Engine Failure On Takeoff - 2 Cfi's At The Controls

[RefugePilot]

Right technique wrong application.

They went from 360 horse power to 0, very quickly. This would take a major pitch adjustment while trying to maintain the same airspeed. Loosing one engine would cause a significant pitch change, 2 engines a dramatic pitch change.

Chopping the power while at Vx or even worse Vy without pushing the nose over will cause or a dramatic sink rate or even a stall in any airplane. Try it in your trainer at altitude. Have a student Climb at Vy through 3000' AGL at 3100' chop the power and see how they react and how the plane reacts, now put the proximity of the ground and its related fear factor into the equation.

If you wanted to similate the needed pitch change to maintain sufficient airspeed, I would try it at altitude and keep the response needed in mind for the time you will need it.

Overall it was a successfull result, they survived and we have learned a valuable lesson at their expense. I am going to practice a Vx engine failure in a single and simulate that experience in a twin as soon as I can.

Learning from others' mistakes is the cheapest lesson you can have.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I am going to practice a Vx engine failure in a single and simulate that experience in a twin as soon as I can.

Learning from others' mistakes is the cheapest lesson you can have.

Things happen REAL fast when the engine quits at 50 feet and Vx in a single...don't ask me how I know, but no metal was bent

Fly safe!

David

 

[NoPax]

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoPax
First question (Mauleskinner) - prop should feather immediately, gear maybe takes 7 seconds.


It is a Seminole and I doubt it has autofeather. I ASS-UME you mean they should have been able to recognize and feather it immediately, right??

I know that Seminoles doesn't have autofeather same way that the gear isn't automatically going to retract into the wells either...I'm not a complete 'tard, however, after brining the lever to feather, the prop should go into feather instantaneously...no delay. Can't imagine they did though, since it was a flawed training exercise.

They went from 360 horse power to 0, very quickly. This would take a major pitch adjustment while trying to maintain the same airspeed. Loosing one engine would cause a significant pitch change, 2 engines a dramatic pitch change.

Very true. I was fortunate enough to start flying at a glider shool, and we'd practice cable snaps/early cable releases, and the first thing you'd do is point the glider at the ground, from about a 25º nose up attitude at around 100'.

Chopping the power while at Vx or even worse Vy without pushing the nose over will cause or a dramatic sink rate or even a stall in any airplane. Try it in your trainer at altitude. Have a student Climb at Vy through 3000' AGL at 3100' chop the power and see how they react and how the plane reacts, now put the proximity of the ground and its related fear factor into the equation.

If you wanted to similate the needed pitch change to maintain sufficient airspeed, I would try it at altitude and keep the response needed in mind for the time you will need it.

First off, I think chopping the power at Vx would be even worse than at Vy...but not by much. Isn't VSSE a limitation on the airplane...

I wouldn't try it at altitude, or anywhere for that matter...just safe to say

"In possibly the worst emergency you may ever face ie loosing an engine at 50 ft, gear down, and you choose to land on remaining runway, it will take a lot of skill, and more runway to save the airplane, and your skin."

Why do people have to prove this?

It's like "this airplane is not approved for aerobatic maneuvers" but people test that one too.

 

[ERAUGrad04]

For starters, I just want to say that this is a great thread.
Now with that said, let me put in my two cents. I agree with just about everything being said here. But I notice that there is one thing that is not really being addressed. When looking at horizontal distance from the point of engine failure (75ft) to the point to stopped on the runway; how long do you think that is? At the point of failure, the airplane does have quite a bit of inertia going upwards and is probably still accelerating. By the time one pushes the nose over and lands on the remaining runway and brings the aircraft to a stop, I would be willing to gamble that we are looking at a total distance that exceeds 3000ft. Now this estimate is for a Seminole. Greatly add to this number if you are in say, a baron or 421. I have around 400hrs of dual given in Seminoles and there was always one question that I would ask to students on departure:" What would you do if the engine quit right now." And "now" happened to be at about 75' with around 2000' or so of runway remaining. And without fail, every student said "I am going to land on the remaining runway." I flew with multiple instructors that said the exact same thing. If they attempted a landing from this position, we would have ended up making scrap out of the ILS antenna if it had been a real failure. And this was almost always in an airplane that was light. In all of these simulated situations (alt, weight, temp, etc.), the airplane would have climbed away at 150-200fpm without trouble. Climb to a safe altitude and return for a more normal approach.
Now with all that said, I think that we need to take a step back to the briefing. In the before takeoff briefing, you should pick a reference point that bears weight in the Go/No Go decision. Pretty much, if the engine quits after this point, were going. But it is important to back up that GO decision with performance charts and your own personal experience in that airplane.
Ok...one last thing. The Seminole POH does state that in the event of an engine failure with sufficient runway remaining, close BOTH throttles to IDLE and land on the remaining runway. In my opinion, this statement is setting people up for trouble. It says absolutely nothing about lowering the nose. I personally say:"In the event of an engine failure after rotation with sufficient runway remaining, I will PITCH for the remaining runway, ensure 3 green, and use power and flaps as necessary." PITCHING for the runway in this scenario is LOWERING the nose. That kills 2 birds with one stone. You have effectively lowered your Vmc speed and reduced the possibility of stall considerably.
I think what all of this boils down to is that it is very important to know your airplane, its limitations and your own personal ability.


ERAUGrad04

 

[MauleSkinner]

In the before takeoff briefing, you should pick a reference point that bears weight in the Go/No Go decision. Pretty much, if the engine quits after this point, were going. But it is important to back up that GO decision with performance charts and your own personal experience in that airplane.

...and if you select gear up at your go/no-go point (assuming it's in the air, which is almost always is for me in a Part 23 twin), all you have to do to clean up the airplane is feather the appropriate prop.

Fly safe!

David

 

[CalifDan]

Interesting Thread

This has been an interesting thread for me. Pretty much all my time is multi these days in and out of large and small runways (at least 2500 feet is my preference). The engine fail at 75 feet has always been interesting and I agree with the last few posts regarding the actual process necessary if you devide to abort. The pitch change would be dramatic twice...initially down and then up to arrest the resultant sink rate.

I wanted to share a process I use to determine the go decision. I was always taught that when you select gear up, that is the commitment to go. This bothered me a bit, because selecting was not absolutely defined. Is that when you first touch the gear lever, or after you move it, or slightly earlier or later? When I take off in my Duchess, I leave my hand on the throttles until I've decided that insufficient runway remains. When I first release the throttles, the gear is coming up and I am going to go even with an engine failure. Given the take-off configuration of the Duchess, at that point all that is necessary is to clean up the gear and feather the dead engine.

I briefed my Commercial Multi Examiner on this prior to our first take-off. He liked it. I think the primary issue is having a definite and consistent point at which you commit.

 

[RefugePilot]

Overall I would say these guys were succesfull in handling this emegency in that they walked away from it. Until now I would say I would go at 75 feet, but the thought of "I'd rather hit the fence at the end of the runway really slow than the house just past it very fast." comes to mind.

If they had hit the fence slowly as opposed to pancaking it in, I would say they were 100% succesfull at what they tried to do. We had an overweight C182 crash after takeoff at my airport last week. Nothing like a flaming field with a wrecked airplane in the middle to bring bad publicity to aviation. I imagine this incident we are now discussing did not get any media attention, what the FAA has to say about it, I'd like to know.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Thank god, an ERAU grad to steer us in the right direction.

 

[Tonala2k]

Another Factor

We've talked a bit already about knowing the planes performance with respects to Vyse, Vxse. But what about moments? When that engine fails how far above Vmc are you? If you have just rotated clearly you are above it. And if you're climbing you are even that much further above it. With gear down Vmc has dropped a few knots. Clearly directional control is not an issue as to go/ no go. As stated earlier it's about single-engine performance. But I digress.
The failure of the aborted takeoff appears to be A lack of understanding moments about the center of gravity. In most twins the center of gravity is bellow the center of thrust. They more than likely knew that once they cut throttle they would have to pitch for the runway, but their thrust was forcing their nose down in the first place. Once they lost thrust they lost nose down moment but were likely hoping the plane would automatically pitch down because of the loss of power. It would have taken only a couple seconds to over come this pitch change, the same amount of time to lower the flaps. (Now half their altitude is lost) In twins flaps are creating drag bellow the C.G. causing a nose down moment pitching the plane into the runway with no more altitude to recover with. I think they should have been able to save the plane as well as them selves, but it sounds like they were too interested in "let's find out." They should have taken more time on the ground before trying to push themselves and the plane to the limits.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Apples and oranges. ERAU is a UNIVERSITY!!!!

DCA is only an ACADEMY!!!

Come on now. Now who are you going to listen to.

 

[paid4training]

I just took my MEI check ride yesterday and the examiner pounded the sht out of me about these types of situations. The proper proceedure in the airplane I was flying in was: 1) if I loose an engine before lift off I will smoothly close the throttles and apply smooth braking 2) if I loose an engine after take off with runway remaining I will Land on the remaining runway and close the throttles and apply smooth braking. 3) if I loose an engine after takeoff with no runway remaining I will perform the engine out proceedure and based on my climb performance I will either land straight ahead or circle back to the airport.

He also wanted me to focus on establishing blue line BEFORE the gear or flaps come up. I did about four of these during the check ride...the first one was on roll out... the next one was 1100 feet agl, another was after vmc demonstration and the last was about 2 miles out from landing. I am proud to say I aced them all and did a kick a$$ vmc, drag demo, and steep turns etc.

Another point I want to make about this situation is why the hell were they doing those things that close to the ground. During my check ride we noticed another (very prominent)multi engine flight school landing and coming to a complete stop on the runway and then start the take off from beyond mid point on the runway. He made a comment that it was dangerous and stupid and that I should never do that with a student. His point was its stupid to use half the runway on a takeoff. If an incident like described earlier were to happen with that airplane they would pretty much be out of option 1 and 2 on the pre-take off briefing.


Every airplane has different single engine performance but factors of Vmc and single engine proceedures don't or shouldn't be altered.

Just my two cents...

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Overall I would say these guys were succesfull in handling this emegency in that they walked away from it. I imagine this incident we are now discussing did not get any media attention, what the FAA has to say about it, I'd like to know.

In this case the two CFI's had an emergency revocation of their certificates. One has quit aviation and the other is in the process of recertification.

 

[paid4training]

just a quick question on the aerodynamics of this situation. 75 feet so I am thinking ground effect is not helping, except for the poor decision of doing this in the first place, what would be the correct pilotage in this situation? Establish blue line go through the drill fly the airplane?

 

[dogismycopilot]

I would be interested to see what the NTSB has to say. A preiminary may be out already if this was recent. Care to post a date?

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

The go decision

just a quick question on the aerodynamics of this situation. 75 feet so I am thinking ground effect is not helping, except for the poor decision of doing this in the first place, what would be the correct pilotage in this situation? Establish blue line go through the drill fly the airplane?

If the pilot decides to continue the takeoff the procedure is simply:
1. Maintain directional control
2. Gear up
3. Pitch forward to maintain Vxse (or Vyse if that has already been obtained)
4. Verify failed engine (some people use throttle for verification but I prefer to verify the failed engine by retarding the prop control to partially back)
5. Then feather
6 Maintain Vxse or Vyse until obstacles are cleared.

Trouble shooting is not part or the time critical engine failuires that may occur at less than about 300 feet. At higher altitudes it would be prudent to slow down the pace a little to provide some minimum troubleshooting.