Deadstick landing

The steeper the turn without a prop spinning the greater the chance of a stall. Flying a plane without power (not pulled to idle, NO power!) is quite interesting, and quite different than you can imagine. Decent needs to be increased unless you want to be a rock. Getting and keeping the airspeed up is EVERYTHING. Nothing else matters if you loose your only engine. A steep turn without power eats up an unbelievable about of altitude.

When all else fails, FLY THE AIRPLANE!

After watching the video I can see why you have the question, but a tight turn without practicing a dead stick hundreds of times, in a very light AC will mostly end is a smoking hole. He is doing is a "proficiency maneuver", not an "emergency maneuver". Not sure why he wanted the final at an angle that is not good, and when you are dead stick you want to land in the MIDDLE of the runway, not on the numbers. This give you a margin for error. If you come up short and cannot restart the engine you are going to be buying some farmers crops and airplane parts or a casket.
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
rate of turn plays into this
Click to expand...

Correct. There is an optimum bank angle (and g-level and rate of turn) for every aircraft. This is also dependant on the aircraft's energy level.

I've often read that a bank angle between 45 and 60 degrees is appropriate.
 
dmccormack said:
If you're power out, you're constantly descending -- so the tight, steep turn achieves a faster change in heading. G forces are negligible since this is a constant descending turn.
Click to expand...

what happens to g forces in a spiral?
 
dmccormack said:
If you're power out, you're constantly descending -- so the tight, steep turn achieves a faster change in heading. G forces are negligible since this is a constant descending turn.
Click to expand...

Not true unless the rate of descent is continually increasing.
 
Geico266 said:
Flying a plane without power (not pulled to idle, NO power!) is quite interesting, and quite different than you can imagine
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand this. I've had an engine failure and deadsticked to an airstrip 5 miles away from 6000' AGL & there really wasn't anything different with no power than it was with the engine at idle during practice. It was no different than I imagined. Well except for the brown stuff running down my leg.

An aside, if you lose an engine in a plane with a CS prop...pull it to full coarse. It significantly reduces the drag.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Flying a plane without power (not pulled to idle, NO power!) is quite interesting, and quite different than you can imagine.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean, if you're talking light trainer. Heavy complex, yes, there is a big difference, but in most light airplanes in a power off glide, you can't tell if the engine is idling or if the engine has quit, and the prop is windmilling. That's one of the reasons to "clear the engine" every 30 seconds during a power-off glide - to insure you have a running engine.

Slowing up and stopping the prop does smooth and quieten the ride. Back in the old days, we routinely pulled the mixture or shut off the fuel valve to simulate more realistically how the engine feels when it stops, and also the prop.

Not really much difference, once you have been exposed and the 'oh shucks' factor is de-stimulated.
 
dmspilot said:
Not true unless the rate of descent is continually increasing.
Click to expand...


The demo wasn't a spiral -- it was a fairly steep descending turn.

The IMC death Spiral provides a 1 G sensation as the hapless pilot tightens the turn, increasing the bank, increasing the descent rate....
 
up to a certain point yes. descent rate increases with bank angle but so does rate of turn. There is a happy point, like someone else said, somewhere between 45 and 60. A faster turn also allows you more time to deal with the approach rather than spending all your time dealing with the turn.
 
timwinters said:
An aside, if you lose an engine in a plane with a CS prop...pull it to full coarse. It significantly reduces the drag.
Click to expand...

Boy, does it. I was having some trouble getting a Piper Arrow to glide for power off 180's until I figured that out. Still comes down like a rock, sure, but you get a lot more range.
 
dmccormack said:
The demo wasn't a spiral -- it was a fairly steep descending turn.

The IMC death Spiral provides a 1 G sensation as the hapless pilot tightens the turn, increasing the bank, increasing the descent rate....
Click to expand...

I agree...but hopefully you wouldn't attempt to deliberately do a death spiral after an engine failure.

If you want to maintain exactly 1g in a 45 degree bank turn, your rate of descent after only four seconds would be 6362fpm.

(Hopefully I calculated that right... (1/cos(45) - 1) * 32fps/s * 1/2 * 4s^2 * 60s/min).

The conclusion is that this would be impossible and that one must accept the load-factor increase and subsequent stall speed increase when making a steep turn, even if descending.
 
dmccormack said:
The demo wasn't a spiral -- it was a fairly steep descending turn.

The IMC death Spiral provides a 1 G sensation as the hapless pilot tightens the turn, increasing the bank, increasing the descent rate....
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the IMC death spiral was much much greater than 1 G. Which is why several people have broken their planes in the air in the spiral. They see the altimeter unwinding and pull harder, which loads up the wing more and more.

As noted in the previous post, you'd have to have a huge vertical acceleration to be able to turn the airplane and maintain only 1 G.
 
tonycondon said:
up to a certain point yes. descent rate increases with bank angle but so does rate of turn. There is a happy point, like someone else said, somewhere between 45 and 60. A faster turn also allows you more time to deal with the approach rather than spending all your time dealing with the turn.
Click to expand...

Exactly... forget how much altitude is lost in what kind of turn; the point is to get the turn done quickly while you still have some extra altitude. One good steep turn could be much more useful than several shallow turns, each started lower than the last.
 
dmspilot said:
I agree...but hopefully you wouldn't attempt to deliberately do a death spiral after an engine failure.

If you want to maintain exactly 1g in a 45 degree bank turn, your rate of descent after only four seconds would be 6362fpm.

(Hopefully I calculated that right... (1/cos(45) - 1) * 32fps/s * 1/2 * 4s^2 * 60s/min).

The conclusion is that this would be impossible and that one must accept the load-factor increase and subsequent stall speed increase when making a steep turn, even if descending.
Click to expand...


Good grief.

:confused:

Let me clear:


Point 1:

The original post questioned this statement:

"The steeper the turn the less altitude lost in the turn."

The video linked demonstrated a dead stick approach and landing.

I agreed with the initial premise since a descending steep turn does not apply the G load a level steep turn will impose. The demonstration pilot in the video did a 180 turn at a bank angle of about 50-60 degrees, which qualifies as steep.

Point 2:

The "Death spiral" in IMC example is germane, since the doomed pilot's typical reaction is "Airspeed is increasing! I'll pull the nose back up..." thereby decreasing the radius and thus steepening the turn. The Pilot feels 1 G initially and for long enough to conclude he is level.

As the spiral continues things get worse, but gradually enough to the sense-dependent pilot that he doesn't "feel" there's a problem until it's too late (unless he has the presence of mind to reduce the bank and then recover from the dive).

Point 3:

I've practiced the turn back in my Chief and in every airplane I've flown since I lost power over Fairmont, WV (and returned safely to the departure airport. Description here).

The maneuver requires significant push and roll to:

  • maintain airspeed
  • achieve the bank required to maximize the rate of turn
  • minimize the loss of altitude going from initial heading to "get back to the field" heading (I don't care about runways for this maneuver as all I need is flat enough obstruction free landing area)

Point 4:

The "impossible turn" is impossible below a certain altitude. Above that altitude you may be able to return to the field with partial or full power loss. It behooves us as pilots to beat this fact into our thinking before we release the brakes and break the surly bonds. Here's an interesting read that provides a bit more detail and calculation.
 
timwinters said:
I'm not sure I understand this. I've had an engine failure and deadsticked to an airstrip 5 miles away from 6000' AGL & there really wasn't anything different with no power than it was with the engine at idle during practice. It was no different than I imagined. Well except for the brown stuff running down my leg.

An aside, if you lose an engine in a plane with a CS prop...pull it to full coarse. It significantly reduces the drag.
Click to expand...


I'm the same way. I've done something like 380 landings and I probably haven't landed more than a half dozen times with anything more than engine idling. I was taught to land with engine idling and that helped me alot from the very beginning to learn how to glide it in for a simulated emergency. Hopefully I never use this training for a REAL power outage.
 
MBDiagMan said:
I'm the same way. I've done something like 380 landings and I probably haven't landed more than a half dozen times with anything more than engine idling. I was taught to land with engine idling and that helped me alot from the very beginning to learn how to glide it in for a simulated emergency. Hopefully I never use this training for a REAL power outage.
Click to expand...

That's good practice!

:yesnod:

I do the same in the Chief. That practice helped me in this situation.

But keep n mind even "engine idling" provides some thrust. Also, you may think power is to "idle" when it's actually 1100-1300 RPM.

The prop isn't causing the drag it would cause if it was windmilling.
 
nosehair said:
Not sure what you mean, if you're talking light trainer. Heavy complex, yes, there is a big difference, but in most light airplanes in a power off glide, you can't tell if the engine is idling or if the engine has quit, and the prop is windmilling. That's one of the reasons to "clear the engine" every 30 seconds during a power-off glide - to insure you have a running engine.

Slowing up and stopping the prop does smooth and quieten the ride. Back in the old days, we routinely pulled the mixture or shut off the fuel valve to simulate more realistically how the engine feels when it stops, and also the prop.

Not really much difference, once you have been exposed and the 'oh shucks' factor is de-stimulated.
Click to expand...


The point I am trying to make is an engine idling is still applying thrust. With no engine at all the rate of decent will need to be increased to compensate for the loss of trust and additional drag of a windmilling prop. Does that makes sense?

Most CFI's pull power to simulate engine out which is fine, but a real engine out is different. Maintaining airspeed is everything.

This is a great thread, and good discussion. Lots of pliots have died when the engine quits and they forget to fly the airplane. We just lost two guys in this senerio. Christian Eagle instructor in the front, student in the back pulls out the mixture on take off kills the engine. Rather than fly the plane they became a rock.

JMHO
 
Last edited:
I landed with prop stopped one time 20 years ago. My instructor at the time had me climb several thousand feet and then we went over the downwind end of the field and he turned the engine OFF. He told me to spiral down and land. It was eerie with no sound.

I spiraled clockwise with the runway on a tangent of my circle. I went around several times and then landed not far past the numbers. It was very easy at the time and I don't remember my glide being significantly different with no prop rotation.

Doc
 
dmccormack said:
Good grief.

:confused:

Let me clear:


Point 1:

The original post questioned this statement:

"The steeper the turn the less altitude lost in the turn."

The video linked demonstrated a dead stick approach and landing.

I agreed with the initial premise since a descending steep turn does not apply the G load a level steep turn will impose. The demonstration pilot in the video did a 180 turn at a bank angle of about 50-60 degrees, which qualifies as steep.

Point 2:

The "Death spiral" in IMC example is germane, since the doomed pilot's typical reaction is "Airspeed is increasing! I'll pull the nose back up..." thereby decreasing the radius and thus steepening the turn. The Pilot feels 1 G initially and for long enough to conclude he is level.

As the spiral continues things get worse, but gradually enough to the sense-dependent pilot that he doesn't "feel" there's a problem until it's too late (unless he has the presence of mind to reduce the bank and then recover from the dive).

Point 3:

I've practiced the turn back in my Chief and in every airplane I've flown since I lost power over Fairmont, WV (and returned safely to the departure airport. Description here).

The maneuver requires significant push and roll to:

  • maintain airspeed
  • achieve the bank required to maximize the rate of turn
  • minimize the loss of altitude going from initial heading to "get back to the field" heading (I don't care about runways for this maneuver as all I need is flat enough obstruction free landing area)

Point 4:

The "impossible turn" is impossible below a certain altitude. Above that altitude you may be able to return to the field with partial or full power loss. It behooves us as pilots to beat this fact into our thinking before we release the brakes and break the surly bonds. Here's an interesting read that provides a bit more detail and calculation.
Click to expand...

^ THIS.

It is sometimes advantageous to turn back quickly (keeping the nose down). You will accelerate in order not to pull Gs but 180 degree turn probably won't put you over Vne. I was just doing a steep spiral the other day with a CPL student, and true most of the maneuver you don't feel (more than +1) G-force, you will on occasion to stop the acceleration from bringing you over Va and in order to correct for the wind part of the turn will be tighter than the other. You COULD in theory dive in a 60 degree bank (to stay non-aerobatic) and not caring about the wind accelerate to almost Vne and then very gently roll out after how ever many turns to get you there but that's a big risk being over Va (and well over Vno) because an abrupt flight control movement or even enough turbulence could cause damage to the airframe. I would try it an aerobatic aircraft that dosen't care if you accidently G-load it.

But in a 'typical' traffic pattern if your deciding to turn back your probably already on crosswind. The window between landing straight ahead, making a ~100 degree turn back to final (crosswind turn), and where you could successfully make the 270 degree (180 turnaround + 45 back on target + 45 to straighten out) is VERY small.

<---<^>--->
 
p1l0t said:
But in a 'typical' traffic pattern if your deciding to turn back your probably already on crosswind. The window between landing straight ahead, making a ~100 degree turn back to final (crosswind turn), and where you could successfully make the 270 degree (180 turnaround + 45 back on target + 45 to straighten out) is VERY small.
Click to expand...

I practiced this several times in different conditions in the Chief. Here are my conclusions for that airplane:


  • It takes a BIG push and roll to maintain flying speed and turn steeply when the engine suddenly cuts off during a Vy climb out. In my airplane there is a moment of 0 G during the transition from climb to glide.
  • My default turn is to the left (habit -- this doesn't account for wind -- oh well).
  • The airplane feels like it's on its side -- but bank probably never exceeds 50 degrees.
  • I roll out after 180 heading change -- I'm really not trying to make the runway -- just the flat, unobstructed area around the runway. Some airports don't have much "flat, unobstructed" available.
This practice convinced me to reach 700' AGL before committing to a turn back in my airplane in Western PA or WV. Better Aeronca pilots tell me they use 400'. That's them. I'm not that good.

Above 700' AGL I will likely make it back to some part of the airport which is just about the only decent place to land for miles.

Now that I'm in Lancaster county (Eastern PA) I am overwhelmed by all the wonderful emergency landing strips surrounding my local airports. Straight ahead (give or take 25 degrees either way) will be much more comfortable should the need arise.

:thumbsup:
 
Prof. David Rogers' work on the "impossible turn" (about which I think Kyle is thinking, since 45-60 is the range in which Rogers suggests the optimum will likely fall depending on specific aircraft parameters) suggests that there is an optimum bank angle to minimize altitude loss in the turn. So, from wings level through 90 degrees of bank, first the altitude loss decreases until the optimum bank is reached, then it increases again. So, I think the original statement quoted by Richard is inaccurate without further qualification/limitation.

For more detail on Prof. Rogers' work, google "rogers impossible turn."
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Prof. David Rogers' work on the "impossible turn" (about which I think Kyle is thinking, since 45-60 is the range in which Rogers suggests the optimum will likely fall depending on specific aircraft parameters) suggests that there is an optimum bank angle to minimize altitude loss in the turn. So, from wings level through 90 degrees of bank, first the altitude loss decreases until the optimum bank is reached, then it increases again. So, I think the original statement quoted by Richard is inaccurate without further qualification/limitation.

For more detail on Prof. Rogers' work, google "rogers impossible turn."
Click to expand...

Do you read a thread before responding...??

dmccormack said:
Point 4:

The "impossible turn" is impossible below a certain altitude. Above that altitude you may be able to return to the field with partial or full power loss. It behooves us as pilots to beat this fact into our thinking before we release the brakes and break the surly bonds. Here's an interesting read that provides a bit more detail and calculation.
Click to expand...
 
thomascannon said:
Boy, does it. I was having some trouble getting a Piper Arrow to glide for power off 180's until I figured that out. Still comes down like a rock, sure, but you get a lot more range.
Click to expand...
timwinters said:
An aside, if you lose an engine in a plane with a CS prop...pull it to full coarse. It significantly reduces the drag.
Click to expand...
Just keep in mind that you're going to need oil pressure for that trick to work.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
The steeper the turn without a prop spinning the greater the chance of a stall. Flying a plane without power (not pulled to idle, NO power!) is quite interesting, and quite different than you can imagine. Decent needs to be increased unless you want to be a rock. Getting and keeping the airspeed up is EVERYTHING. Nothing else matters if you loose your only engine. A steep turn without power eats up an unbelievable about of altitude.
Click to expand...
It's a fine line. If you are actually wanting to make it back to the runway (which in Nebraska is usually a stupid goal) you need a pretty aggressive turn to get the airplane tracking back in the right direction. Somewhere between 45 to 60 is ideal. Yes you lose altitude but if you dick around and don't turn quickly you spend all the time flying AWAY from the runway which won't help you get back.
 
jesse said:
Just keep in mind that you're going to need oil pressure for that trick to work.
Click to expand...

Correct, but as long as the engine continues to windmill, you should have enough. And it will windmill easier if the pitch is full coarse.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Correct, but as long as the engine continues to windmill, you should have enough. And it will windmill easier if the pitch is full coarse.
Click to expand...
Depends on the failure mode. Many of the very common failure modes revolve around oil pressure. Just don't be surprised when the "trick" doesn't work.
 
jesse said:
Depends on the failure mode. Many of the very common failure modes revolve around oil pressure. Just don't be surprised when the "trick" doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Jesse beat me to it. That's what I get for working during the daytime instead of surfing PoA like I should.:rofl:
 
if you apply bank, push, and begin descending, you're also not going to turn, at least not very fast.
 
only if you're pulling 2 G's. i used to get myself confused about this too, i started thinking that it was the bank angle that turned the plane and forgot that it is the horizontal component of lift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top