engine quit at idle

dmspilot

dmspilot

Final Approach
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
5,860
Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
After the runup, taxiing downhill toward the runway for takeoff, the throttle is pulled back to idle. Ten or twenty seconds later the engine stops. How normal is such an event? If the engine restarted, would you fly it?

Engine is a Lycoming IO-360.
 
My IO-320 quit a few times when I first bought the the plane but the idle screw just wasn't adjusted properly. Couple turns and never had a problem since.
 
This one's easy.. take a video of the engine quitting at idle and post it to Youtube.

Bonus points for wearing epaulettes in the video!

(This was Tony of Red Board fame for you who missed the joke)
 
dmspilot said:
After the runup, taxiing downhill toward the runway for takeoff, the throttle is pulled back to idle. Ten or twenty seconds later the engine stops. How normal is such an event? If the engine restarted, would you fly it?

Engine is a Lycoming IO-360.
Click to expand...

Has anything changed on the engine? Was the carb adjusted? How low was idle set? Were you running lean?

If nothing changed, but the engine quit this time, I would not fly.
If there is a chance the idle has been set too low, I would fly, but not at idle speed. If you had it leaned all the way, then applied throttle to taxi when it quit, I would try it "less lean".
 
If it's not right, you shouldn't fly it. Even if there is a chance it is just a low set idle, there is also a chance it is something else.
 
No. I was taught the purpose of pulling it to idle on the ground was to make sure the engine would not quit when pulled to idle. Why would I want to test it again while in the air? I am not that brave.
 
dmspilot said:
After the runup, taxiing downhill toward the runway for takeoff, the throttle is pulled back to idle. Ten or twenty seconds later the engine stops. How normal is such an event? If the engine restarted, would you fly it?

Engine is a Lycoming IO-360.
Click to expand...


Not normal, but is a common minor adjustment issue. Fuel injected or carbureted? As long as it made power on the takeoff roll, I wouldn't have qualms flying it.
 
dmspilot said:
After the runup, taxiing downhill toward the runway for takeoff, the throttle is pulled back to idle. Ten or twenty seconds later the engine stops. How normal is such an event? If the engine restarted, would you fly it?

Engine is a Lycoming IO-360.
Click to expand...

Depends on why engine stopped. Local pilot had their o-300 quit on them yesterday. They did their air restart checklist & discovered they had run the plane completely dry.
 
As I recall the gauges (fuel flow, etc.) were normal. The event occurred in an old Seneca-I and it was my first multiengine lesson. The instructor seemed more concerned with blaming me for "not paying attention" and "letting" it die than about the engine itself.

This was at a flight school in another state. I cancelled the rest of my lessons and came back to VA.
 
He shouldn't really have admonished you as their mechanic should have the fuel servo tuned better, but as far as safe goes, as long as the pressure was correct at full power, I would not have been concerned by that alone. However, the real problem is that of the school's attitude towards proper maintenance. While that event isn't a great concern to me, it raises the larger issue of "If they allow this simple, low cost to fix issue, to remain, what the hell else is wrong with this POS?"
 
We actually ended up flying, but I wished we hadn't. The instructional technique during the flight was not any better. And we almost had a gear problem too (big surprise).

You are right that maintenance at this company in general is not too great, but it's really the instructor that made me leave and they have no others to choose from.
 
warthog1984 said:
Depends on why engine stopped. Local pilot had their o-300 quit on them yesterday. They did their air restart checklist & discovered they had run the plane completely dry.
Click to expand...
You know the old saying about protecting fools.
 
gismo said:
The primary effect of most any attempt to make something "foolproof" is to make the users become better fools.
Click to expand...
I like it, but then again the next thing I see labeled foolproof that is truly foolproof will be the first time I see something that is foolproof...unless the whole purpose of foolproof is to prove that fools exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top