Landing Without Engine Power

TheTraveler

TheTraveler

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
685
Location
Valparaiso
Display Name
Display name:
TheTraveler
This came up in a conversation recently, and it's something that I have been extremely curious of...landing without engine power. Engine failure, out of fuel, or whatever the reason, as far as I've been told, it should technically be possible to glide, and land, any airplane without power.

What I would like to know is not in theory, but in practice and reality, how difficult is this to do?

I'm sure the debate could go on and on about where to actually land the aircraft if there isn't an airport or landing strip nearby. There's also the conversation about doing this at night, hoping that dark spot isn't a lake. I don't want to avoid those debatable variants, but the main question, making a few assumptions...

1. Controls are still intact, but engine has failed
2. It's daytime
3. You are in a relatively flat area, with few obstructions
4. You are in very reasonable weather

-How practical, and how difficult is it to actually land the plane without engine power?

-Does this differ with high-wing vs. low-wing?

-If you have done this, has it been a scary situation, trying to keep control without power? Or a calm, quiet situation, just kind of minding your own business, and gliding back down to land?

I am really interested in hearing what everyone says about this.
 
Knowing your airplane is a huge factor as well, how it reacts when the engine fails and how efficiently it glides at L/Dmax. For example, a C172R will glide like a paper airplane, while a PA28R-201 will glide like a rock. I have not personally lost an engine but I have done many a Power-off 180 and simulated engine outs by the field I fly from during my Pvt and Comm training.

My recommendation is, if you are coming in to an airport (say 5 to 6 miles out) and you begin to lose power, I would start looking for a field first and land only at the airport if you know you can make it. Always err on the conservative side when it comes to an engine out or partial power landing. You have no one to impress by getting to the airport, I think people will be more impressed to see you land without an engine safely anywhere and go home and see your family, rather than trying to make it to the airport and put your name in the annual NTSB report..
 
It is actually fairly easy.
My wife (with about a 100 hours) was flying left seat when our engine suffered a catastrophic failure at 1,000 feet. An airport about 4 miles away was surrounded by trees. It sort of looked like we might be able to make it, if we were lucky. Or we might die. So we chose a fairly straight piece of highway to put it down. She did it all herself, including talking to ATC and it was a great landing. The only problem was that when just before she was about to flair, a little red pickup was trying to pass us and we almost set down on its bed. She had to flare early and aim slightly to the left to avoid the power lines on the right side of the road, so she was forced into the median and then up on the other side of the road into oncoming traffic. Fortunately, they were able to see us and parted to either side and we went up the middle. But we did take out one road sign which caused about $8k damage to the leading edge on the left wing.

Once the clanging of the engine stopped, and that big windmill up front came to a dramatically sudden screeching halt, it was amazingly quiet and smooth.

The landing part was fairly easy. It was everything else going on at the same time that made it exciting.
 
Last edited:
It is very possible. I think you will be able to find quite a few stories of it acualy happening. Like the last poster said, knowing you aircraft is a big factor in the outcome i think. Knowing your glide ratio and just how it flies with the power off. Also it really depends on the terrain you are above. Flat farmland makes good sites, while mountainous terrain does not help. YOu get the picture. Good luck out there.
 
The time my Cherokee ate a valve, I glided to CVG from over lawrenceburg IN. Other than the intensity, it was not to exciting that I recall since my CFI was a bear on emergencies.

Just ran thru the emergency procedures and when that didn't do anything, I set up best glide speed and made it with altitude to spare. Almost too much altitude but with a 10000' runway, I just landed long.

I mentally run thru every emergency check list every preflight and always keep a emergency landing spot in view when VFR.

If you know what you are supposed to do, it should be a non event.

Cheers
 
I appreciate all the replies, I hope they keep coming. I won't say that losing an engine is something that I am always afraid of, but it is something that I'd like to be prepared for, I don't think it's something that is discussed as often as it should be with new pilots (my experience and opinion only) and these stories help.

I did think that the model of the plane made a difference, but I didn't know that the PA28 was so bad (like a rock? really?). So generally, would you say that high wings glide better than low wings? Why?

So far everything seems to have been fairly low altitude. What about up at 5000-7000? I'm under the impression that you can glide longer with a better chance of making it to an airport (172?) or maybe you just fall faster and it's more dangerous (PA28?). Thoughts?
 
X3 Skier said:
The time my Cherokee ate a valve, I glided to CVG from over lawrenceburg IN. Other than the intensity, it was not to exciting that I recall since my CFI was a bear on emergencies.

Just ran thru the emergency procedures and when that didn't do anything, I set up best glide speed and made it with altitude to spare. Almost too much altitude but with a 10000' runway, I just landed long.

I mentally run thru every emergency check list every preflight and always keep a emergency landing spot in view when VFR.

If you know what you are supposed to do, it should be a non event.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Now that's really interesting. Someone just posted that the PA28 glided like a rock during failure, but you are saying that it was pretty much a non event. What is different from yours or what you did compared to the PA28R-201 that supposedly doesn't glide well?
 
Altitude is always your friend. You have a proportionately longer glide and you have a better view and more time to pick a landing spot. The only problem is that it is harder to see features (like trees or power lines) at higher altitudes.
 
It is a skill you are required to develop before solo, and on which you are tested on your initial pilot certification (Sport/Rec/Private) practical test. It takes work to develop and practice to maintain, but it is a skill every licensed pilot has achieved, so as you start learning it, know that there are 600,000 of us out there who can do it -- you'll just be one more.

And the PA28 is not "like a rock" -- its power-off glide ratio isn't that different from any other plane in its class unless you get it significantly below the best glide speed, so just don't do that. But if you get a C-172 slow enough, it, too, will "drop like a rock." And it has nothing to do with whether the wings are on top or on the bottom (largely an aesthetic issue) -- it's all about the overall aerodynamics.
 
Without having the manuals here, I seem to remember that a cherokee glide ratio is about 6:1. And I think my Cessna ratio is about 9:1. In general, the proverbial rock is about "almost nothing":1
 
JOhnH said:
Without having the manuals here, I seem to remember that a cherokee glide ratio is about 6:1. And I think my Cessna ratio is about 9:1. In general, the proverbial rock is about "almost nothing":1
Click to expand...
I think your memory is faulty.
 
I'm glad that Cherokee thing got sorted out. If someone actually had the numbers it would be interesting to see.

I wasn't assuming that there was a difference in high wing vs low wing, but after the Cherokee comments I was just beginning to wonder.

My other suspicions seem to be confirmed...altitude is your friend, keeping up airspeed, most efficient glide speed, etc.

What stands out now is the comment about just one more pilot being able to do it, and one of the reasons I wonder about this so much...there was just another thread started a little while ago about a pilot who ran out of fuel, resulting in a fatal crash, which seems like something that happens a little more than it should.

I just don't understand why or how they cannot land the airplane if it's out of fuel, one of the reasons I brought this up.
 
Been there, valve issue going down the Oregon coast at night, glided to a small airport, didn't scratch the paint.

One aspect that will help is to do some off-airport landings with your CFI (using a proper plane for this, I.e. Not a 172 with wheel pants).

Remember airplanes don't know the difference between a airport and a road, or grass runway and a golf course (only in a emergency)

Depending on where you live, talk to some local backcountry pilots and get some info on some nice backcountry newbie places to land.
 
Last edited:
JOhnH said:
Without having the manuals here, I seem to remember that a cherokee glide ratio is about 6:1. And I think my Cessna ratio is about 9:1. In general, the proverbial rock is about "almost nothing":1
Click to expand...

Hm....I thought the cherokee was 10:1, but then, it's been many years since I went looking. Website www.av8n.com has this comment

"The lift-to-drag ratio of typical Skyhawk or Cherokee (in best-glide configuration) is about 10-to-1, which corresponds to an angle of six degrees."

Of course everything depends on configuration and weight. I remember in early training in a C172 the rule for engine out was to trim all the way back for best glide. When I moved to the cherokee, I tried the same thing - not the best idea. Unfortunately I don't know aerodynamics well enough to understand why it didn't work in the cherokee.
 
Last edited:
TheTraveler said:
I wasn't assuming that there was a difference in high wing vs low wing, but after the Cherokee comments I was just beginning to wonder.
Click to expand...
The original Cherokee wing (aka "Hershey bar" wing) was a constant chord, constant airfoil design with a significantly lower aspect ratio than tapered, twisted, and higher aspect ratio wing on the Cessna types with which it competed. This made many of the Cherokee's flight characteristics very different than the Cessna's, especially at high angles of attack. However, the later PA28's (Warrior, Archer, etc) with their longer, tapered wings, have more Cessna-like characteristics in that flight regime.

My other suspicions seem to be confirmed...altitude is your friend, keeping up airspeed, most efficient glide speed, etc.
Click to expand...
You got it.

What stands out now is the comment about just one more pilot being able to do it, and one of the reasons I wonder about this so much...there was just another thread started a little while ago about a pilot who ran out of fuel, resulting in a fatal crash, which seems like something that happens a little more than it should.
Click to expand...
In that case, an ounce of prevention (better flight planning and decision making) would have prevented the engine from failing -- take that one to heart.

I just don't understand why or how they cannot land the airplane if it's out of fuel, one of the reasons I brought this up.
Click to expand...
Panic, unsuitable terrain, lack of proficiency, you name it. The lesson to be taken from that one is not so much one of engine-out landing proficiency but rather making sure that your fuel tanks never fill with air.
 
TheTraveler said:
I'm glad that Cherokee thing got sorted out. If someone actually had the numbers it would be interesting to see.

I wasn't assuming that there was a difference in high wing vs low wing, but after the Cherokee comments I was just beginning to wonder.

My other suspicions seem to be confirmed...altitude is your friend, keeping up airspeed, most efficient glide speed, etc.

What stands out now is the comment about just one more pilot being able to do it, and one of the reasons I wonder about this so much...there was just another thread started a little while ago about a pilot who ran out of fuel, resulting in a fatal crash, which seems like something that happens a little more than it should.

I just don't understand why or how they cannot land the airplane if it's out of fuel, one of the reasons I brought this up.
Click to expand...

I would guess that things are kinda slow around your airport this time of the year (or maybe not, I dunno. They sure are around here!) Might be a great time to get a CFI and learn more about power-off landings.
 
Get a glider license first. Engines are stupid.
 
murphey said:
Of course everything depends on configuration and weight. I remember in early training in a C172 the rule for engine out was to trim all the way back for best glide. When I moved to the cherokee, I tried the same thing - not the best idea. Unfortunately I don't aerodynamics well enough to understand why it didn't work in the cherokee.
Click to expand...
That's a function of design of the aircraft and its trim system. The lesson there is about negative training transfer -- what works in one plane won't necessarily work in another, so make sure you know each plane you fly, and fly it the way it was meant to be flown.
 
Ron Levy said:
The original Cherokee wing (aka "Hershey bar" wing) was a constant chord, constant airfoil design with a significantly lower aspect ratio than tapered, twisted, and higher aspect ratio wing on the Cessna types with which it competed. This made many of the Cherokee's flight characteristics very different than the Cessna's, especially at high angles of attack. However, the later PA28's (Warrior, Archer, etc) with their longer, tapered wings, have more Cessna-like characteristics in that flight regime.
Click to expand...

Excellent explanation! Now I understand why I have a very different configuration for glide in the cherokee (hershey bar) than the C172 I used to fly.
 
Checking my POH for both a 172 and a Warrior (don't have my Cherokee one handy) shows ~14 miles for the 172 and ~15 miles for the Warrior from 8000 feet at best glide.

That said, usually the best emergency spot is the nearest good one. Trying to stretch it can be fatal. I had plenty of capability to make it to CVG and it was better than the local hills, Downtown Cincinnati or the Ohio River. ;)

Cheers
 
I land without engine power almost every time I land. Abeam the numbers the throttle goes to idle and I fly a 1/2 to 5/8 mile pattern.

I landed in Wiggins, MS once after a complete engine failure. Glided to the airport from 5 miles north & from 6,500' MSL. It was a non-event...

...well, except for cleaning my underwear.
 
I have had 3 engine outs in ultra lights, and practice engine off ( not reduced power) landing 3 -4 times a year. It is very possible to land a plane without an engine and do no damage what so ever.

There was a 747 (I think) that lost all engines going through a volcanic ash cloud and landed engines out on an island setting a world record for gliding a heavy in the process. Pretty sure he needed to change underwear also. ;)
 
I practice gliding sans power from cruise altitude at least once a year. No CFI ever did it with me, but I've always thought it a good exercise.
 
timwinters said:
I land without engine power almost every time I land. Abeam the numbers the throttle goes to idle and I fly a 1/2 to 5/8 mile pattern.

I landed in Wiggins, MS once after a complete engine failure. Glided to the airport from 5 miles north & from 6,500' MSL. It was a non-event...

...well, except for cleaning my underwear.
Click to expand...

Even at idle the engine is making power. It is close, but not the same as no engine. If you lose the engine altogether keep an eye on the airspeed. You will definitely need to put the nose down more to keep AS up. The prop is real draggy when not turning. ;)
 
ROFLMAO, Imagining the exhaust port from the two horses polluting your flying air.

The prop on the Arrow is like a speed break. Lots of drag.
 
Geico266 said:
There was a 747 (I think) that lost all engines going through a volcanic ash cloud and landed engines out on an island setting a world record for gliding a heavy in the process. Pretty sure he needed to change underwear also. ;)
Click to expand...

And there is the Gimli Glider, but that was a fueling mishap.

Those guys demonstrated slipping to a landing in a heavy as well! No fatalities, several minor injuries, repairable damage to the aircraft, after a double flameout over very remote territory (fortunately at very high altitude), landing on a racetrack.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
There was a 747 (I think) that lost all engines going through a volcanic ash cloud and landed engines out on an island setting a world record for gliding a heavy in the process. Pretty sure he needed to change underwear also. ;)
Click to expand...
They got all four restarted after exiting the cloud, although the landed on three.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9
The best lesson of all in that incident came from the captain, who made the following announcement: "Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get them going again. I trust you are not in too much distress." Like the WWII signs said, "Keep Calm and Don't Panic." The crew just ran all the checklists and procedures in a calm, orderly, British manner, and the situation was resolved successfully. One can only hope that if one faces the same crisis, one acts as professionally as Captain Eric Moody.
 
MAKG1 said:
And there is the Gimli Glider, but that was a fueling mishap.

Those guys demonstrated slipping to a landing in a heavy as well!
Click to expand...
Now that one really was a no-engine landing, although the windmilling engines provided hydraulic power to the flight controls.
 
Ron Levy said:
Now that one really was a no-engine landing, although the windmilling engines provided hydraulic power to the flight controls.
Click to expand...

It was the R.A.T. (Ram Air Turbine) that provided hydraulic power, not the windmilling turbine engines.
 
Ron Levy said:
Now that one really was a no-engine landing, although the windmilling engines provided hydraulic power to the flight controls.
Click to expand...

Turbofan engines will not turn the accessory section when the fan wind mills.

thus they will not provide any type of electrical or Hyd. power.
 
TheTraveler said:
Now that's really interesting. Someone just posted that the PA28 glided like a rock during failure, but you are saying that it was pretty much a non event. What is different from yours or what you did compared to the PA28R-201 that supposedly doesn't glide well?
Click to expand...

I was talking about a PA28R-201 or Piper Arrow, that one doesn't like to stay up there, it might be just the one I fly specifically, but I don't think so...
 
The Dakota (PA28-236) AIM glide chart shows about 7:1
 
Geico266 said:
There was a 747 (I think) that lost all engines going through a volcanic ash cloud and landed engines out on an island setting a world record for gliding a heavy in the process. Pretty sure he needed to change underwear also. ;)
Click to expand...

I think we are talking two different incidents here. There was a 747 that lost all engines over the Pacific due to flying through a volcanic ash cloud. They eventually got at least one engine, maybe all engines, (Don't recall) back online and landed with power.

There was an A-330 that had a dual flameout over the Atlantic in August of 2001. They glided for over 65 miles, starting from about 34,000 feet to a safe landing on the runway at Lajes.
 
timwinters said:
I land without engine power almost every time I land. Abeam the numbers the throttle goes to idle and I fly a 1/2 to 5/8 mile pattern.

I landed in Wiggins, MS once after a complete engine failure. Glided to the airport from 5 miles north & from 6,500' MSL. It was a non-event...

...well, except for cleaning my underwear.
Click to expand...

Living in ski country where the roads often close due to storms (and I've slept on the floor in a couple hotels) I learned to pack a toothbrush and clean underwear in the emergency bags for the airplane & the car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top