Engine failure on takeoff--feared the most

SixPapaCharlie said:
Also worth throwing this out:

Who here has had an engine failure on takeoff?
Click to expand...

Two. One due to double mag failure (partial power only). One due to a catastrophic failure of one of the cylinders.
 
Great topic! I just attended a FAAsteam seminar hosted by 4 local DPE's on this very subject the other day. Wichita was an example they used among others. A few tips that came out of this (hopefully it will help everyone here think of possibilities on takeoffs):

- As a pre-flight safety measure, check Google Maps (even on your phone!) and take a quick satellite view of the departure end of the runway for any clearings as an emergency "put-down" spot. Most fatalities on take-off engine outs are due to hitting obstacles (buildings, terrain, etc). You may even consider changing your runway due to this factor.

- The impossible turn can and should be practiced at altitude to really gain an understanding of what/when you can and cannot do it.

- There are just as many engine performance losses as full engine outs. Many people think it's a binary thing (engine quits or is 100%) but you can lose a single cylinder and still have 70-80% power on takeoff. You can then take it back into the pattern and land it.

- Many people think that if you rotate and something goes wrong (let's just say a 10,000' runway example) that you can just nose it down and smoothly land. That is much easier said than done because you won't have enough energy built up to flare. It will actually be a VERY hard landing, if not destroy your gear. There have been a few documented serious injuries doing that maneuver.

- Denial of the situation will get you killed.

- Treat every takeoff like "today is your day". Hindsight is always 20/20, so plan that it will be happening.

- Consider the go/no-go in low-IFR if you had an engine out. There was one DPE that would not have been around to tell the story had he taken off in the low-minimums earlier in the morning his Citation ingested a bird.


It was a great seminar.

-Andrew
 
Last edited:
What really disturbs me are those posting that they are practicing the turn back.
I have no issues with practicing unusual attitudes and maneuvers. I'm the guy who tries to never use the runway into the wind.
But, I do worry about the subliminal message received by those who simply read about practicing turning back and filing that away in the subconscious.

Statistically, in GA aircraft if you turn back you will die.
It is just that simple.
 
Denny, one of the DPE's addressed the turnback during the seminar I attended. The consensus by ones who [claim to] have practiced it, trained it, and successfully done it was that it can be done under a few circumstances... typically at a bare minimum of 500'-700' AGL depending on wind in a 172. That said, that is also why they suggested going up to altitude (say 3000' in the Midwest), simulate a takeoff (full throttle, Vy) and then at 3500' pull the power and try an impossible turn to see what type of altitude loss you have. The other trick is to avoid the natural tendency to OVERBANK into a 40-45 degree bank, as that will reduce lift exponentially and cause you to drop FASTER. The impossible turn must be done in shallow banks. Someone at the seminar even mentioned that it should be trained on during private alongside of stalls.

This is, of course, all here-say from people who claim to have done it... I've not practiced nor attempted it myself... but would love to with an instructor.

-Andrew
 
Ryanb said:
One lesson to be learned is never take an intersection departure. Glad all ended well!
Click to expand...

Similarly, always back taxi when you can to use all the runway, like RWY 03 at FGU.
 
Dr. O;1606920 Statistically said:
Statistics come from the masses. You don't have to be a part of those statistics. Like texting and driving. Just don't text and you won't be a part of that statistic.
Practicing and becoming proficient at the turn around will take you out of those statistics. Isn't that a great concept?
Click to expand...
 
nosehair said:
Practicing and becoming proficient at the turn around will take you out of those statistics. Isn't that a great concept?
Click to expand...

Just wondering out loud...

How many pilots who have stalled, spun and died while attempting "The Impossible Turn" do you think would have described themselves as proficient in returning to the airport?

Until in the heat of battle they weren't, of course.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Also worth throwing this out:

Who here has had an engine failure on takeoff?
Click to expand...
Maybe a dozen times... but they were all RC models. I did learn to push it over and land straight ahead after trashing half a dozen.

Old school sim.
 
FastEddieB said:
Just wondering out loud...

How many pilots who have stalled, spun and died while attempting "The Impossible Turn" do you think would have described themselves as proficient in returning to the airport?

Until in the heat of battle they weren't, of course.
Click to expand...

Right, I get what you mean, and have wondered the same.
We'll never really know.
But what I do know, after 50+ years of surviving various emergencies, is that being skilled in stall/spin recovery, steep turns, steep spirals, forced landings from all possible positions in the take-off profile, including the turn around when it is appropriate, has allowed my body to rotely fly the airplane while my brain calmly analyzed the situation and applied the correct action.
Of course, it is only my opinion, but it comes from a lifetime of experience.
Mostly in spam cans, btw. :)
 
nosehair said:
Right, I get what you mean, and have wondered the same.
We'll never really know.
But what I do know, after 50+ years of surviving various emergencies, is that being skilled in stall/spin recovery, steep turns, steep spirals, forced landings from all possible positions in the take-off profile, including the turn around when it is appropriate, has allowed my body to rotely fly the airplane while my brain calmly analyzed the situation and applied the correct action.
Of course, it is only my opinion, but it comes from a lifetime of experience.
Mostly in spam cans, btw. :)
Click to expand...

It's always easy to say what you'd do when safe and sound, regardless of experience. Clutch city is another matter entirely. That's why they provoke military student pilots to see how they handle an emergency and get rid of many who can't cut it. It's also why, even with an instructor on board , the 180 is attempted and two die instead of one. Regardless of stall spin training, if it happens low and one tries the turn back, they die. Hard to turn back or recover at pattern height or lower except maybe in a cub or a tcraft type.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
It's always easy to say what you'd do when safe and sound, regardless of experience. Clutch city is another matter entirely. That's why they provoke military student pilots to see how they handle an emergency and get rid of many who can't cut it. It's also why, even with an instructor on board , the 180 is attempted and two die instead of one. Regardless of stall spin training, if it happens low and one tries the turn back, they die. Hard to turn back or recover at pattern height or lower except maybe in a cub or a tcraft type.
Click to expand...
One of the other owners in my airplane said that he could reliably turn back at 700AGL. I haven't yet attempted to duplicate his performance.
 
Jaybird180 said:
One of the other owners in my airplane said that he could reliably turn back at 700AGL. I haven't yet attempted to duplicate his performance.
Click to expand...

I have tried this with an instructor in my cherokee. At altitude, not under stress, I can make it just fine in 700ft. In an actual emergency I'm not gonna try. Straight ahead for me unless I'm a 1000ft agl, that is my brief point to turn around. Anything less will be straight ahead. And I agree you can say all day long how you will react but you really don't know until it happens.
 
Last edited:
ahkahn said:
The other trick is to avoid the natural tendency to OVERBANK into a 40-45 degree bank, as that will reduce lift exponentially and cause you to drop FASTER. The impossible turn must be done in shallow banks.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. Dave Rogers, a retired professor of aerospace engineering and a pilot (and a good friend of one of the instructors I've flown with) has done extensive theoretical and practical research into the impossible turn and says exactly the opposite--that the impossible turn becomes more possible (~75% success rate from 500 AGL) when you turn at a 45* bank just above stall speed.

Papers are at the bottom of this page: http://www.nar-associates.com/technical-flying/technical-flying.html
 
During a night flight we did one around 550-600. Already on crosswind when the engine "failed". I hesitated when he told me to do a 270 to the right but we still made it back no problem. Heading out on that runway at night attempting the impossible turn is about the best option unfortunately. In an actual emergency 800' on a straight out departure is probably the lowest I'd attempt the turn.
 
jpower said:
That's interesting. Dave Rogers, a retired professor of aerospace engineering and a pilot (and a good friend of one of the instructors I've flown with) has done extensive theoretical and practical research into the impossible turn and says exactly the opposite--that the impossible turn becomes more possible (~75% success rate from 500 AGL) when you turn at a 45* bank just above stall speed.

Papers are at the bottom of this page: http://www.nar-associates.com/technical-flying/technical-flying.html
Click to expand...

This is of course true. A 45 degree bank does NOT reduce lift "exponentially" whatever that means (as related to what?), it in fact reduces it by 30%. You don't have a prayer of making the impossible turn with a "shallow bank." You need the turn to be as tight as possible. Actually an even higher bank than 45 gets you back to the runway better but 45 degrees at 5% over stall was determined to be the best option for pilot skills, etc... in both his empirical and his practical experimentation.
 
flyingron said:
This is of course true. A 45 degree bank does NOT reduce lift "exponentially" whatever that means (as related to what?), it in fact reduces it by 30%. You don't have a prayer of making the impossible turn with a "shallow bank." You need the turn to be as tight as possible. Actually an even higher bank than 45 gets you back to the runway better but 45 degrees at 5% over stall was determined to be the best option for pilot skills, etc... in both his empirical and his practical experimentation.
Click to expand...

This is the essence of the maneuver. Actually, a "split-S" maneuver would get you turned 180° in quickest time with least altitude loss.
45° is the best "compromise" considering "normal" pilot skill.
Get out of the "normal" statistics by improving your pilot skills beyond "normal" pilot skills.
Sadly, "normal" means someone who has met PTS standards, but has not pursued his/ her "license to learn".
YOU don't have to be a part of that statistic.
YOU can be in control by training.
 
What about a hammerhead?

*disclaimer: this is probably a really stupid idea and not part of my engine out plan*
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Also worth throwing this out:

Who here has had an engine failure on takeoff?
Click to expand...

I had an engine run really, really rough when I pulled the throttle back and RPMS to stay under the Bravo.

I went with Rod Machado's "undo whatever you did" and put the throttle back in. The engine eventually smoothed out.

It was carb ice. I didn't figure it out until later.

It didn't give the symptoms you're supposed to get with a CS prop, with drop in MP.
 
JoeFromKS said:
What about a hammerhead?
Click to expand...
Well, yes, a hammerhead into a split S, if that is appropriate.
But that is beyond a normally trained level.
But steep gliding turns are not.
I would be ashamed of not being able to do a steep gliding turn without stalling, if I had a license to carry passengers .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top