Feathering Single Engine

When practicing simulated engine failures, does it hurt to bring the prop back all the way with the engine idling?
 
I don't know if it stretched my glide but the other reason to go to high pitch (low rpm) on engine failure is if that thing is rattling you to death like mine was, slowing it down helps a lot.
 
There has been a similar discussion a while back. In any case, if you are able to stop the prop, there is less drag than there would be with a windmilling prop.
 
When practicing simulated engine failures, does it hurt to bring the prop back all the way with the engine idling?

The prop driving the engine at low rpm/low mp is okay.

What you do not want is high rpm/low mp, as in a steep descent using your prop drag to reduce speed.

Another thing you can do in an actual emergency engine-out once finished all troubleshooting with no restart, is to open thethrottle. Of course fuel and ignition will be off. Now your pistons are not pulling as much of a vacuum on the intake stroke.
 
I have to slow to nearly full flaps stall speed 54 kias to stop the prop, 95 kias to get it going again. In an emergency engine out from very high altitude, I may do that. Down low, I will leave it windmilling, as I sink like a rock behind the power curve.
 
I agree. I remember doing it in the CE208 and it felt astoundingly different. That's an enormous prop so It really accelerated when the drag was reduced.

You're taking turbine.

A piston will go full flat pitch when it looses its oil pressure.

But yeah, if you can, it will make a difference.
 
But let's say you brought the prop to high pitch/low rpm , got up to stall and stopped the prop, wouldn't the spring return the prop to low pitch/high rpm once the oil to the governor stops?
 
Well once you lost pressure the weights would flatten it out
 
The prop driving the engine at low rpm/low mp is okay.

What you do not want is high rpm/low mp, as in a steep descent using your prop drag to reduce speed.

Another thing you can do in an actual emergency engine-out once finished all troubleshooting with no restart, is to open thethrottle. Of course fuel and ignition will be off. Now your pistons are not pulling as much of a vacuum on the intake stroke.


I've always practiced emergency descents with high rpm and low mp. Why isn't this good? I always thought the MP should be lower than the RPM.
 
But let's say you brought the prop to high pitch/low rpm , got up to stall and stopped the prop, wouldn't the spring return the prop to low pitch/high rpm once the oil to the governor stops?
Yes. Drag is less for the two blades stopped in fine pitch, than it is with them turning in coarse or fine pitch.

I've always practiced emergency descents with high rpm and low mp. Why isn't this good? I always thought the MP should be lower than the RPM.
Ring flutter, broken rings. With the throttle closed and the piston moving swiftly up and down, the cylinder pressure goes negative on the intake stroke.
 
But let's say you brought the prop to high pitch/low rpm , got up to stall and stopped the prop, wouldn't the spring return the prop to low pitch/high rpm once the oil to the governor stops?
It isn't so much the spring as much as the fact that because the prop will never fully feather, it will start to windmill again as soon as you lower the nose and pick up speed.
 
I<snip>, but my understanding is that pulling the prop on an idling engine, and pulling the prop on a non-firing engine are significantly different conditions. You don't have any oil pressure of consequence on a windmilling engine,<snip>.

This is a myth in every plane I have tried it in. It turns out pulling the power back to idle in most small single engine airplane does a very good job of simulating a windmilling propeller.
Also if the engine is windmilling and there are no other mechanical problems to cause loss of oil pressure you will have enough pressure to actuate the prop. In fact some planes (Bellanca Viking) recommend pulling the prop back as part of the engine out procedure, and it helps reduce the descent rate a lot.

Brian CFIIG/ASEL
 
Ring flutter, broken rings. With the throttle closed and the piston moving swiftly up and down, the cylinder pressure goes negative on the intake stroke.

So, what is the safest way to practice emergency descents or simulated engine failures? Idle MP and low rpm? Wouldn't the high rpm help you get down quicker for the emergency descent?
 
I think I'd be hesitant to take engine operating advice from someone who has had seven engine failures in a piston single.
Maybe...he's the perfect person to take advice from since he's been thru seven engine failures and is here to talk about it. Just sayin'...
 
So, what is the safest way to practice emergency descents or simulated engine failures? Idle MP and low rpm? Wouldn't the high rpm help you get down quicker for the emergency descent?
During practice or simulated, take care of the engine...Idle/low rpm.

If I had an engine fire, then I would use high rpm and get on the ground as quickly as possible.
 
During practice or simulated, take care of the engine...Idle/low rpm.

Thanks for that! Learned something new. I will do that from now on. For some reason I thought using a low rpm with the engine idling was bad for it.

Out of curiosity, this is unrelated but you seem to know a lot about engines, if you had the option of cruising at 2100 RPM and 26" or 21" and 2500RPM, which would you pick? Both are 65% horsepower at the same altitude. I've been using lower MP because i was taught never to use a higher MP than RPM setting, but i've been taught a lot of wrong things it seems.
 
what engine? sub 2300 on some contis has turned out poorly
 
what engine? sub 2300 on some contis has turned out poorly

This is for a Lycoming IO-360 for an Arrow.

Is the general rule that you should always use a lower MP than RPM another one of those myths I was taught? I should make a giant list of them
 
Myth. Lest every radial engine was being run wrong
 
So is it better to run the engine 26"MP and 2100RPM instead of 21"MP and 2500RPM?
 
Thanks for that! Learned something new. I will do that from now on. For some reason I thought using a low rpm with the engine idling was bad for it.

Out of curiosity, this is unrelated but you seem to know a lot about engines, if you had the option of cruising at 2100 RPM and 26" or 21" and 2500RPM, which would you pick? Both are 65% horsepower at the same altitude. I've been using lower MP because i was taught never to use a higher MP than RPM setting, but i've been taught a lot of wrong things it seems.
I typically run 2,100 rpm and 45-55% power for better fuel economy, less wear, lower noise levels down low/short trips. On long xc flights between 8.5-12.5K, I usually run 2,100-2,400 rpm and never above 65% power. I try to run WOT in cruise as your engine breathes better and use rpm to keep the power where I want it. I follow the charts in the Lycoming Engine manual and low rpm/high mp are not recommended. At 2,100 rpm, 27.5" mp is the book limit for my engine. I try not to operate near the limits. I try to keep cht under 400F at all times. Takeoff and climb at 2700 rpm.
 
Also if the engine is windmilling and there are no other mechanical problems to cause loss of oil pressure you will have enough pressure to actuate the prop. In fact some planes (Bellanca Viking) recommend pulling the prop back as part of the engine out procedure, and it helps reduce the descent rate a lot.
Brian CFIIG/ASEL

I just looked up the POH and you're correct. It also says to go to full throttle after cutting fuel to the engine to "reduce engine back pressure"

That's the first I've heard about that.
 
About ten years ago Peter Garrison explored this issue in a very well written article in Flying.

He used his own aircraft as the test article and experimented with most of the scenarios posters have mentioned above.

I can't recall any of the specifics of the outcomes, but if anyone is interested in finding the article some good Google-fu might locate it.
 
Fair point. Maybe I'd take advice from him on how to set down a plane with a crippled/blown engine. But not on proper engine management.

7 ENGINE FAILURES? I hate to say this with absolutely no evidence, but I'm not completely sure I believe that. Unless he is a bonafide test pilot.

I personally know two people with four each and one 20,000+ hour instructor who's had exactly zero. It's a scatter plot.

Yup, it will indeed extend your landing roll. Which is why you use it like flaps. When the field is made, push the blue knob in and the flaps down (the gear may need to be a bit earlier in a Cessna retract).

In a 182, the blue knob makes an easily noticeable difference in glide distance.

Interesting idea. I can second that on the big 182 prop it's a significant difference if you can get I to course pitch.

You are missing a key point: unless the engine/prop was specifically designed to feather (the vast majority of single engine pistons are not) you will never actually get the prop to feather and stop windmilling. It will continue to spin, but with less flat plate drag.

Others covered this, but slowing way up below best glide will usually get it to stop windmilling, but you really need spare altitude to mess with it and in doing so you're burning altitude you might need to get a marginal glide performance increase after you go back to best glide. Not worth it.

But there's YouTube videos of people braver or stupider than truly necessary who like creating possible emergencies when they don't have to, who've stopped both fixed pitch and constant speed props at altitude and then the compression and what not counteracting getting it windmilling again seems to work on lighter/slower aircraft. Heavier/faster aircraft exert enough force that the prop will start rotating again.

You can't "feather" a typical single enough to make the engine stop rotating at anything resembling best glide speed. Coarse pitch isn't very coarse.

See above. There used to be some YT examples. I think a number of them have been removed by their posters though, deciding that advertising that one creates unnecessary emergencies in flight, on a public video forum, is probably not a great idea.

The prop driving the engine at low rpm/low mp is okay.

What you do not want is high rpm/low mp, as in a steep descent using your prop drag to reduce speed.

Another thing you can do in an actual emergency engine-out once finished all troubleshooting with no restart, is to open thethrottle. Of course fuel and ignition will be off. Now your pistons are not pulling as much of a vacuum on the intake stroke.

I'd heard this long ago and forgotten it. Thanks for the reminder.

Yes. Drag is less for the two blades stopped in fine pitch, than it is with them turning in coarse or fine pitch.


Ring flutter, broken rings. With the throttle closed and the piston moving swiftly up and down, the cylinder pressure goes negative on the intake stroke.

Have also heard this but many manufacturers do demand this sort of operation for an emergency descent and many many schools and instructors and examiners and what not, want this procedure done even in training, by the book. Will be an interesting discussion in person with some mechanics and instructors at the airport however. Interesting point.

So, what is the safest way to practice emergency descents or simulated engine failures? Idle MP and low rpm? Wouldn't the high rpm help you get down quicker for the emergency descent?

Yeah that's the gist of my comment above.

During practice or simulated, take care of the engine...Idle/low rpm.

If I had an engine fire, then I would use high rpm and get on the ground as quickly as possible.

And I understand what you're saying here, too. I think if we really want to get to the bottom of this we'd have to talk this through with mechanics on specific powerplants. Some may behave far better than others in this regime.

I typically run 2,100 rpm and 45-55% power for better fuel economy, less wear, lower noise levels down low/short trips. On long xc flights between 8.5-12.5K, I usually run 2,100-2,400 rpm and never above 65% power. I try to run WOT in cruise as your engine breathes better and use rpm to keep the power where I want it. I follow the charts in the Lycoming Engine manual and low rpm/high mp are not recommended. At 2,100 rpm, 27.5" mp is the book limit for my engine. I try not to operate near the limits. I try to keep cht under 400F at all times. Takeoff and climb at 2700 rpm.

Heh. Just a side note. Boy you gotta love turbochargers! Heh. You can regularly see takeoff power way up above 34" on the Turbo Seminole turning just over 2500 RPM. Wheee.

What was really amazing today was seeing it was possible to poke an engine into overboost above 11,000 MSL because it was cold as all get out up there here today. -18C measured. Normally up there for various demos you can truly go to full throttle on those engines but not today! Brrrrrr. :)
 
Last edited:
The prop driving the engine at low rpm/low mp is okay.

What you do not want is high rpm/low mp, as in a steep descent using your prop drag to reduce speed.

Another thing you can do in an actual emergency engine-out once finished all troubleshooting with no restart, is to open thethrottle. Of course fuel and ignition will be off. Now your pistons are not pulling as much of a vacuum on the intake stroke.

Ring flutter, broken rings. With the throttle closed and the piston moving swiftly up and down, the cylinder pressure goes negative on the intake stroke.


Do you have a good resource that talks more about high rpm/low mp? I'd like to learn more about why low MP and high RPM is bad. Thanks
 
Do you have a good resource that talks more about high rpm/low mp? I'd like to learn more about why low MP and high RPM is bad. Thanks

I would as well.

The cylinder pressure ALWAYS goes negative compared to ambient during the intake stroke, or the mixture doesn't enter the cylinder. It never goes negative in absolute pressure because that's not possible. So, what do you mean by that?
 
Myth. Lest every radial engine was being run wrong
Keep in mind that most of those radials have geared props and blowers, so the RPM is naturally going to be lower than the MP.

General rule of thumb for cruising in a radial is 1-10" of MP for 100 rpm. So if you are cruising at 1800 RPM, MP can be 18-28".
 
I really need to take a big bird feather along the next time we have the cowl off of the 182 for a photo for this thread. I love to feather my single engine, the big dumb O-470 turns out, is into being a little kinky during oil changes. :)
 
Sorry about the "vacuum" confusion. I meant the higher rpm's pull a deeper vacuum. This is where I learned about it a few years back. Good reading. Below is from the Service Instruction 1427B that I received with my IO-540...

"AVOID LOW-MANIFOLD PRESSURE DURING HIGH ENGINE SPEEDS (UNDER 15”
HG.) AND RAPID CHANGES IN ENGINE SPEEDS WITH ENGINES THAT HAVE
DYNAMIC COUNTERWEIGHT ASSEMBLIES. THESE CONDITIONS CAN DAMAGE
THE COUNTERWEIGHTS, ROLLERS OR BUSHINGS, THEREBY CAUSING
DETUNING.
6. Descend at low cruise power while closely monitoring the engine instruments. Avoid long
descents at low manifold pressure. Do not reduce altitude too rapidly or the engine temperature
may drop too quickly.
CAUTION
AVOID ANY CLOSED THROTTLE DESCENTS. CLOSED THROTTLE OPERATION
DURING DESCENTS WILL CAUSE RING FLUTTER CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE
CYLINDERS AND RINGS."

Here are some links...

http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/186778-1.html

http://www.highpowermedia.com/RET-Monitor/3762/piston-ring-flutter

http://www.motorstate.com/TheGreatPistonRingControversy.htm
 
Back
Top