How many engine failures have you experienced?

But just because someone is not instrument rated does NOT mean that they aren't just as good or better than someone who is. Take, for example, someone who always wanted to fly airshows, so they got their private and a VFR-only commercial. They fly like Patty Wagstaff, but they're not instrument rated. They're probably also WAY better pilots than your run-of-the-mill instrument pilot!

Another example would be Alaskan bush pilots. They don't even have the option of going IFR most of the time, so I'd imagine that there are plenty of them who aren't instrument rated. They're also some of the best pilots in existence.

Right -- there's no implication in my post that VFR is a limiting factor.

Rather, that IFR requires more of the candidate, and not all VFR pilots have all the pre-requisites.
 
I think those of us who are info-spoges have to be aware that not everyone shares the desire to "know all I can."

There's a reason we call it the "license to learn..." The more you learn, the better pilot you will become.

Sure, I've read AFNA -- but I've flown with superior pilots who could give a rat's rear end about Bernoulli.

I've, uh, bought AFNA. :redface: Haven't cracked it yet. :frown2:

Different people learn differently - Not everyone will "get" what's in AFNA. Some people have an innate gift for understanding what the airplane is doing - Jesse, for example, is a natural stick. But I bet he's still learning plenty too. Someone like me will think of angles of attack, Newton, Bernoulli, yadda yadda yadda when talking about or doing stalls, whereas someone like Jesse will be able to hear what the airplane is telling him a lot better than most. I will be flying along doing lots of math in my head, whereas Mari will be using simple but effective rules of thumb to arrive at about the same conclusion. The point is, we all learn and do things a little differently, but I think all of us are learning. THAT is by far the most important point. :yes:
 
There's a reason we call it the "license to learn..." The more you learn, the better pilot you will become.

Not everybody calls it a "license to learn."

Of course they end up learning (or dying) eventually, but not everyone approaches aviation with a sense of discovery. Some people just want to fly an airplane from here to there on nice days.

I think calling the "forever learning" types "good pilots" and the "I've done it this way a thousand times and I'm happy doing it this way again" types "bad pilots" is a value judgement that's unwarranted.

The only reason I'm debating this topic is that the "forever learning" types (of which group I proudly include myself) sometimes fool themselves into thinking they know more than they do, or are somehow immune from petty inconveniences the rest of the unwashed masses endure.
 
Okay, I can buy all that... Good explanation. The McKinley analogy isn't the best, though - I've never flown within a thousand miles of it, yet you fly within 500 feet of IFR traffic corridors on every flight.

I'm also not suggesting that you should go and learn to *fly* the approaches - Merely take a quick look at the PDF's that are available online, especially for your home airport or other airports you frequent, and have a clue what they look like, and maybe the names of the FAF's at most... Maybe even make a small single-page diagram that shows where they are in relation to the airport. Actually, come to think of it, that last thing would be a GREAT idea for the FAA to do, so that when we fly VFR into another airport it would be easy to familiarize ourselves, as I think knowing every FAF for an airport you don't regularly go into is definitely overkill. It'd help, but not enough to make it worthwhile for us all to individually go through that kind of planning.

My apologies for the "bad pilot" perception. I think that those of us on this board are collectively among the best pilots out there, simply because we are here learning (hopefully). I'd still fly with you, if that's any indication. :dunno:

Apologies unneeded. I just wanted to show you how you could be perceived based on what you had written.

This disagreement will continue. I am learning more all the time, but learning approaches is a long way down my list, given the rarity of midair collisions. In 500 hours I've come close to aircraft twice. I've said before that we all pay them more attention than they deserve. If finances allow I will convert my aircraft into an IFR trainer, and then I will get to immerse myself in all that. Until then, clear skies and mark II eyeballs will have to do for me. I do hope you make it to the show, perhaps we'll converse more over some brews.
 
I don't think anyone ever said it should be required. :no: I do think pilots should *want* to learn enough to know where other traffic will be.

Why? Half the IFR pilots are in the wrong place anyway.
 
The only reason I'm debating this topic is that the "forever learning" types (of which group I proudly include myself) sometimes fool themselves into thinking they know more than they do

It seems like every time I learn something new I also discover at least two more things I have yet to learn. That combined with the fact that these days I seem to forget about as fast as I learn leads me to believe that I will always know less than I think I do.
 
It seems like every time I learn something new I also discover at least two more things I have yet to learn. That combined with the fact that these days I seem to forget about as fast as I learn leads me to believe that I will always know less than I think I do.
+1 :rofl:

I'll also add that just by coming to an aviation message board people here are more interested in learning about and discussing flying than 95% of the pilots out there.
 
Except perhaps on rotation.

Still a non event, you just stow them both instead of one if you're in a plane that won't climb out on one. The only thing is you have to have the discipline to actually figure out every time you launch what your strategy will be and stick with it. You can't be mentally lazy.

BTW, If one engine is unlikely to fail, wouldn't a twin be twice as unlikely to fail?:sosp:
 
> BTW, If one engine is unlikely to fail, wouldn't a twin be twice as unlikely to fail?

twice as unlikely for *both* to fail? Ignoring common failure modes, yes
 
I have only had one dead stick landing that ended uneventfully in a C206 and also, an engine failure on a P68 due to ice contamination in the fuel.

2 cents on the airplanes...I ferried a Cessna 400 with TKS "weeping wing" to Europe through all the usual early spring icing on the Northern Route and the aircraft handled it beautifully all while cruising easily at 210 knots in absolute comfort. If people/cargo hauling is not important then I would be inclined towards the 400...P.S. I beat 3 Cirrus G3s accross that day!
 
But what is your experience?

Only one engine failure in ~100 (at the time) hours. Single engine C172 while training for my IFR. Under the hood... power off stall.. 2500feet....silence... tore off the hood quickly.. silence.... saw the prop standing straight up...silence.. not moving... did I mention the SILENCE? I was a half step behind my instructor in the emergency checklist, (fuel, mixture, throttle, start).

Wonderful beautiful noise.

Turns out the problem was a low-idle setting on the throttle. Set it to idle, and the engine wouldn't get enough fuel and quit.

Recently I had a spinner break on my PA-28 in flight, and I thought(!) i was having an engine failure. Lots of vibration etc. Precautionary landing at a nearby airport and it was obvious what the problem was.

I'm hoping that I've had my one engine failure now for the life of my hobby flying "career".

Brian
N9093K
 
I have ~1100 hrs, predominantly in a PA28-180, but about 50 hrs in a Seneca II as well. A few hundred hours of night flying, and about 100 hrs of simulated + actual IMC. 80% of my flying is in the Chicago area.

I have never experienced an engine failure. I have had the engine hiccup, run roughly, and lose RPM due to a mag failure. This was at about 500AGL after takeoff, and I did an immediate 180 and landed. Of course, the mag had just checked ok on the ground just prior to takeoff.

To your question about what kind of plane to buy... that's a difficult question to answer. I will share a few experiences that may be of interest.

My family had a Seneca II for about 10 years, and although it was a great plane, it was quite expensive to maintain (probably 4-5x the expense of my Cherokee). Others may have different experiences, but it was enough to scare me out of personally owning a twin.

As far as currency goes, I found VFR single-engine ops to be quite simple. The Seneca II is turbo'd and climbed quite easily at 5k in the summer when light/moderately loaded. At the time of my multi training, I was flying my Cherokee IFR a lot, and was very comfortable doing so. With that background, I was surprised at how 'behind' I felt when losing an engine during approach phase under the hood. Between emergency checklists, maintaining attitude, flying the approach, and communicating with ATC - it really was task saturation. I am sure more practice would have made it second nature, but it was probably the toughest thing I have ever done in aviation, and certainly made me realize how dedicated one needs to be to staying current in a twin.

A friend has recently bought a non-FIKI deiced SR22 (non-turbo). It will not do 190kts, but it will easily fly at 170kts, and can fly 180kts if pushed. The idea of having a parachute certainly mitigates a lot of the single-engine risk. If I only needed 4 seats, I would definitely consider the SR22 before a twin.

Part of the answer also stems from how often you plan on crossing the lake, and what your risk tolerance is... I will not cross the lake in a single (chute or not).

Last, in my last ~10 years of flying a non de-iced single near Chicago, I have only cancelled/delayed a handful of flights due to icing concerns. Even in winter, I am surprised at how many VFR days there are if your time/schedule can be a bit flexible.


But what is your experience? How many times over the years have you personally experienced an engine failure? If you were in my shoes, which of the following would you buy - Baron B58, Cessna 400, Cessna 310, Cirrus SR22?
 
Part of the answer also stems from how often you plan on crossing the lake, and what your risk tolerance is... I will not cross the lake in a single (chute or not).

I have a very specific, limited set of circumstances in which I will cross the lake in a single - But I do it from MTW-MBL. The lake's too wide down near you, and you're close enough to the bottom that it doesn't make much of a difference anyway.

That's one of the things with the chute - It doesn't do you a damn bit of good over the lake. Cross at the wrong time of year, and you're just as dead with the chute as you are ditching. In fact, if I were crossing the lake in a chute-equipped plane, I would not pull it for engine failure - Glide will get me closer to shore, and I believe provide less chance of serious injuries. The plane under chute will still drop to the ground fairly quickly, and the design of the system relies on the collapse of the landing gear to absorb some of the vertical energy. That won't happen in water - And the guy who went in the Potomac after pulling his chute ended up with pretty serious back injuries. I think ditching is probably the better option.

Last, in my last ~10 years of flying a non de-iced single near Chicago, I have only cancelled/delayed a handful of flights due to icing concerns. Even in winter, I am surprised at how many VFR days there are if your time/schedule can be a bit flexible.

Not to mention, winter + clouds does not automatically equal icing. I've got a fair amount of December actual in my book with no ice - And the only time I've picked up inadvertent icing without a CFI aboard was in August!
 
I have 400 hours in my Cessna 150. One time I was doing instrument training with my CFI and my O-200 sucked a valve. We had 5000 feet and we were 1 mile from the airport. I could only get 1500 RPM out of the engine without shaking the cowl so bad I could see daylight. I was able to land safely.
 
Had an engine failure in a Piper Arrow at 8,000 ft above Iowa. Landed in a farmers field without damaging the aircraft. Engine failure in a Bonanza entering the traffic pattern at an airport, landed non event. Two engine failures on a Cessna 404, one after takeoff when the turbo charger exploded on the left engine, aircraft was at gross, came around and landed. Same Cessna 404 a month later lost the right engine in cruise when oil pressure went to zero. (this C404 was purchased from Barron Thomas with "fresh" overhauled engines btw).

Did a precautionary shutdown on a Beech 99 in cruise. Had a partial engine failure on a SA-227 Metroliner in cruise. Lost number 3 engine on a B727 at 100 feet after takeoff.

Other than that, nothing unusual......... :)
Okay, be prepared to back up your post please:

You claim an engine failure in a Cessna 404? Purchased from me? I am sure you logged that in your log book, right? And there's an FAA incident report somewhere?
So, it should be pretty easy to provide an "N" number then.

I have NEVER owned or sold a Cessna 404 in 42 years of doing this.

It's probably the only model Cessna I've never had, but I have NEVER sold or owned a 404.

Like a lot of these posts, when pressed, there's NOTHING to back them up.

Care to respond with an actual "N" number of your adventure?

Sorry, but I have to call you on this one!

Barron Thomas
 
Does accidentally turning off fuel to the engine; having it stop and getting it restarted count (red faced)? Had the cord to my headset somehow get tied up around the fuel tank switch in my A-36 shut it off by moving the selector between tanks when I reached back to get into the cooler in the seat behind me. Did get it restarted very quickly, but it got quiet pretty fast.

Best,

Dave
 
Okay, be prepared to back up your post please:

You claim an engine failure in a Cessna 404? Purchased from me? I am sure you logged that in your log book, right? And there's an FAA incident report somewhere?
So, it should be pretty easy to provide an "N" number then.

I have NEVER owned or sold a Cessna 404 in 42 years of doing this.

It's probably the only model Cessna I've never had, but I have NEVER sold or owned a 404.

Like a lot of these posts, when pressed, there's NOTHING to back them up.

Care to respond with an actual "N" number of your adventure?

Sorry, but I have to call you on this one!

Barron Thomas

Barron, normally I wouldn't waste my time with you. Your reputation in the aviation industry speaks volumes about you, and it's not anything glowing.

I'm on the road right now but when I get back home I'll dig up the "N" number of the 404. As far as an "incident report" the flight was conducted under Part 135, so yes a report was filed.
 
In ~500 hours of VFR flying, 1 engine failure, Cessna 182 rough engine at 500AGL right after takeoff from a 2000' grass strip, was already talking to approach at the big airport 5 miles off the nose, made it to the runway, engine quit totally on short final.

Scariest part was rolling off at the first taxiway, getting out of the airplane and seeing what looked like a 20-foot-tall fire truck aiming his nozzle right at me.....

Had the world's most dangerous cargo on board - 3 other pilots. And the world's most dangerous engine - fresh overhaul, 5 hours out of the shop.
 
Does accidentally turning off fuel to the engine; having it stop and getting it restarted count (red faced)? Had the cord to my headset somehow get tied up around the fuel tank switch in my A-36 shut it off by moving the selector between tanks when I reached back to get into the cooler in the seat behind me. Did get it restarted very quickly, but it got quiet pretty fast.

Best,

Dave
I've been thinking, "No" until this post. OK. Once or twice. Fixed it, kicked self, no big deal.
 
Yea, this is more a 'pilot failure' :lol:

No other engine failures; couple precautionary landings in helos: couple transmission chip detector lights and once because of ground fire hits. In the second case, we had to leave the bird for it to be lifted out later.

Best,

Dave
 
Baron B58 is what I would buy if I was buying a twin engine, used to have one and it is a great aircraft, only down side is fuel prices are going up and twin engines sure do like fuel or according to your list of what you like, I would buy a Cirrus SR22, I fly one alot, and there is no down sides, a powerful single engine that is great with fuel in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Barron, normally I wouldn't waste my time with you. Your reputation in the aviation industry speaks volumes about you, and it's not anything glowing.

I'm on the road right now but when I get back home I'll dig up the "N" number of the 404. As far as an "incident report" the flight was conducted under Part 135, so yes a report was filed.

I never saw the N-Number...

Did you blur it out so no one could find it without contacting Barron first?

:rofl:
 
Only 2 but, within 6 weeks of each other, no time to get much of a fright, too busy doing emergency checklists.
 
Hi All,

I've had a few 'partials', but flat-out failures I'd probably say two. One in a piston single and one in a piston twin.

Here's a photo from one of the 'partial' failures that I had.

Cheers,

Owen

BlogBigBang.jpg
 
Got some details on that jug's demise?

Hi All,

I've had a few 'partials', but flat-out failures I'd probably say two. One in a piston single and one in a piston twin.

Here's a photo from one of the 'partial' failures that I had.

Cheers,

Owen

BlogBigBang.jpg
 
Got some details on that jug's demise?

Hi again,

In hindsight, there was a spate of cylinder failures on Continental IO-520 engines about that time. From my understanding, the cylinder heads were quite susceptible to 'shock cooling' and any degree of over-leaning. We had measures in place at this company to circumvent these problems, however after my cylinder failed, inspections still found cracks in three other engines within our fleet.

I trust that answers your question.

Cheers,

Owen
 
I never saw the N-Number...

Did you blur it out so no one could find it without contacting Barron first?

:rofl:

On the bright side, if he's mistaken he can head over to Barron's website for some of that "forgiveness" I saw preached over there.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
 
I guess it all depends on whether we classify an engine failure as one stopping for any reason, or due to mechanical defect. If the former applies then I got to experience two. One in a vain attempt to make ground pelican with a GE T58-10, (not recommended :nono: ) and one due to being a lightning rod while playing in a squall line near Johnston Island. The pelican did not help the performance of the HH-3F since we at max gross, but we got low and limped back to Key West. The 130 had a small fire and total electrical loss until our crew chief Mcgyvered some watts back as we DR'ed our way back to Honolulu.
 
143.7 hours and no engine failures. However I've had a total electrical failure (2nd flight with my PPL) and the seat come loose off the tracks during a smash and go (practice flight before checkride).
 
I see this thread was started 2 months before I solo'ed. if you want the experience of an engine out fly ultralights. I started flying ultralights and by the time I had 150 hrs flying I had more engine outs then I ever want to have.
Lost a complete reduction unit and prop at 1000'. Had two engine seize at 1000'. An ignition failure and others I have forgot about. In all I do believe six in total.
 
8 or 10, can't recall off the top of my head. Plus some precautionary shutdowns that turned out to be something minor.
 
300 hrs flying:

#1 Spinner broke on my 150 and threw the whole engine way out of balance and thought the engine was gona fall apart. Flew 10MN at reduced power where the shaking seemed better and landed without issues. Fixed the spinner and was on my way.

#2 Lost electrical power in the C150. An improperly crimped ring terminal on the generator fixed the problem.

#3 Lost a magneto on takeoff in a Grumman AA-1C which felt like the engine swallowed a chunck of foam or something. I made a quick turn 180 degrees looking for a smoke trail thinking I might be on fire, landed with no problems. Fixed the mag a week later and flew it home.

#4 Was flying into KLNK at about 2000 AGL and 15 miles out in an old Cessna 172 carrying 1 pax. I turned on the landing lights (old power hungry incandecent type) and almost immediately smelled smoke and I quickley turned them off and advised approach of the situation. My passenger noticed the smell too. Never did find anything wrong and the plane has flow 100 hours since without any problems. Also pulled about 4 ounces of water from this one on a preflight once.

#5 Always was perty leary of my dad's 177 on hot days as it never seemed to hold very good fuel pressure and seemed rougher than it should be. Never got stuck anywhere but a new fuel pump behaves perfectly and the carburetor OH and a few gaskets cure the roughness. After replacing the wiring FWF, It's one my favorite planes to take and feel good about dispatch reliability.
 
In 27 years of flying, every one of my airplanes bit me in some way

My 172 loss to a pushrod tube seal and drained all the oil out… fortunately for me, I was on a straight in 10 mile final when it went and I made it to the field before I threw a rod.

My bonanza cracked an exhaust manifold and gave me carbon monoxide poisoning while I was in IMC.

My 340 had the spider valve on the left engine vibrate loose and sprayed fuel all over the engine while in flight. The only sign of something being wrong was the blue colored “oil” seeping out the front of the cowl.

The mechanics speculated the Venturi effect inside separated the fuel from the blue dye
 
None, and hoping to keep it that-a-way. My partner did in our baron when new engines were installed and one cylinder overheated when very new. Acted hot from the time it was installed and we were hoping it would improve. Non-event except for the inconvenience. Partner landed near by on the other engine and had to drive back. Couple precautionary landings in the military (chip detector). One from enemy fire, but never lost the engine.

Best,

Dave
 
1. T-38 Bird in left engine. Rolled back to 80% until shutdown after landing
2. C-123 J-85 failed to start for landing had bullet hole in it from ground fire.
3. C-123 blew jug on R-2800 shut it down.
4. KC-135 shelled out on takeoff out of Hickam AFB
5. KC-135 water injection flooded engine on takeoff, came back after water ran out.
6. C-150. Broken compression ring that destroyed the cylinder.
 
13,, most were metal generating and the chips light came on,, we simply shut it down, ran the emergency check list and continued the mission.

none in the general aviation aircraft.
 
Back
Top