The "Impossible" Turn, again (longish)

[jsstevens]

Well, I'm not trying to stir up debate. Really, I'm not.

Yesterday evening I went up with my current instructor (I have a PP-ASEL) to get familiar with our club's 1963 C-172. I fly our of Orlando Executive, KORL, a frequently pretty busy class D under the Class B shelf of Orlando International (KMCO). At 7:30PM there was no one around, so after a few mild cross wind landings, my instructor said "You've got this. Let's try some simulated engine failures." The tower cleared us for whatever we wanted on any runway (KORL has 7-25 at ~7000x150 and 13-31 at ~5000x100). Wind was 110-120 at 6-10kts.

So, after taking off from 7, at about 450' (a 145hp 172 with full fuel and 500 lbs. of pilots climbs in a leisurely fashion) we turned crosswind and as soon as I lifted the wing to look for traffic, he pulled the power. He said turn immediately toward the airport, which I did. I also dropped the nose after having read about how much you should be ready to PUSH when power fails during the climb out. He said "No. keep the nose in position to slow to and hold 65 mph." So with a 30 degree banked turn and holding 65, we glided back toward the the numbers on runway 25. When we got down to 100' or so it was clear I'd have made the taxiway or the customs parking area but not the runway. He restored power and I flew us down runway 25. I turned for a right crosswind at 500' (25 is right traffic due to the close 900' shelf of class B. Again he pulled the power and I continued my turn and headed for the numbers on runway 7. (I was using moderate bank angles here, somewhere around 30 degrees - I wasn't looking I was feeling what the plane was doing.) I held 65 mph and glided back. At ~200' and maybe 1/10 mile, I pulled all 40 degrees of flaps, turned to line up with the runway and made a normal crosswind landing.

This set of manuvers was very confidence building for me. I've got ~125 hours total time, with 120 or so in C-172's of various vintages. These exercises did not require extraordinary skill nor extraordinary manuvering control. They did require concentration.

As a disclaimer, I did this under the direction of a qualified instructor and we discussed what we were going to do first. We had tower permission. I learned what's necessary (and it was not what I expected - the push vs. hold to slow to target best glide speed). I do NOT recommend that anyone who has not PRACTISED this to use it in an emergency.

Please, no instructor bashing. I'm quite pleased with my choice at this point.

John

 

[EppyGA]

It as probably great to go through the exercise. I think a lot of folks believe it can be done. The issue comes when you do actually lose the fan and the adrenaline kicks in and how you react at that point. You always assumed during the exercise that when things were looking good you could push the throttle and go.

 

[poadeleted20]

Only thing I'd suggest is that you try that "impossible turn" maneuver a few times at altitude first just to get the feel of it (especially the necessary reaction to sudden loss of power in a climb attitude) with plenty of air between you and the ground, but based on your post, you seem to understand that one pretty well. The key is knowing just where to put the nose so airspeed will stabilize at best glide, and it sound like your instructor made that point clear to you during the maneuver.

And for instructors, it's a real good idea to give Tower a "heads up" before doing something like that. Yeah, in theory, tower should be able to handle a real engine failure, but there's no pilot training value and a lot of negatives in surprising tower as well as the trainee. Back in the pre-headset days, we could pick up the mike and tell tower what we were going to do without the trainee hearing it, but now it's hard to surprise the student who can hear what you're saying through the headset. If you really want to surprise the trainee, a phone call to tower before getting in the plane is a good idea.

 

[rpadula]

Sounds like a great lesson.

Next time, please bring a video camera and post the results for us.

 

[EdFred]

but now it's hard to surprise the student who can hear what you're saying through the headset.

The split com feature on the garmin 340 or PS engineering intercoms allow it.

 

[poadeleted20]

The split com feature on the garmin 340 or PS engineering intercoms allow it.

Even if the trainee is on the same freq?

 

[kgruber]

Well, I'm not trying to stir up debate. Really, I'm not.

>>>>I pulled all 40 degrees of flaps, turned to line up with the runway and made a normal crosswind landing.<<<<<

John

The POH for a Cessna "N" model states in Section 4 "Normal Operations."

"When landing in a strong crosswind use the minimum flap setting required for the field length."

So 40 deg. flaps would be abnormal, not normal on the long runways you were using.

 

[EdFred]

Even if the trainee is on the same freq?

Well, not in that case no. But if I am reaching up to hit the split com button, I'll hit the Com2 button to flip his headset over to whatever is dialed in on radio 2 at the same time.

 

[jsstevens]

The POH for a Cessna "N" model states in Section 4 "Normal Operations."

"When landing in a strong crosswind use the minimum flap setting required for the field length."

So 40 deg. flaps would be abnormal, not normal on the long runways you were using.

I don't think 6-10 kts is a strong crosswind. It was certainly no problem with 40 degrees of flaps last night.

Also, while it doesn't change your statement, this was a 172C.

John

 

[kgruber]

I don't think 6-10 kts is a strong crosswind. It was certainly no problem with 40 degrees of flaps last night.

Also, while it doesn't change your statement, this was a 172C.

John

What does your "C" owner's manual state about crosswind landings?

 

[nddons]

I'm not an instructor, so this is just based upon what I was taught, and what I've read.

At 450 - 500 ft AGL, I'm looking forward or at an angle for a suitable landing place. I'm not looking to make the runway, and I think a lot of people have been killed that way. Your training seems to reinforce that the appropriate course of action is to turn to the runway.

At 1,000 ft AGL, I think I'm safe to make the turn back to the runway. I understand there is a big gap between 500 and 1000 ft, where judgement would come into play.

I've read that an engine quitting on climb is significantly different than an engine pulled to idle, which is where the "push" idea comes into play, and airspeed drops off very quickly with a stopped engine. Even at idle, I think the windmilling propeller is producing some thrust (or at least minizing drag vs. a stopped prop.) Letting the airspeed decay to best glide sounds fine if the prop is at idle, but doesn't seem smart if the engine actually quits. Again, I could be wrong and would like to hear the exerts' opinions.

 

[poadeleted20]

Well, not in that case no. But if I am reaching up to hit the split com button, I'll hit the Com2 button to flip his headset over to whatever is dialed in on radio 2 at the same time.

Sounds like a good way to alert the trainee that something's about to happen.

 

[EdFred]

Sounds like a good way to alert the trainee that something's about to happen.

You underestimate my sneakiness.

 

[Palmpilot]

One of the planes in our club was damaged while an instructor was teaching this maneuver in the pattern. I heard that they hit an unexpected downdraft or something like that.

 

[poadeleted20]

One of the planes in our club was damaged while an instructor was teaching this maneuver in the pattern. I heard that they hit an unexpected downdraft or something like that.

It could have been worse.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20060118X00087&key=1

That's why I recommend learning and practicing at a safe altitude before trying it on a real takeoff.

 

[jsstevens]

I'm not an instructor, so this is just based upon what I was taught, and what I've read.

At 450 - 500 ft AGL, I'm looking forward or at an angle for a suitable landing place. I'm not looking to make the runway, and I think a lot of people have been killed that way. Your training seems to reinforce that the appropriate course of action is to turn to the runway.

No, my training was to look for a suitable landing spot within the aircraft's and my capabilties. We discussed landing in the lake (off the end of runway 7), on the overpass of Hwy. 50, in the grass green belts in line with crosswind leg, and other options. What he did want me to see is what the plane can do in my hands. I was surprised at how easy it was. I DO NOT advocate a turn back under all or even most circumstances. As a pilot I want a full box of tools to apply to any given situation and to make my coices based on the situation. My instructor also spent time reminding me that you can't even begin to think of this as an option until you really have a good feel for the slow flight envelope of this airplane - which he had already seen that I had.

At 1,000 ft AGL, I think I'm safe to make the turn back to the runway. I understand there is a big gap between 500 and 1000 ft, where judgement would come into play.

At 1000' and how far from the airport? Yesterday, in that C-172C, with full fuel and 500 lbs of pilots, I barely made 1000' AGL by abeam with the numbers for landing.

I've read that an engine quitting on climb is significantly different than an engine pulled to idle, which is where the "push" idea comes into play, and airspeed drops off very quickly with a stopped engine. Even at idle, I think the windmilling propeller is producing some thrust (or at least minizing drag vs. a stopped prop.) Letting the airspeed decay to best glide sounds fine if the prop is at idle, but doesn't seem smart if the engine actually quits. Again, I could be wrong and would like to hear the exerts' opinions.

Well, a stopped prop is actually less drag than a windmilling prop. And a dead engine with a windmilling prop is (as far as I know) the worst case. It is not the same as idling. Thanksfully, I have no direct experience with either a stopped prop or a dead engine.:wink2:

John