different matter.

Haven’t tried in my RV10. I should.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Personally for me on TO I would lower the nose if climbing. If in cruse I would let speed bleed off and trim for best glide as I look for a sport to put it down and troubleshoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top