Fly with master switch off to save money?

That's gonna depend on the airport. What if when you're down to 1000 AGL and some nitwit lands his LS airplane with it's 30 KIAS approach speed ahead of you and decides to taxi the entire length of the one and only 1800 ft runway at a slow walk leaving you nowhere to land your Mooney except in the trees growing alongside the narrow runway? Or maybe you picked an airport with two runways that cross in the middle only to find that someone has blown a tire and parked right at the intersection of the two. Meanwhile the 15 other airplanes that wanted to leave are spread out over the only taxiway... Hope that engine fires right up.


Considering the amount of SAC bases that proliferated that area, I am sure we can find a runway to operate over that will allow for a safe 3000' buffer median on the runway, I'll take a LAHSO no worries.
 
Last edited:
Considering the amount of SAC bases that proliferated that area, I am sure we can find a runway to operate over that will allow for a safe 3000' buffer median on the runway, I'll take a LAHSO no worries.
Like I said, it depends on the runway.
 
My FBO charges for the airplane by the hobbs meter. If I turn off the master switch during flight do you think that would be an effective way to save money? Of course I would have a transceiver to do my radio calls.

EDIT: I'm not actually going to do this (it's a dumb idea). Just entertaining the idea.

Turn the mags off and save even more.
 
Why does it matter if it's stopped? IMO, windmilling is far more likely and better training.

Because others pointed out here that the Hobbs meter is often connected prior to the master switch and also triggered by engine oil pressure, soooo.... stop the prop to stop the clock and start enjoying big savings!!:D
 
I'll bet you $1000 that we can go up to 10,000' over an airport as many times as you want in a day, shut the engine off and I'll put it on the runway every time. We aren't talking emergencies here, we are talking a planned glide.

I think most people would want that bet to be the value of the aircraft because if you come up short, that's what it might cost.

The thing is, glider pilots practice their dead stick landing every landing. Powered plane pilot, how many landings? Gliders have big ol' wings and glide for days, so come in way high and then pop the spoilers in and out until on the perfect glide path and speed. Powered pilots have one shot at the speed brakes.

Push come to shove, most pilots here on this thread could do this maneuver with success, but a few might come up short. I think nearly everyone here would pass on this exercise with the engine and master completely off. I have done something similar with the prop windmilling, mags on and master on.
 
I don't know if they still do it in the USA but here the examiner would kill an engine on an NDB approach when you were flying a twin for your IFR ride. Now they use zero thrust instead. Too many cracked up AC. I found it to be more challenging than killing the engine on a single for your Private Pilot ride.

As far as shutting off the master to save money to me it seems rather sleazy.
 
I think most people would want that bet to be the value of the aircraft because if you come up short, that's what it might cost.

The thing is, glider pilots practice their dead stick landing every landing. Powered plane pilot, how many landings? Gliders have big ol' wings and glide for days, so come in way high and then pop the spoilers in and out until on the perfect glide path and speed. Powered pilots have one shot at the speed brakes.

Push come to shove, most pilots here on this thread could do this maneuver with success, but a few might come up short. I think nearly everyone here would pass on this exercise with the engine and master completely off. I have done something similar with the prop windmilling, mags on and master on.

I would think there would be a lot of people who would love me to wreck their plane for them and collect the insurance.
 
Interesting the attitude difference between instructors, I went through this exercise multiple times from lower altitudes with an instructor long ago measuring the break altitude of where it becomes advantageous to stop the prop for the glide.
 
Last edited:
I would think there would be a lot of people who would love me to wreck their plane for them and collect the insurance.

These days, absolutely! Put a post on Craig's list and you'd be a very busy guy, wrecking other people's planes.
 
I'll bet you $1000 that we can go up to 10,000' over an airport as many times as you want in a day, shut the engine off and I'll put it on the runway every time. We aren't talking emergencies here, we are talking a planned glide.
 
I think you'd end up disappointed.

Maybe, but I doubt it. Notice I said "nearly". That means not absolutely, so yeah, a few might just go for it any ol' time. That's OK too I guess. People do all kinds of stuff in planes. Just don't crash. Please.
 
Powered pilots have one shot at the speed brakes.

Not true...

If you fly a power off approach with a medium deflection slip as a rule, you are basically flying a stabilized approach where you can vary the throttle as you normally would.

Too hot? Pull the power off (increase the slip)

Looking good? Leave the slip as is right down to the runway

Too low? Add power (reduce the slip and glide)
 
No matter how you slice the cake, it is still theft. If you can not afford to fly, don't fly. Find another way of entertaining yourself. I don't think you would be too welcome among pilots, most of us consider ourselves to be an honorable lot, and don't care too much for such dishonesty.

How long do you think rental airplanes would be available if everyone started doing what you are fishing around about? Then the only way to fly would be to buy your own airplane from the very start.

Not a good plan at all.

-John
 
How long do you think rental airplanes would be available if everyone started doing what you are fishing around about?

That's an important point. I even try to get the cheapest fuel even though I'm renting at a wet rate, because I want to encourage owners to keep renting their airplanes.
 
That's an important point. I even try to get the cheapest fuel even though I'm renting at a wet rate, because I want to encourage owners to keep renting their airplanes.


problem with that is that you will burn through more hobbs and possibly instructor time just to divert and find that 50 cent/gal cheaper fuel. Thus, the FBO makes more money on you flying more than whatever they save on gas.

I once flew in a school where the instructors were told to refill under the student or customer time. I never allowed it. hell no. I am paying for my instruction and flying time and they can refill under their own dime, plus when you have a wet rate they are already up marking the price of gas. They have no problem squeezing the last dollar from you, but when you put a stop on it they get offended. For trying to save a some dollar they lost a a potential long term customer. I think customer service is what's killing the small plane industry.
 
problem with that is that you will burn through more hobbs and possibly instructor time just to divert and find that 50 cent/gal cheaper fuel. Thus, the FBO makes more money on you flying more than whatever they save on gas.

I didn't mention that I only do it if I need to make a fuel stop anyway, and it won't make a significant difference in the distance to my destination. For example, when I fly From the San Francisco area to the Phoenix area, Tehachapi has cheaper fuel than Mojave, and both are along my route of flight.
 
Back
Top