Multiengine Dilemma

[rcaligan]

I read this article in the AOPA Instructor Report, and it got me wondering exactly what to do and when to do it. I've read this article and Bob G's book, and I'm trying to come up with a clear-cut "profile" of what to do and when.

It's been ages since I've flown a multi (back when an engine failure below V1 meant STOP and above meant GO), so I'm wondering what the more experienced multi pilots on here do. When do you make the decision to either go or land (even if it's off-airport?)

 

[gismo]

I read this article in the AOPA Instructor Report, and it got me wondering exactly what to do and when to do it. I've read this article and Bob G's book, and I'm trying to come up with a clear-cut "profile" of what to do and when.

It's been ages since I've flown a multi (back when an engine failure below V1 meant STOP and above meant GO), so I'm wondering what the more experienced multi pilots on here do. When do you make the decision to either go or land (even if it's off-airport?)

Well, technically that's still the definition of V1 on a balanced field, but most multi-piston drivers have come to realize that continuing on one before reaching Vyse with the airplane cleaned up is only practical if you are a few hundred pounds below MGW. common technique is to use the point where you raise the gear to mark the point where you are in a position to continue if one fails completely which is generally when you have attained Vyse with the gear up. Another suggestion is to start the takeoff roll with the fingers of your right hand in front of the throttles signifying that you should close the throttles if an engine dies and shifting that grip behind the throttles once you raise the gear (at or above Vyse).

 

[Dave Siciliano]

To add to what Lance said: on departure be ready to pull the throttles back until you take your hand off of them to raise the gear.

Example: begin takeoff roll--be prepared to retard throttles.

Continue roll until lift off (about 90 knots in my Baron), accelerate in ground effect a few feet off the ground or commence climb (depending on technique) still intending to retard throttles if there is an engine failure.

At blue line (which is about 110 knots in my plane) take hands off throttles, raise gear, change intention to continue flying if an engine fails.

As you can see, with a long enough runway, there is a very small time period between lift off and reaching blue line where one may be off the ground, but may need to immediately retard the throttles if there is a problem.

Of couse, accelerate stop distance can be computed in advance to know how much runay will be required to accelerate to lift off speed and immediatly retard the throttles and aggressively stop.

Best,

Dave

 

[bbchien]

Roy, I'm an extreme case. I have determined V1 for about 1000 differenct configurations, weights, winds, baros, and headwinds. I take V2 to be Vysse. If V2 is higher than V1, I usually don't depart. The exceptions have been Gaston's, and 6Y9.

Hands on throttles for the on-ground Engine failure abort. Hands on throttles to identity confirm the dead engine after rotation.

Always orally give the predeparture briefing even if solo. It spring loads teh response. It's like, "well yeah I know the W&B is OK" vs. "In the event of engine loss after rotation we are GOING", or "In the event of engine loss within 50 AGL we are pulling the throttles....."

 

[Dave Siciliano]

"In the event of engine loss after rotation we are GOING", or "In the event of engine loss within 50 AGL we are pulling the throttles....."

You've confused me Doc; were you rushed when imputing this?

Engine loss after rotation we are going seems inconsistant with loss within 50 AGK we are pulling the throttles.

Can you correct or 'xplain ;-)

At many recurring training centers, they are teaching keeping your hand on the throttles during the entire departure, removing them to lift the gear and that point being when the pull the throttles v. pull the bad one and keep on going is made. i.e.; before lifting the great it's pull the throttles; after gear up, one is to continue. Of course, the gear isn't raised until landing at the existing airport is no longer an option or above blue line.

Best,

Dave

 

[gprellwitz]

I take V2 to be Vysse. If V2 is higher than V1, I usually don't depart. The exceptions have been Gaston's, and 6Y9.

Bruce, in other words, if I'm there you disregard that rule?

And to bring it back to the topic, I was talking to my former flight instructor last night and he was saying that in the Lears he's flying they are still taking V1 as the take-off commit point. Of course, he also said that he gets 3000 fpm climb SE. Didn't ask about hand placement, though.

Not being multi-rated, I'm not qualified to offer my own opinion on it.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Grant:

The jets don't do the same thing our twin recips do; can't really compare them. I was with a friend other night that flies 320s; once they rotate, set pitch up, they are going--period--15 degrees nose up.

We don't really rotate. I just kind of take the weight off the front strut and let the plane climb when it's ready. My nose is up mabe 5 or 6 degrees, then I put it down to acelerate in ground effect.

Different engines; power ratios; engine locations, etc.

Best,

Dave

 

[gprellwitz]

Grant:

The jets don't do the same thing our twin recips do; can't really compare them. I was with a friend other night that flies 320s; once they rotate, set pitch up, they are going--period--15 degrees nose up.

We don't really rotate. I just kind of take the weight off the front strut and let the plane climb when it's ready. My nose is up mabe 5 or 6 degrees, then I put it down to acelerate in ground effect.

Different engines; power ratios; engine locations, etc.

Best,

Dave

That's a good point. I didn't know the original article dealt with propeller planes; it wasn't specified in Roy's note. I think my mind was still on the Comair flight.

My recollection of those time I was at the wheel of a twin was that I was told to basically just let it start flying, rather than do a true rotation. IOW, just what you described. Then lower the nose to accelerate to blue line.

 

[Fast n' Furious]

I fly an airplane that is a "tweener". The Beech 300 was certificated under SFAR 41 which is a mix of the best (or worst depending on your opinion) of FAR 23 and FAR 25. As a result, the airplane has a honest to goodness V1, Vr, and V2 but it also has many of the better known speeds and airspeed indicator markings of a lighter twin. The drill with this airplane is at V1 the hand comes off the power levers (hey....I'm going flying, see?), at Vr you get a two handed 10 degree rotation to the climb attitude and you climb at V2 to 400 AGL or better whether both Pratts are running or not. There are a few circumstances where I would seriously consider putting the airplane back down on the runway (explosion, fire, pestilence) but for the most part, I'm going flying.

 

[bbchien]

You've confused me Doc; were you rushed when imputing this?

Engine loss after rotation we are going seems inconsistant with loss within 50 AGK we are pulling the throttles.

Can you correct or 'xplain ;-)

At many recurring training centers, they are teaching keeping your hand on the throttles during the entire departure, removing them to lift the gear and that point being when the pull the throttles v. pull the bad one and keep on going is made. i.e.; before lifting the great it's pull the throttles; after gear up, one is to continue. Of course, the gear isn't raised until landing at the existing airport is no longer an option or above blue line.

Best,

Dave

The two statements are inconsistent. They represent completely different conditions: There are some runways, like Gaston's, where if we lose power just after rotation we are closing the throttles, period. Can't make the turn, can't make the gradient to above the dam.

There are some, like my home base 200 below gross (on most days), where V2<V1 and since I rotate at V2, if we're already 50 feet up (climb happens FAST at V2) we are going. At the home drone if we lose power just after rotation but less than 50 AGL, it's a draw. But I am set to do whatever I said just prior to throttles forward. Depends on who's with me.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Thanks! Don't mind me, I've consistantly had trouble with clear explainations by former nasal aviators ;-)

Best,

Dave

 

[Everskyward]

The jets don't do the same thing our twin recips do; can't really compare them.

Part of that is because they're certified differently. Accelerate-go is impossible in twin recips in many situations, especially when the gear is still down. If you're flying a jet certified under Part 25 you're not legal to take off unless you are at a weight where you are able to continue successfully if the engine quits at V1. Also the thought is that it's safer to deal with your problems in the air rather than try to stop after V1 since there's so much more momentum involved. You would only abort after V1 if the wing falls off or something and the airplane isn't structurally able to fly.

As far as the hand thing goes, you're supposed to take your hands off the throttles at V1 so that you have no temptation to pull them back. V1 is sometimes the same speed as Vr but many times not. Theoretically the worst time for the engine to fail is right after V1 while you're still on the ground, so that's where the engine likes to fail in the sim. Luckily there are no props to feather so you don't have to worry about that aspect of it. You just have to keep it straight on the runway until you get to Vr which is sometimes a challenge depending on the plane. If your engine has failed you climb at V2 which is a computed depending on your weight, which is somewhat like blue line although there is no physical blue line on the airspeed indicator. You bug the speed. You normally don't climb at V2 with two engines because you're through it in an instant and you would be climbing straight up.

Someone in the Comair thread mentioned the tiller which throws a new wrench into the hand thing. The tiller is a little 3-4 inch diameter handwheel on the left side of the left seat. At least the one I'm familiar with is. You use it to steer when you taxi and for the first part of the takeoff roll. Therefore, the left seat pilot always steers on the ground. When taking off the left seat pilot has their left hand on the tiller and their right hand on the throttles. The right seat pilot has their right hand on the yoke, correcting for x-wind if necessary. They are also making the callouts. At 80 knots the left seat pilot takes the yoke, "my yoke" and they've also transitioned to steering with their feet like normal. The rest of the takeoff is like in a jet without a tiller. Your right hand comes off the throttle at V1. If it's going to be the right seat pilot's leg to fly you switch control at 80 knots. I have never done this except in the sim to see what it's like since in our world the flying pilot always flys from the left, at least in the plane with the tiller (Hawker 800).

Yikes! I didn't mean to make this so long. Hope it makes sense...

 

[Henning]

I read this article in the AOPA Instructor Report, and it got me wondering exactly what to do and when to do it. I've read this article and Bob G's book, and I'm trying to come up with a clear-cut "profile" of what to do and when.

It's been ages since I've flown a multi (back when an engine failure below V1 meant STOP and above meant GO), so I'm wondering what the more experienced multi pilots on here do. When do you make the decision to either go or land (even if it's off-airport?)

Well, V1 doesn't really apply to light twins flown privately. As to what and when, that is really reliant on the individual situation, although more likely than not if I lose one on the ground in a light twin, I'll chop and stand on the binders. Rather go into the ground at lower energy than high. Most light twins just don't have a reliable SE climb gradiant. Once I lost one in a 310 about 1/2 second after rotation. I barely made it around.

 

[Henning]

Another suggestion is to start the takeoff roll with the fingers of your right hand in front of the throttles signifying that you should close the throttles if an engine dies and shifting that grip behind the throttles once you raise the gear (at or above Vyse).

Personal preference here, I transfer my hand to the props once I hit redline before I rotate, then go to the gear lever and right back to the props.

 

[Henning]

Hands on throttles for the on-ground Engine failure abort. Hands on throttles to identity confirm the dead engine after rotation.

I don't personally agree with verifying with the throttle on a departure failure. I use the prop. Pull back halfway, no change in sound pull her on back. Failure on rotation leaves you almost no extra time, gotta clean it up quick if you wanna stand a chance. Been there, done that.

 

[bbchien]

I don't personally agree with verifying with the throttle on a departure failure. I use the prop. Pull back halfway, no change in sound pull her on back. Failure on rotation leaves you almost no extra time, gotta clean it up quick if you wanna stand a chance. Been there, done that.

I think this is Okay too. But I used to have access to two near identically equipped Barons, a 64 and an 82. You know what what the problem is there. Just depends now confident and how fast you are.

I was sufficiently impressed that I fly 200 undergross unless I've got 4000 feet (at MSL). I'm always current but I am not THAT good.

 

[wesleyj]

Make it real simple, if you are flying a 310Q or older, an Aztec or Apache, a straight Baron, or just about any other light twin, below 400 feet on takeoff, you are going to pick a soft place, maybe, to crash. If you are inflight with any of these, you will make it to an airport without much problem if you know what you are doing.

If you are flying a late model 310 or a B model Baron, once the gear is in the wells and if you do everything right and at the right time, you will fly.

If you are flying a C model or later Baron, have moved your hand off of the throttles to retract the gear and again do everything the way it is supposed to be done, you will fly,

Of the light twins, none will accelerate to blue line on one, and only the C model or later Barons will consistantly go on one, at blue line.

Do not do as some suggest, hold blue line to 400 feet, in any except the C or later Barons, by the time you identify and put to bed the dead one, you will drop far enough below blue line and lose enough inertia that you will not be able to maintain altitude.

I wish that there was some way to convince the feds to use the prop theory instead of throttles to identify, makes it so much easier, quicker and safer, but who said that the feds ever do anything the smart way.

 

[jdwatson]

I wish that there was some way to convince the feds to use the prop theory instead of throttles to identify, makes it so much easier, quicker and safer, but who said that the feds ever do anything the smart way.

That's a nice straight forward post. Seems like there are only a handful of GA twins that will climb away at blue line.

I don't fly a twin (yet). Could you expound on the prop theory ?

 

[Dave Siciliano]

There is a great accident report I can try to dig up if anyone is interested; Baron guy that lost one right after lift off speed. It spun on the ground and stopped before the end of the runway; plane was trashed, but he walked away. Folks at SIMCOM emphasised it this year.

After study, it's obvious he lifted off and acelerated in ground effect. When he lost one, he was only a couple feet off the ground. Rahter than the fatal consequenses where one stalls the plane below VMC, drops a wing and augers in, he plopped back down on the runway.

That's my preferred departure procedure. With any decent length runway, I'm at blue line before I climb. Blue line, nose up and acelerate at 120 knots initially (above blue line); then 140 knot cruise climb.

Since I have 325 ponies on each side, I can climb at blue line on a standard day at gross, but if one doesn't feather, or I don't get it quickly enough, that's not going to happen. Fly straight ahead until the dead engine is properly secured; no turns until clean!!

Best,

Dave

 

[gprellwitz]

Part of that is because they're certified differently. Accelerate-go is impossible in twin recips in many situations, especially when the gear is still down. If you're flying a jet certified under Part 25 you're not legal to take off unless you are at a weight where you are able to continue successfully if the engine quits at V1. Also the thought is that it's safer to deal with your problems in the air rather than try to stop after V1 since there's so much more momentum involved. You would only abort after V1 if the wing falls off or something and the airplane isn't structurally able to fly.

To throw another wrench in here, how would the new VLJs stack up in this discussion? Like their bigger jet brethren, hopped-up light twin recips, somewhere in between, or we don't know yet?

 

[poadeleted20]

To throw another wrench in here, how would the new VLJs stack up in this discussion? Like their bigger jet brethren, hopped-up light twin recips, somewhere in between, or we don't know yet?

I do believe that as new multiengine jets, they are Part 25-certified, and will have to be operated as transport category aircraft, i.e., no brake release without balanced field length in front of the nose so throughout the takeoff, you can always either abort and stop from below V1, or rotate and fly from above it (if the plane is performing per the book and the pilot does it all properly and in a timely manner).

 

[Henning]

That's a nice straight forward post. Seems like there are only a handful of GA twins that will climb away at blue line.

I don't fly a twin (yet). Could you expound on the prop theory ?

I believe if you look at my posts near the top, you'll see.

 

[gismo]

That's a nice straight forward post. Seems like there are only a handful of GA twins that will climb away at blue line.

Actually most will indeed climb away at blue line if you acheve that speed with the gear (and flaps) up, the dead engine's prop feathered, and use the proper attitude including a slight bank into the good engine and the inclinometer about a half ball towards the dead engine. The typically insurmountable problem is to achieve that state (gear up, prop feathered, blue line airspeed) unless you are already above blue line with the gear in the wells when an engine packs it in and you are at or near MGW.

The point at which you can continue to fly really depends on how close you are to MGW. Fly a B55 or C310 a few hundred under MGW below 2000 DA and your chances of pulling it off are decent if you have a hundred feet to lose or have the gear up and are at blue line either way.

Take the weight down to something like 500 under MGW and my Baron will climb on one with the gear down if the prop is feathered. By myself with 100 gallons of fuel (900 under MGW) and I'd be tempted to continue if I was just barely in the air (provided I didn't have enough runway in front of me to land safely).

I don't fly a twin (yet). Could you expound on the prop theory ?

I think what Henning (and Wes) was talking about is using the prop control to verify the dead engine. The theory is that pulling the prop control part way back but not far enough to get near the feather detent (the slight resistance you encounter before the prop feathers). If the engine is producing significant power (the wrong one), the effect is a brief increase in yaw followed by slightly less yaw and a reduction in airspeed. If you do this on the dead engine you get an immediate lessening of yaw and a slight increase in airspeed. I've played with this a little and it seems to work, but I'm not a convert yet. The process is definitely simpler and less likely to be screwed up than the standard use of throttle to verify and the prop to feather. Transferring your hand from throttle to prop not only wastes time, it provides an opportunity to switch from the dead engine's controls to the good one.

 

[bbchien]

The point at which you can continue to fly really depends on how close you are to MGW. Fly a B55 or C310 a few hundred under MGW below 2000 DA and your chances of pulling it off are decent if you have a hundred feet to lose or have the gear up and are at blue line either way.

200 pounds makes a WORLD of difference.....

 

[poadeleted20]

The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

 

[bbchien]

The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

Like I say, I'm good, but I don't wanna know if I'm THAT good.

200 pounds. World of difference.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I do believe that as new multiengine jets, they are Part 25-certified, and will have to be operated as transport category aircraft, i.e., no brake release without balanced field length in front of the nose so throughout the takeoff, you can always either abort and stop from below V1, or rotate and fly from above it (if the plane is performing per the book and the pilot does it all properly and in a timely manner).

I may be wrong, but I believe the Eclipse is a Part 23 airplane.

It does however require operations under Part 91, subpart F, for (large and) Turbine-powered multi-engine airplanes. 91.503 requires that one-engine-inoperative climb performance data be on board and used, which pretty much means a-stop and a-go are normal takeoff requirements, just like the Part 25 jets. (at least, that's where I'm told it comes from in the Part 25 jets)

Fly safe!

David

 

[jdwatson]

I believe if you look at my posts near the top, you'll see.

Thanks, I didn't start at the beginning of the thread. I skipped around. I'll try it out in the simulator.

 

[Henning]

Thanks, I didn't start at the beginning of the thread. I skipped around. I'll try it out in the simulator.

In my experience, it saves around 3 seconds and a potential point for grabbing a wrong handle. In a failure on rotation, thats the difference between making it and not.

 

[gismo]

The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

How far back do you pull the prop (say your redline is 2600 and the bottom of the governing range is 2100)? I can't see 2100 RPM for a few seconds causing any engine damage in a normally aspirated engine. I would be a bit more reluctant to try that with a turbo though.

In any case if you manage to correctly identify the failed engine and then pull the other prop to feather, I think the engine would be just as stressed as if you pulled the prop first. Also in a true emergency (vs practice) I don't see any downside at all provided that verification via the prop control is as effective as using the throttle.

For me the biggest problem would be unlearning what I was trained to do (pull the throttle half way back to verify).

 

[poadeleted20]

How far back do you pull the prop (say your redline is 2600 and the bottom of the governing range is 2100)? I can't see 2100 RPM for a few seconds causing any engine damage in a normally aspirated engine.

You're sitting there a tad above blue line, trying to keep the plane upright and pointed front, and now you want to divert your attention to the tach to make sure you don't pull the prop back too far while "identifying"? Not, in my opinon, cool. I just don't see any real gain but I do see significant added risk.

 

[Henning]

The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

Please explain how I am going to damage the engine pulling back the prop enough to hear a response.

 

[Henning]

You're sitting there a tad above blue line, trying to keep the plane upright and pointed front, and now you want to divert your attention to the tach to make sure you don't pull the prop back too far while "identifying"? Not, in my opinon, cool. I just don't see any real gain but I do see significant added risk.

That's just it, you don't have to look inside for anything but blue line with the hands on the prop levers method. You pull back the handle 1/2 throw wait 1 second or until you hear a change in pitch then forward and switch if you do and all the way to feather if you don't. Saves precious time. Give it a try in a sim and check it out.

 

[poadeleted20]

Please explain how I am going to damage the engine pulling back the prop enough to hear a response.

You aren't, but that's not what I said. I asked what happens if you goof and pull the wrong throttle back too far. The answer is you get a yaw response, but the engine recovers when you push it up. OTOH, if you goof and pull the wrong prop control back too far, the good engine becomes another bad engine.

Further, if you teach folks to pull props back halfway, that's what they'll do, and they won't fully feather it. Do that for real and it can be the difference between climbing and descending. That's why I teach my ME trainees to pull the prop back until it stops -- and it's my job to stop it halfway back.

I'll stick with throttle, thank you.

 

[Henning]

You aren't, but that's not what I said. I asked what happens if you goof and pull the wrong throttle back too far. The answer is you get a yaw response, but the engine recovers when you push it up. OTOH, if you goof and pull the wrong prop control back too far, the good engine becomes another bad engine.

Further, if you teach folks to pull props back halfway, that's what they'll do, and they won't fully feather it. Do that for real and it can be the difference between climbing and descending. That's why I teach my ME trainees to pull the prop back until it stops -- and it's my job to stop it halfway back.

I'll stick with throttle, thank you.

Yes you did:
Originally Posted by Ron Levy
The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

Regardless, I don't agree with your assessment. When you pull back the throttle to verify that's 2 seconds before you start moving your hand (a potential point of error) to the prop (and a look inside) and start pulling back. 3 moves totaling 6 seconds before you have a feathered prop and a hand free to clean up the rest, as well as introducing a point of error while changing handles.

Using the prop handle, Pull halfway, wait 1 second for response, never take your eyes off outside, never remove your hand from the handle, then pull all the way bac till it stops. 2-2 1/2 seconds and a point of potential error eliminated. Had I used the throttle method on the 310 failure on rotation incident, I would not have cleared the trees by 5' as I managed to. In a cruise situation, it doesn't matter. It's the immediate take off failures where every second literally counts.

Try and keep an open mind and try it in the sim sometime. See how much time you can save. I average 3-4 seconds. I don't think the technique is any harder to teach to implement correctly and since it eliminates a failure point, may be easier.

 

[gismo]

You're sitting there a tad above blue line, trying to keep the plane upright and pointed front, and now you want to divert your attention to the tach to make sure you don't pull the prop back too far while "identifying"? Not, in my opinon, cool. I just don't see any real gain but I do see significant added risk.

But there is a physical detent at 2100 RPM on my plane so you wouldn't have to look, just feel. And BTW do you conduct the verify/feather without looking? Seems like that increases the chances of switching engines between the throttle pull and the feathering.

Anyway, I posed the question about going from 2600 to 2100 because that's as low as I would expect to go without looking due to the physical stop. And I suspect that it would be apparent that you had the wrong prop control long before you got anywhere near 2100.

 

[poadeleted20]

Yes you did:
Originally Posted by Ron Levy
The big problem with identifying via the prop control rather than throttle is that if you screw it up with the throttle, you may damage your shorts, but you can't damage the good engine, and that is not true for the prop control.

Well, I still think I said what I think I said, but since we now both know what I meant, we'll leave the sentence-parsing to the English teachers.

Regardless, I don't agree with your assessment. When you pull back the throttle to verify that's 2 seconds before you start moving your hand (a potential point of error) to the prop (and a look inside) and start pulling back. 3 moves totaling 6 seconds before you have a feathered prop and a hand free to clean up the rest, as well as introducing a point of error while changing handles.

My experience is that making sure you don't pull the wrong engine is more important than feathering the correct engine two seconds faster. If two seconds is going to make the difference, it's probably a "chop and drop" rather than "fly away" situation anyway, but if you hammer the good engine, you are definitely screwed no matter what.

 

[poadeleted20]

But there is a physical detent at 2100 RPM on my plane so you wouldn't have to look, just feel.

I can't speak to all twins, but there isn't one in a Cessna 401, Piper Apache, Piper Aztec, or Grumman Cougar, those being the only light twins in which I have any significant experience.

And BTW do you conduct the verify/feather without looking?

Absolutely not. I am, and I teach trainees to be, very deliberate about the identify/feather drill.

 

[Henning]

Well, I still think I said what I think I said, but since we now both know what I meant, we'll leave the sentence-parsing to the English teachers.

My experience is that making sure you don't pull the wrong engine is more important than feathering the correct engine two seconds faster. If two seconds is going to make the difference, it's probably a "chop and drop" rather than "fly away" situation anyway, but if you hammer the good engine, you are definitely screwed no matter what.

Again, I don't see where the method I advocate introduces a point of error in identification, actually it reduces a point of potential failure. If you always fly off long runways with flat clearings beyond, yes, chop and drop may be the best option, but my system does nothing to eliminate that option. When you are flying off of tight fields with big nasties off the ends, 2 seconds getting cleaned up is the difference between living or dying. I always train for the worst case.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Again, I don't see where the method I advocate introduces a point of error in identification, actually it reduces a point of potential failure. If you always fly off long runways with flat clearings beyond, yes, chop and drop may be the best option, but my system does nothing to eliminate that option. When you are flying off of tight fields with big nasties off the ends, 2 seconds getting cleaned up is the difference between living or dying. I always train for the worst case.

Henning,

How about this method? Add power for takeoff, hand positioned on front of throttles to retard in event of failure. When chop and drop is no longer an option, move hands to prop levers to prepare for identifying.

I thought it was possible to un-feather a prop too, if the associated engine is running?