I had me a day.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cillian
  • Start date Start date
C

Cillian

Guest
For almost a month, my single-engine plane with an IO-540 and a constant-speed prop had been agonizingly ground-bound, awaiting its Condition Inspection. But finally, all the squawks had been taken care of, and monies paid. It was time for a test flight.

On a beautiful morning, after a thorough pre-flight, I launched from the home 'drome. My plan was a wide circle around the Class C airspace, aiming for a full hour to test the newly replaced transponder and ADS-B unit. The takeoff was uneventful, climb out smooth. I settled into cruise, leaning the engine a couple of times to check different performance parameters. Having flown only once in 60 days, I was undeniably rusty, fumbling a bit with the avionics. But soon enough, I settled into my rhythm, following the planned route. Everything felt right... famous last words.

Making the turn around the northern apogee of my planned circle, I listened to the ATIS for the Class D airport I was near, then dialed in the tower frequency, monitoring Guard (as I had been doing all along the route for airports of note). I set up the autopilot to descend a thousand feet as I passed the next waypoint, to honor direction of flight VFR cruising altitudes.

And then it happened.

There was an obvious surge / overspeed of the prop, followed by a loss of thrust. In that instant, my mind went blank, a stark "WTF?" echoing. Per ForeFlight, I lost 40 knots of groundspeed in 14 seconds while the autopilot maintained altitude. Aurally, the throttle responded, but the prop remained stubbornly unresponsive. Then the autopilot clicked off – a distinct tone I clearly recall. That's when my brain finally registered the stark reality: "I am now a glider. I need to land." I knew I had just passed the Class D airport (though in fact I’d just lost sight of it under my nose), so I started a turn back. I did not look at my engine gauges, but I did grab best glide airspeed. Even at best glide airspeed, I couldn't maintain altitude. Trimming for that airspeed proved difficult; my "thorough" preflight had, regrettably, neglected to load the rear baggage compartment with the usual travel equipment and tools I put there when flying solo. This left my nose-heavy plane with a less than desirable center of gravity, rendering trim less effective at low speeds.

I broadcast a Mayday to Tower, but my radio configuration meant it actually went out on Guard. I quickly realized that, and with a quick flip-flop button push, did another Mayday call to the tower with my position, altitude, and loss of power situation. The controller (who I met on deck later) was cool and collected, dealing with the other traffic in the area and giving me unobstructed access to the active runway. He said he could not locate me and requested updated position reports. I told Tower I had made the inadvertent broadcast on Guard and that he should probably tell the powers that be I was now talking with him. Because, naturally, easing confusion for others is precisely what occupies your mind during an emergency landing.

After 270 degrees of turn, I visually acquired the airport and active runway. At that point, I was feeling pretty good about my energy package, and confident I could make the runway. This was all done visually. I had no clue what the field elevation was. I was not looking to make a High Key / Low Key at some predetermined altitude above ground level and location relative to the runway. I was just flying the plane, based on my own experience.

I transitioned to a high downwind. The runway looked ding-dang long, so I aimed for the 1,000-foot marker as my touchdown point. When I was abeam that touchdown point, I felt high and fast, so I lowered the flaps to half. I started my base turn. After starting the turn, I still felt high and fast, so I went to full flaps. Soon thereafter, I started to slip to slow down. But then the touchdown point appeared to walk away from me, so I banked harder to point right at it. In the end, I touched down pretty close to my target. In retrospect, not bad for my first landing in 30 days! Four minutes from prop surge to touchdown.

I found I had enough thrust to taxi on deck and got progressive instructions to the maintenance shop hangar. Before I shut down, I did a runup to cycle the prop lever, which did nothing. I confirmed continuity between the prop lever and the prop governor after shutting down. I've since learned this was likely a classic prop governor failure: an initial overspeed, then a shift to fine pitch, providing some thrust but nowhere near enough to fly.

While I was talking to the maintenance shop and working on getting some hangar space at the airport waiting for repairs to happen, the airport manager pulled up with a sticky note containing a phone number and contact person at the FSDO (that was fast). I called a few minutes later, and it must have been a good day to leave the FSDO, as I was asked if I could meet the Operations and Maintenance points of contact in an hour at the airport to go over things. Since I was waiting on transportation home anyway, I agreed. When they arrived, everything was very cordial. We discussed what happened; a copy of my ID, Pilot Certificate, and Medical were taken, as well as the AWC and Registration for the airplane. The maintenance person asked me to email a copy of the Condition Inspection entry when I got back to my hangar to complete the process. They confirmed that nothing required the NTSB to be notified, and that this would just be classified as an occurrence.

As it turned out, the new transponder and ADS-B unit hadn't been working for this flight. Had the outcome been less desirable, there wouldn't have been much for blancolirio to speculate on, save perhaps the tower frequency communications. There isn't much in the plane that an accident investigation could try and do a forensic extraction on; the engine analyzer only records CHT and EGT, everything else is analog. Maybe something could be had from the iPad running ForeFlight, which was essential for my own debrief of the flight,

Reflecting on the incident, several key takeaways emerged:

  • Goods:
    • I had practiced engine-out landings quite a bit in this plane, to include pulling the prop lever back to fine pitch. The plane flew exactly as it did during practice.
    • I picked a cruising altitude 7,000 feet AGL, and a nice Class D airport with a big runway as a waypoint. That gave me time and options.
    • I aviated, then navigated, then communicated.
  • Others:
    • I should have pre-flighted the rear baggage compartment.
    • I should have done a transponder check with ATC early in the flight.
    • I should have done a bit more confirmation of the situation by looking at and processing the information displayed on the engine gauges.
    • I should have looked at my navigation displays to ascertain my actual position relative to the airport and not wasting energy doing a 270 degree turn.
    • I should have done a landing checklist (luckily, I was in the fixed gear airplane that day).
Truly, God was my copilot that day, choosing to fail the governor right on top of an airport. The route I was flying had plenty of inhospitable terrain. And I routinely spend a considerable amount of time sightseeing low and slow.

I drank the really expensive whiskey that night.
 
Good job getting it down safe. I'm confused though. You prop appears not set up right if the fine pitch stop allowed the engine not to produce sufficent thrust to stay airborne. Most planes fly just fine with the blue knob firewalled.
 
Good job getting it down safe. I'm confused though. You prop appears not set up right if the fine pitch stop allowed the engine not to produce sufficent thrust to stay airborne. Most planes fly just fine with the blue knob firewalled.
This struck me as odd too. Isn't the prop control full-forward the standard position for take-off and landing? Been a while since I flew a constant-speed prop, but I seem to recall screwing around with the blue knob only once in cruise.
 
Well done!

If you had made an off airport landing, having a bunch of tools aft could have been bad luck.

The constant speed prop I have flown the most, full fine pitch to about rotate speed, then it started to go to more pitch. The sound changed. Most likely, if you needed more altitude to get to the runway, advancing the throttle to the red line would have provided all the thrust you needed, and more.

Again, well done, and always nice to have a long runway to target for an engine out approach.
 
Well, in a single engine, the propeller is supposed to fail to a low pitch condition as a fail-safe measure, so thrust can still be maintained. Why did you experience a loss of power when the governor failed?

Nonetheless, I’m glad you had a safe outcome!
 
Well, in a single engine, the propeller is supposed to fail to a low pitch condition as a fail-safe measure, so thrust can still be maintained. Why did you experience a loss of power when the governor failed?
I guess we all had that question. There's also the related
had practiced engine-out landings quite a bit in this plane, to include pulling the prop lever back to fine pitch.
Fine pitch is full forward/high RPM where we would expect it to be in a governor failure. And if the failure was of a type that would leave the prop low RPM/coarse, I don't know how moving it back would make a difference.

Reading back through it, this doesn't sound like a "classic governor failure" in a standard single-engine airplane. OTOH, the OP mentions it just had a "condition inspection" completed, so it might have been an experimental, in which case who knows?
 
For almost a month, my single-engine plane with an IO-540 and a constant-speed prop had been agonizingly ground-bound, awaiting its Condition Inspection. But finally, all the squawks had been taken care of, and monies paid. It was time for a test flight.

On a beautiful morning, after a thorough pre-flight, I launched from the home 'drome. My plan was a wide circle around the Class C airspace, aiming for a full hour to test the newly replaced transponder and ADS-B unit. The takeoff was uneventful, climb out smooth. I settled into cruise, leaning the engine a couple of times to check different performance parameters. Having flown only once in 60 days, I was undeniably rusty, fumbling a bit with the avionics. But soon enough, I settled into my rhythm, following the planned route. Everything felt right... famous last words.

Making the turn around the northern apogee of my planned circle, I listened to the ATIS for the Class D airport I was near, then dialed in the tower frequency, monitoring Guard (as I had been doing all along the route for airports of note). I set up the autopilot to descend a thousand feet as I passed the next waypoint, to honor direction of flight VFR cruising altitudes.

And then it happened.

There was an obvious surge / overspeed of the prop, followed by a loss of thrust. In that instant, my mind went blank, a stark "WTF?" echoing. Per ForeFlight, I lost 40 knots of groundspeed in 14 seconds while the autopilot maintained altitude. Aurally, the throttle responded, but the prop remained stubbornly unresponsive. Then the autopilot clicked off – a distinct tone I clearly recall. That's when my brain finally registered the stark reality: "I am now a glider. I need to land." I knew I had just passed the Class D airport (though in fact I’d just lost sight of it under my nose), so I started a turn back. I did not look at my engine gauges, but I did grab best glide airspeed. Even at best glide airspeed, I couldn't maintain altitude. Trimming for that airspeed proved difficult; my "thorough" preflight had, regrettably, neglected to load the rear baggage compartment with the usual travel equipment and tools I put there when flying solo. This left my nose-heavy plane with a less than desirable center of gravity, rendering trim less effective at low speeds.

I broadcast a Mayday to Tower, but my radio configuration meant it actually went out on Guard. I quickly realized that, and with a quick flip-flop button push, did another Mayday call to the tower with my position, altitude, and loss of power situation. The controller (who I met on deck later) was cool and collected, dealing with the other traffic in the area and giving me unobstructed access to the active runway. He said he could not locate me and requested updated position reports. I told Tower I had made the inadvertent broadcast on Guard and that he should probably tell the powers that be I was now talking with him. Because, naturally, easing confusion for others is precisely what occupies your mind during an emergency landing.

After 270 degrees of turn, I visually acquired the airport and active runway. At that point, I was feeling pretty good about my energy package, and confident I could make the runway. This was all done visually. I had no clue what the field elevation was. I was not looking to make a High Key / Low Key at some predetermined altitude above ground level and location relative to the runway. I was just flying the plane, based on my own experience.

I transitioned to a high downwind. The runway looked ding-dang long, so I aimed for the 1,000-foot marker as my touchdown point. When I was abeam that touchdown point, I felt high and fast, so I lowered the flaps to half. I started my base turn. After starting the turn, I still felt high and fast, so I went to full flaps. Soon thereafter, I started to slip to slow down. But then the touchdown point appeared to walk away from me, so I banked harder to point right at it. In the end, I touched down pretty close to my target. In retrospect, not bad for my first landing in 30 days! Four minutes from prop surge to touchdown.

I found I had enough thrust to taxi on deck and got progressive instructions to the maintenance shop hangar. Before I shut down, I did a runup to cycle the prop lever, which did nothing. I confirmed continuity between the prop lever and the prop governor after shutting down. I've since learned this was likely a classic prop governor failure: an initial overspeed, then a shift to fine pitch, providing some thrust but nowhere near enough to fly.

While I was talking to the maintenance shop and working on getting some hangar space at the airport waiting for repairs to happen, the airport manager pulled up with a sticky note containing a phone number and contact person at the FSDO (that was fast). I called a few minutes later, and it must have been a good day to leave the FSDO, as I was asked if I could meet the Operations and Maintenance points of contact in an hour at the airport to go over things. Since I was waiting on transportation home anyway, I agreed. When they arrived, everything was very cordial. We discussed what happened; a copy of my ID, Pilot Certificate, and Medical were taken, as well as the AWC and Registration for the airplane. The maintenance person asked me to email a copy of the Condition Inspection entry when I got back to my hangar to complete the process. They confirmed that nothing required the NTSB to be notified, and that this would just be classified as an occurrence.

As it turned out, the new transponder and ADS-B unit hadn't been working for this flight. Had the outcome been less desirable, there wouldn't have been much for blancolirio to speculate on, save perhaps the tower frequency communications. There isn't much in the plane that an accident investigation could try and do a forensic extraction on; the engine analyzer only records CHT and EGT, everything else is analog. Maybe something could be had from the iPad running ForeFlight, which was essential for my own debrief of the flight,

Reflecting on the incident, several key takeaways emerged:

  • Goods:
    • I had practiced engine-out landings quite a bit in this plane, to include pulling the prop lever back to fine pitch. The plane flew exactly as it did during practice.
    • I picked a cruising altitude 7,000 feet AGL, and a nice Class D airport with a big runway as a waypoint. That gave me time and options.
    • I aviated, then navigated, then communicated.
  • Others:
    • I should have pre-flighted the rear baggage compartment.
    • I should have done a transponder check with ATC early in the flight.
    • I should have done a bit more confirmation of the situation by looking at and processing the information displayed on the engine gauges.
    • I should have looked at my navigation displays to ascertain my actual position relative to the airport and not wasting energy doing a 270 degree turn.
    • I should have done a landing checklist (luckily, I was in the fixed gear airplane that day).
Truly, God was my copilot that day, choosing to fail the governor right on top of an airport. The route I was flying had plenty of inhospitable terrain. And I routinely spend a considerable amount of time sightseeing low and slow.

I drank the really expensive whiskey that night.
What plane? What prop?
 
I guess we all had that question. There's also the related

Fine pitch is full forward/high RPM where we would expect it to be in a governor failure. And if the failure was of a type that would leave the prop low RPM/coarse, I don't know how moving it back would make a difference.

Reading back through it, this doesn't sound like a "classic governor failure" in a standard single-engine airplane. OTOH, the OP mentions it just had a "condition inspection" completed, so it might have been an experimental, in which case who knows?
Yes, I'm beginning to think he meant coarse pitch (low RPMs) rather than fine pitch (high RPMs).
 
"Even at best glide airspeed, I couldn't maintain altitude"

Best glide is not for maintaining altitude, but the most efficient speed to trade altitude for distance. So yes, you should lose altitude.

If your intent is to say in the air longer then you want minimum sink rate... which is rarely published.

 
Good on ya for the safe outcome.:rockon:

I’m not too concerned about any confusion that may exist regarding the “fine pitch not maintaining altitude,” etc, aspects of troubleshooting in flight…the priority was a safe outcome. Having said that, let us know what you find out.
 
So any emergency landing regardless brings out the FSDO? Open door even? Or did airport manager call the cops on you?
 
So any emergency landing regardless brings out the FSDO? Open door even? Or did airport manager call the cops on you?
Depends.

Twice I had engine failures to some extent in Virginia. In the first one some ultralighter had killed himself a couple of counties over so the FSDO is like: no injuries, no problem. The second time, I ended up in a field. The FAA kind of did everything over the phone.

Both times I had state troopers with their Commonwealth of Virginia accident report and they were good about it as we sat around filling it out. In the first case, I had been flying young eagles. The report instructions tell the cop he has to see if there were any witnesses. We walk over to the FBO, where I found two sets of parents have waited around to thank me for bringing their kids back alive. "Did anybody see this?" the trooper asks. "I did," said one of the kids. The officer gets down on one knee to take the kids statement. It was hilarious.

The EAA sent me a nice letter thanking me for not killing any young eagles.
 
Depends.

Twice I had engine failures to some extent in Virginia. In the first one some ultralighter had killed himself a couple of counties over so the FSDO is like: no injuries, no problem. The second time, I ended up in a field. The FAA kind of did everything over the phone.

Both times I had state troopers with their Commonwealth of Virginia accident report and they were good about it as we sat around filling it out. In the first case, I had been flying young eagles. The report instructions tell the cop he has to see if there were any witnesses. We walk over to the FBO, where I found two sets of parents have waited around to thank me for bringing their kids back alive. "Did anybody see this?" the trooper asks. "I did," said one of the kids. The officer gets down on one knee to take the kids statement. It was hilarious.

The EAA sent me a nice letter thanking me for not killing any young eagles.

I think it has to do with the emergency declaration.
 
I think it has to do with the emergency declaration.
No. Please do not give pilots who don’t know better a reason to be afraid of declaring emergencies or thinking that if they don’t, everything will be just fine. There’s more than enough of that nonsense around already.
 
Last edited:
So any emergency landing regardless brings out the FSDO? Open door even? Or did airport manager call the cops on you?
As Ron said, it depends. For one example, an emergency landing which closes down a runway is likely to get the FAA involved. One that doesn’t, may go unmentioned.

I wouldn’t consider ann open door as an emergency, but if I did, I would not expect a FSDO to get involved. Heck, I took off once from a busy Delta, had a (partial) loss of power, declared an emergency return to the airport, was cleared to land any runway, stopping other traffic, and heard nothing from the local FSDO.
 
"Even at best glide airspeed, I couldn't maintain altitude"

Best glide is not for maintaining altitude, but the most efficient speed to trade altitude for distance. So yes, you should lose altitude.

If your intent is to say in the air longer then you want minimum sink rate... which is rarely published.

Best glide is the most efficient airspeed. If you have limited power, it is the optimum airspeed for trying to maintain altitude.
 
Best glide is the most efficient airspeed. If you have limited power, it is the optimum airspeed for trying to maintain altitude.
Best glide is to cover the most distance over the ground, not to maintain altitude. That's min sink. Having said that, it's a distinction without a difference in most GA aircraft. AFAIK, there are not polar curves published for GA planes. Having said that, I don't think slowing below best glide will meaningfully change sink rate and from a practical standpoint, I'm hard pressed to come up with a scenario where you'd want to try that in an emergency. If you have a place to land, just land. The example below is for a glider, where there's a big difference between min sink and best glide, due to the low drag of a glider. The green curve is relatively flat. A GA aircraft would have a much steeper green line due to higher drag and the airspeed for min sink and best glide would also be closer. Screenshot 2025-06-29 at 8.12.07 AM.png
 
Last edited:
As Ron said, it depends. For one example, an emergency landing which closes down a runway is likely to get the FAA involved. One that doesn’t, may go unmentioned.
Actually, I did close the runway. And another plane that was up claimed he didn't have enough fuel to divert to the next airport (five miles away) and declared an emergency and landed on the runway behind me. None of that seemed to bother the FAA much.

While I was over in the FBO with the state trooper taking statements from seven year olds, the mechanic and another Navion owner put my plane back in its tie-down space (to do this they ended up taking a landing gear leg off his Navion... it was disassembled anyhow).
 
So any emergency landing regardless brings out the FSDO? Open door even? Or did airport manager call the cops on you?
The two times I've "declared" an emergency (as in gotten the fuel and souls on board questions from ATC) I've been contacted by the FSDO.

The first time turned out to be an intermittent bad mag, and they kind of went over the top IMO, wanting a narrative and following up to find out what was done to solve the problem. I did cause a couple jets to go around on that one.

The second was the oil loss thing. The ATL FSDO was much more relaxed than STL. He did go out and look at the plane, and then called me back later and congratulated me for getting it down safely. The impression I got was that they are notified of any emergency declared with ATC, then follow up on the ones they deem serious. How they make that decision is beyond me. I landed at an uncontrolled field on this second one, but I was with center when I declared.

I also had a landing gear indication problem where the tower rolled the fire trucks to meet me in case my gear collapsed. All turned out fine; never heard from the FSDO on that one.
 
I had an alternator belt let go leaving a class D. Called the tower to let them know I was coming back, but might not have radio. I did not declare, but think the tower might have as they cleared all traffic (busy training airport) and gave me any runway. Never heard boo from FSDO.
 
Best glide is the most efficient airspeed. If you have limited power, it is the optimum airspeed for trying to maintain altitude.
As @Hang 4 said, best glide maximizes distance, not altitude. It's the most distance covered for each increment of altitude lost. A glide ratio (which some EFBs use) like 10:1 means you will travel 10 feet forward for each foot of latitude you lose (I convert that to a NM/1000' number in my personal checklists). Minimum sink, which is not published for most airplanes, is generally lower that best glide, and maximize altitude, slowing the descent but giving you less forward travel. I think of the difference as similar to the difference between Vy (altitude/time) and Vx (altitude/distance), but in the opposite direction.

In airplanes, we tend to think of best glide rather than minimum sink since the issue is usually reaching an emergency landing site (forward distance) rather than how slow or fast we descend once we get there. But minimum sink still has some use, such as being over a landing site but wanting to maximize time aloft for troubleshooting and securing the the airplane for the landing.
 
Good job getting it down safe. I'm confused though. You prop appears not set up right if the fine pitch stop allowed the engine not to produce sufficent thrust to stay airborne. Most planes fly just fine with the blue knob firewalled.
Yes, ChatGPT got a lot of things wrong in this one. I see many clues this wasn't written by a pilot.
 
Actually, I did close the runway. And another plane that was up claimed he didn't have enough fuel to divert to the next airport (five miles away) and declared an emergency and landed on the runway behind me. None of that seemed to bother the FAA much.

While I was over in the FBO with the state trooper taking statements from seven year olds, the mechanic and another Navion owner put my plane back in its tie-down space (to do this they ended up taking a landing gear leg off his Navion... it was disassembled anyhow).
FSDO may not have followed up with you, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the dude who confessed to not having enough gas to divert had a little chat with them.
 
I don't think slowing below best glide will meaningfully change sink rate and from a practical standpoint, I'm hard pressed to come up with a scenario where you'd want to try that in an emergency.
It absolutely will change sink rate. When airspeed slows, sink rate increases. Think about what happens when someone attempts to stretch a glide.
 
It absolutely will change sink rate. When airspeed slows, sink rate increases. Think about what happens when someone attempts to stretch a glide.
Slowing to stretch a glide changes both speed over the ground AND sink rate. Depending on where you are on the polar curve and the shape of your plane's polar, it's the reduction in speed over the ground that reduces the glide ratio more than the sink rate change. My hang glider's best glide is around 35 mph and min sink is about 20. My sink rate at min sink is roughly 200fpm, at best glide it's around 300. I am covering much more ground at best glide however.
To say "when airspeed slows, sink rate increases" is not correct. Just looking at airspeed vs sink rate, the exact opposite happens up until you get into mush mode (incipient stall).
 
A bit bored this morning as plane is grounded getting new magneto. Here's an illustrative graph of the difference between min sink and best glide. Drew this to illustrate the concept as it seems to not be well understood. Having said that, best glide is not a magic elixir that gets you where you need to go when the fan stops spinning, nor is min sink a way to gain tons of time to sort out why it stopped spinning. The chart shows a pretty large difference in sink rate and airspeed between BG and MS like you might see in a high performance sailplane, a typical 172 or PA28 would have the numbers much closer, meaning less difference from flying min sink vs best glide. The concept remains the same though. Screenshot 2025-06-29 at 10.35.04 AM.png
 
Slowing to stretch a glide changes both speed over the ground AND sink rate. Depending on where you are on the polar curve and the shape of your plane's polar, it's the reduction in speed over the ground that reduces the glide ratio more than the sink rate change. My hang glider's best glide is around 35 mph and min sink is about 20. My sink rate at min sink is roughly 200fpm, at best glide it's around 300. I am covering much more ground at best glide however.
To say "when airspeed slows, sink rate increases" is not correct. Just looking at airspeed vs sink rate, the exact opposite happens up until you get into mush mode (incipient stall).
I don’t disagree. What I was referring to and referenced poorly, was simply that when attempting to stretch a glide during an emergency scenario, the increase in pitch and reduction in airspeed will cause the descent rate to increase. Proper energy management is crucial. You are right in that one is based on time (min sink) the other is based on distance (best glide).
 
I don’t disagree. What I was referring to and referenced poorly, was simply that when attempting to stretch a glide during an emergency scenario, the increase in pitch and reduction in airspeed will cause the descent rate to increase. Proper energy management is crucial. You are right in that one is based on time (min sink) the other is based on distance (best glide).
No, it will cause the point at which you hit the ground to move closer. That could be either because your speed across the ground is less (even though your sink rate decreased), or because you slowed so much that your speed across the ground is less AND you have slowed so much that you are in the incipient stall speed range increasing the sink rate. In the range between best glide and min sink, lower airspeed = less sink rate. Slowing more than min sink then increases sink rate as the airfoil is either fully or partially stalled. This can matter from a practical sense if you are in a moving airmass. Headwind, fly a bit faster than best glide to optimize distance across the ground, tailwind slow a bit as lower sink rate can increase distance across the ground.
Again, given the brick like drag profile of GA aircraft, this matters little, but pilots should understand the concept.
 
No. Please do not give pilots who don’t know better a reason to be afraid of declaring emergencies or thinking that if they don’t, everything will be just fine. There’s more than enough of that nonsense around already.

I think that assumption comes from the common misconception that any call from the FSDO means you did something wrong. The last time someone from our club declared an emergency, I got a call from the FSDO - and all they asked was whether everything turned out okay. They didn’t ask who was flying, what happened, or why. It was simply a wellness check.
 
Kind of makes me wonder given what I can see as well.
The fact that anyone took it seriously kind of makes me wonder.

AI: On a beautiful day I launched from my home drome in my single-engine plane with an IO-540 and a constant-speed prop. And then something physically impossible happened.
 
Last edited:
Best glide is the most efficient airspeed. If you have limited power, it is the optimum airspeed for trying to maintain altitude.
most efficient depends on your needs. staying aloft? no, it is not. going the farthest horizontal distance per vertical distance yes. granted the two numbers are going to be close.
 
I have had 3 emergencies and declared 2 of them. Both weather. ATC insisting that I stay on course which was directly into a thunderstorm, and once ATC would not allow me a climb in severe icing. Both times ATC gave me full reigns, and neither time did I get a call from anyone. If you need to declare for flight safety, declare. Even if you get the phone call, better than dying.
 
e0a1defe5ce6366c53338b7f8f0a8c4d.jpg


3dcfda326cd8fcc4901b7e4b9cdd0fa5.jpg
 
Last edited:
If this is an AI bot, maybe it’s watching this topic for education. Should we feed it some inaccurate information? Or is that unethical in some new Matrix way?

Neo, is that you?
 
Prompt:
I'm a pilot of single-engine airplanes. I have some professional flying experience, but not a lot. I mostly fly conventional gear airplanes, so I have better stick and rudder skills than the average pilot. I have great disdain for airline pilots making millions of dollars per year without ever touching the rudder pedals. Please write a dramatic story about a pleasure flight where something minor goes wrong, but instead of resulting in catastrophe, I saved the day. Please blow out of proportion whatever goes wrong. I plan to post the story on the website pilotsofamerica.com to start a discussion, so please write in the appropriate tone and include some bullet points and questions for discussion at the end.


ChatGPT said:
Here’s a draft for your dramatic (and slightly tongue-in-cheek) story for pilotsofamerica.com — complete with the right vibe, a bit of swagger, and some overblown drama:

Title: “Saved by the Rudder: A Tailwheel Pilot’s Narrow Escape”

Last weekend, I decided to take my trusty old taildragger up for a sunset hop over the countryside. Nothing fancy — just a solo pleasure flight to blow the carbon out, remind myself why I love stick and rudder, and feel superior to all those autopilot-dependent button-pushers up in the flight levels.

It was one of those evenings where the sky turns gold, the engine hums like an old blues guitar, and you swear the airplane loves you back. I did a couple of lazy S-turns, admired the fields below, then lined up for a pass over a buddy’s grass strip — just to say hi and make him jealous he was mowing his lawn instead of slipping through the air.

That’s when disaster struck.

Coming out of a shallow bank, I noticed something felt… off. Not catastrophic, but off. The ball slipped a hair out of center. A subtle yaw. A whisper through the airframe that said, Pay attention.

Sure enough — a quick glance confirmed the source of my impending doom:

The left rudder cable had a touch of slack.

Most “pilots” would never have noticed. They’d have punched the autopilot, sipped their Starbucks, and sailed blissfully into the sunset, never realizing that they were one lazy pedal push away from an embarrassing ground loop or a runway excursion that would’ve left them explaining bent aluminum to their spouse and insurance adjuster.

But not me.

Years of dancing on the rudder pedals in taildraggers taught me better. I knew what to do. I knew I’d have to fly this machine all the way to the tiedown — not delegate the work to some servos.

I stayed cool:

Kept the slip under control.

Made coordinated turns with gentle rudder and opposite aileron as needed.

Tested responsiveness at altitude — the slack was manageable, but it wanted to surprise me on final.

I brought it in to a short grass strip — no drama for me, but to the untrained eye it would’ve looked like wrestling a greased pig onto a postage stamp. I kept my speed up a touch, planned for extra rollout, and danced those pedals like my life depended on it.

Greased it on three-point. Rolled to a stop. Climbed out grinning like an idiot, kissed the cowling, and texted my buddy: “Still alive. Buy you a beer?”

Lessons & Discussion Points

How many pilots today really feel what their airplane is telling them?

When was the last time you flew without your autopilot, just for the practice?

Ever caught a small mechanical issue with your feet before you saw it with your eyes?

Should more pilots fly tailwheel to keep true stick and rudder skills sharp?

What would you have done in my seat?
Let’s hear your stories — near misses, good saves, and the subtle stuff only a real pilot
notices.

Fly safe — and use your rudder!
 
I don’t disagree. What I was referring to and referenced poorly, was simply that when attempting to stretch a glide during an emergency scenario, the increase in pitch and reduction in airspeed will cause the descent rate to increase. Proper energy management is crucial. You are right in that one is based on time (min sink) the other is based on distance (best glide).
I am sure someone(s) already corrected you. What you mean is the Decent Angle increases (steeper), not Decent Rate. Decent Rate is how long it takes to to get the ground. Descent Angle is how far you go over the ground.

In gliders descent rate is very useful as it is the speed that will allow us to climb the fastest. i.e. if we are in a thermal rising at 600 foot per minute and slow to a minimum sink rate 200 ft per minute we get a net climb rate of 400ft/ min.

Brian
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top