Could the avg ME pilot fly a SE ILS to minimums?

[apcooper]

Had always wondered if randomly called upon if the average Multi engine pilot would be able to fly a single engine ILS to minimums in a piston twin following an engine failure during cruise (an easy situation to handle compared to take off) This to me seems relatively simple assuming no icing conditions and having the training to know when to drop the gear so than you are using significantally less than full pwr w/ gear down to track the GS. I feel any ME rated pilot ought to be able to do this anytime no questions asked. In case you are wondering I firmly believe that a twin is A LOT safer than a single after an engine quits assuming the pilot has half a brain and not only keeps the speed above VMC but also Blue line. In all but the highest density altitudes he should be able to make an arpt provided he will pitch for blue line regardless of the desc rate it will give him!

 

[wingnutt]

ummm...ok, but if you park the spaghetti in the driveway, where will you deep fry the peanut butter sandwiches???

 

[172driver]

Why wouldn't they be able to? It's really no different than flying an approach with two engines...

 

[minitour]

If you can't... you should have your ticket pulled.

Exactly.

Part of the ME (Comm) PTS is a SE Approach and landing.

An approach vs. an approach to "minimums" is really the same thing, you just see less at "minimums"...

-mini

 

[DirtyBeech]

single engine to minimums is no big deal, but the missed approach can get exciting in less powerful twins.

 

[rumpletumbler]

The multi engine checkride was a no brainer. We did the oral walking out to the airplane. A few failures...demos...etc. and single engine ILS to wrap it up. Simplicity itself. All of my SE checkrides have been much harder than that.

 

[avbug]

A light twin may or may not have the performance to make it down the glideslope, or make it to the glideslope for that matter.

If the aircraft has the performance, of course the pilot must be able to fly the approach. If it's a light twin, flying to minimums isn't the issue; fly to a landing is, because attempting a single engine missed approach in a part 23 light piston twin is an utterly stupid thing to attempt. Minimums or not, with an engine out in a light twin, one is landing.

 

[R0NIN]

Was he really "Lucky?"

HA-HA

"My Multi engine checkride included a partial panel NDB approach single engine... you got off lucky."

Tell us more!!!! NDB approach/Single engine... Get off your soapbox!!

 

[rumpletumbler]

Ya.. but it was the NDB to New Smyrna FL... which is setup PERFECT for that "shoreline effect" that NDB's are notorious for... it just made for a harder checkride than it really needed to be...

Ohhhhhhhh Great Patmack! WE ADORE THEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! THOU AREN'T THE FINEST PILOT IN THE LANNNNNNNND!

 

[Caveman]

There is no requirement to be instrument rated to have an ME rating so I'm not sure why an "average' ME pilot should be able to fly an ILS to minimums.

Truth be told, unless they fly for a living, a typical instrument rated pilot is in over his head if he tries to fly an ILS to minimums. I know that comment is gonna piss off the weekend warriors on here but in my experience it's true. I'm not being critical of non-professional pilots. I used to be one, but most non-pro GA pilots just don't fly enough to be really safe and capable down to minimums. What usually results is a sloppy approach that they struggle to keep together and they manage to pull it off. Was the outcome ever in doubt? Usually. Most are never fully and completely stabilized, on glide, on speed and on course. This is a general statement and I'm sure there are exceptions. The problem isn't the pilots. The problem is the idiotic minimum requirements set forth by the feds to maintain currency. Current don't mean competent. Six approaches in six months? Even if you spaced them out and did one every 30 days isn't enough to be really competent. Once a week maybe. Donning flame suit......