Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Practice engine failures in SEL
- Thread starter buckdanny
- Start date
- Watchers 13
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
BobSmith_av8r
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2004
- Posts
- 18
You're going to run into a number of uninformed folks who will act with outrage and shock that you'd ask that question. However, you ask a legitimate question. Most of those who would respond to you in disbelief are ones who have never taught students to land off-field, never made a dead-stick landing, and who have never had a true engine failure. In other words, they don't have any basis to talk. Sadly, they pass on that same heritage of inexperience to their students, who are then released into the world as a certificated pilot without ever having experienced these things. That should be criminal.
You need to consider your own limitations, as well as those of the airplane, the location in which you're flying, etc. Can you shut down using the fuel selector? Yes. But do you understand the implications of doing so?
When you shut down with the fuel selector, you are shutting off fuel to the engine, to the fuel pump, etc. You risk running a fuel pump dry, where most fuel pumps are fuel-lubricated. You also risk cavitating the pump (part of running it dry), possibly leading to difficulty in restoring prime or getting it to pump, and also leading to vapor lock during restart. If you're running a carburetor, you're risking running the float bowl dry, another potential problem. You shut off the fuel, and you risk valve failure with the inability to restart if the valve won't open, or the control shaft shears. It happens. You also risk dislodging debris at the valve itself, and sending it to the engine. This also happens, and can lead to a plugged injector, etc.
On the other hand, you have a more realistic engine failure that can be initiated when the student isn't looking, and which happens later when you're clearly not doing anything to cause it. It gives the student that all important dose of reality.
Anytime you simulate an engine failure, it's imperitive that you be prepared to land the airplane without power. Simply pulling the power without being fully prepared to carry through to a landing is not a responsible act. Suppose you can't restore power? You must be prepared, able, and confident enough to be able to make that off-field landing, or a landing on the site you have chosen. If you're not prepared and able to do this, then don't pull the power.
This applies weather you're fuel chopping with the selector or shutoff valve, with the mixture, or with the throttle/power lever. Regardless of how you simulate the engine failure, always be prepared to follow through with the landing in the event that power cannot be restored.
With this in mind, if you are able to execute a landing to a road, field, etc, then the issue of weather or not the engine can be restarted is really quite mute. Never allow the student to take you to a place from which you cannot extricate yourself. I've heard many instructors ignorantly state that they can't be sure of getting the airplane safely to a landing site if power isn't available. I'll bet dollars for doughnuts that none of them have ever had to...and they have the luxury of thinking like that. They simply haven't been awakened to reality yet.
The fact is that the instructor had better be able to get the airplane to a safe landing, with the outcome never in doubt, as it's part of the most basic minimum level of certification for a private pilot, commercial pilot, or flight instructor. In other words, it's expected that you and I can do this as a minimum level of performance. Setting forth doubt that it can be accomplished safely is doing nothing more than calling one's competence into question.
Back to the subject of simulated engine failures, killing with the fuel shutoff can be done, but you need to question your motives for doing so, your own limitations, those of the aircraft the nature of the system, the risks vs. the benifits for all of the above, the surrounding terrain and population and potential landing sites, etc.
If you're going to be conducting prolonged descents without power, then you'd better be landing...don't cool the engine like that and then add power to go around. Land, restart, let the engine warm back up slowly, and then go again.
I've known folks who experienced the fuel selector shearing off in their hand. They ran a tank dry and were unable to select another tank. Don't let that happen to you. Landing without access to a full tank is embarassing, and can be dangerous if you make bad choices.
I've seen airplanes that experienced a stuck mixture in the off position. One in particular stood out to me; it was a Cessna 152 that was used heavily for training. I was called to a satelite field to work on it, because the student and instructor couldn't get the mixture out of the cutoff position. There was so much grit in the cable housing that the mixture control couldn't be moved. The student had shut it down on the ramp during a cross country flight, and couldn't start. Imagine this happening in flight.
Again, you may not be able to restart the engine after simulating the engine failure. If you kill the engine with the mixture or the fuel shutoff/selector, it's not a simulated engine failure, but the real thing. Getting it back is a bonus, but don't expect it. Once you kill that engine, be fully prepared to execute a landing. If you're not prepared, don't kill that engine.
Conversely, simulating an engine failure with the throttle gives you a wider range of flexibility. I'll be the first to assert the fact that every student should experience genuine engine failures, and some should be to landings. However, when generally training for the engine-out, one should maintain the flexibility offered by keeping the engine running by simulating with the throttle.
Using the throttle helps keep the engine warm, gives instant feedback about the ability to recover (by adding small amounts of power), and gives you the flexibility to simulate a windmilling prop, or a stopped or feathered prop depending on how you set the power. If the engine works as it should, it also gives you more options for the landing site, going around at the end, etc.
The FAA would prefer that you use the throttle.
You need to consider your own limitations, as well as those of the airplane, the location in which you're flying, etc. Can you shut down using the fuel selector? Yes. But do you understand the implications of doing so?
When you shut down with the fuel selector, you are shutting off fuel to the engine, to the fuel pump, etc. You risk running a fuel pump dry, where most fuel pumps are fuel-lubricated. You also risk cavitating the pump (part of running it dry), possibly leading to difficulty in restoring prime or getting it to pump, and also leading to vapor lock during restart. If you're running a carburetor, you're risking running the float bowl dry, another potential problem. You shut off the fuel, and you risk valve failure with the inability to restart if the valve won't open, or the control shaft shears. It happens. You also risk dislodging debris at the valve itself, and sending it to the engine. This also happens, and can lead to a plugged injector, etc.
On the other hand, you have a more realistic engine failure that can be initiated when the student isn't looking, and which happens later when you're clearly not doing anything to cause it. It gives the student that all important dose of reality.
Anytime you simulate an engine failure, it's imperitive that you be prepared to land the airplane without power. Simply pulling the power without being fully prepared to carry through to a landing is not a responsible act. Suppose you can't restore power? You must be prepared, able, and confident enough to be able to make that off-field landing, or a landing on the site you have chosen. If you're not prepared and able to do this, then don't pull the power.
This applies weather you're fuel chopping with the selector or shutoff valve, with the mixture, or with the throttle/power lever. Regardless of how you simulate the engine failure, always be prepared to follow through with the landing in the event that power cannot be restored.
With this in mind, if you are able to execute a landing to a road, field, etc, then the issue of weather or not the engine can be restarted is really quite mute. Never allow the student to take you to a place from which you cannot extricate yourself. I've heard many instructors ignorantly state that they can't be sure of getting the airplane safely to a landing site if power isn't available. I'll bet dollars for doughnuts that none of them have ever had to...and they have the luxury of thinking like that. They simply haven't been awakened to reality yet.
The fact is that the instructor had better be able to get the airplane to a safe landing, with the outcome never in doubt, as it's part of the most basic minimum level of certification for a private pilot, commercial pilot, or flight instructor. In other words, it's expected that you and I can do this as a minimum level of performance. Setting forth doubt that it can be accomplished safely is doing nothing more than calling one's competence into question.
Back to the subject of simulated engine failures, killing with the fuel shutoff can be done, but you need to question your motives for doing so, your own limitations, those of the aircraft the nature of the system, the risks vs. the benifits for all of the above, the surrounding terrain and population and potential landing sites, etc.
If you're going to be conducting prolonged descents without power, then you'd better be landing...don't cool the engine like that and then add power to go around. Land, restart, let the engine warm back up slowly, and then go again.
I've known folks who experienced the fuel selector shearing off in their hand. They ran a tank dry and were unable to select another tank. Don't let that happen to you. Landing without access to a full tank is embarassing, and can be dangerous if you make bad choices.
I've seen airplanes that experienced a stuck mixture in the off position. One in particular stood out to me; it was a Cessna 152 that was used heavily for training. I was called to a satelite field to work on it, because the student and instructor couldn't get the mixture out of the cutoff position. There was so much grit in the cable housing that the mixture control couldn't be moved. The student had shut it down on the ramp during a cross country flight, and couldn't start. Imagine this happening in flight.
Again, you may not be able to restart the engine after simulating the engine failure. If you kill the engine with the mixture or the fuel shutoff/selector, it's not a simulated engine failure, but the real thing. Getting it back is a bonus, but don't expect it. Once you kill that engine, be fully prepared to execute a landing. If you're not prepared, don't kill that engine.
Conversely, simulating an engine failure with the throttle gives you a wider range of flexibility. I'll be the first to assert the fact that every student should experience genuine engine failures, and some should be to landings. However, when generally training for the engine-out, one should maintain the flexibility offered by keeping the engine running by simulating with the throttle.
Using the throttle helps keep the engine warm, gives instant feedback about the ability to recover (by adding small amounts of power), and gives you the flexibility to simulate a windmilling prop, or a stopped or feathered prop depending on how you set the power. If the engine works as it should, it also gives you more options for the landing site, going around at the end, etc.
The FAA would prefer that you use the throttle.
Always leave yourself "an out." I don't know what an AC might say but I can tell you that it does not make any sense to cage an engine unless you want to hold the all time record for dead stick landings as a pilot. Think about it a little. These students can do things you can't even imagine which causes you to react in ways that you never imagined you should. They will try to kill you, unknowingly.
Even in Army helicopter training many moons ago the IPs never shut the fuel off, even when we were practicing at a stage field with level ground to touchdown on. The autos were commenced with power to idle and a full touchdown, which I believe is now considered illegal. They found that they were losing more aircraft and crews in training this way than they lost in the field with actual engine failures. Keep in mind in a helicopter that rolling the power to idle provides no residual thrust during the autorotation.
Leave yourself and out and live to train another day! Heck you never know...you might live to get one of those coveted airline jobs!...sic.
Even in Army helicopter training many moons ago the IPs never shut the fuel off, even when we were practicing at a stage field with level ground to touchdown on. The autos were commenced with power to idle and a full touchdown, which I believe is now considered illegal. They found that they were losing more aircraft and crews in training this way than they lost in the field with actual engine failures. Keep in mind in a helicopter that rolling the power to idle provides no residual thrust during the autorotation.
Leave yourself and out and live to train another day! Heck you never know...you might live to get one of those coveted airline jobs!...sic.
Thanks for the replies. The reason I was asking this is because of the guy at our flight school who does all the checkouts. When I had mine last July, that's how he killed the engine on me and it made me very uncomfortable (we were over water too!) Then in the traffic he had me do a stall on the downwind.... The worst part is that he has thousands of hours. The guy is not a bad guy at all, as a matter of fact he has a lot of experience with aerobatics too. He really is one of the best pilots out there. I just believe he has a teaching style that is not of the safest. His justification is that most of the time engine failures happen because of a miss-ap with the fuel selector. I agree with everything you guys say, and I have always failed engines with the throttle (ME is a different story). Even if his argument is correct, I still think that he shouldn't touch the fuel selector, and just make sure the student includes it in the checklist or visual flow.
To keep a long story short, the subject was brought up yesterday with another school employee who was saying it's no big deal and perfectly legal, so I would like to find official FAA docs on that matter. I already have AC61-67C which take care of the stalls, but I can't find anything about the engine killing.
Buck
To keep a long story short, the subject was brought up yesterday with another school employee who was saying it's no big deal and perfectly legal, so I would like to find official FAA docs on that matter. I already have AC61-67C which take care of the stalls, but I can't find anything about the engine killing.
Buck
moving2vegas
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
- Posts
- 221
shut down using the fuel selector
Avbug brought up some good points and I agree buckdanny, turning off the fuel selector in flight would make me a little uncomfortable too. That said, I feel primary flight instruction regarding engine failures is pretty weak today. I know mine was. The school where I received my private was a school that trained mostly foreign students. I was able to attend basically because I pumped gas at the local FBO. Engine failures consisted of memorizing the emergency checklist, and touching the appropriate item in order. Mix, prop, throttle, gas, pumps, ect....The procedure was good but you never really learned to solve the problem. I've spoke to many pilots my age and they said similar things, basically emergencies weren't stressed enough. That was until my commercial instructor. He did alot of things that made me thing about a problem. One involved shutting off the fuel selector or leaning the mix while taxing out. Not a problem at an uncontrolled airport with low power settings. He had a thousand tricks like that and it came in handy a couple of times when passengers kicked the fuel selector and killed the engine on me in flight. I think this guy is trying to make a better pilot out of you (or thinks he is), but fuel selector kill and stalls on downwind seem a little excessive.
Avbug brought up some good points and I agree buckdanny, turning off the fuel selector in flight would make me a little uncomfortable too. That said, I feel primary flight instruction regarding engine failures is pretty weak today. I know mine was. The school where I received my private was a school that trained mostly foreign students. I was able to attend basically because I pumped gas at the local FBO. Engine failures consisted of memorizing the emergency checklist, and touching the appropriate item in order. Mix, prop, throttle, gas, pumps, ect....The procedure was good but you never really learned to solve the problem. I've spoke to many pilots my age and they said similar things, basically emergencies weren't stressed enough. That was until my commercial instructor. He did alot of things that made me thing about a problem. One involved shutting off the fuel selector or leaning the mix while taxing out. Not a problem at an uncontrolled airport with low power settings. He had a thousand tricks like that and it came in handy a couple of times when passengers kicked the fuel selector and killed the engine on me in flight. I think this guy is trying to make a better pilot out of you (or thinks he is), but fuel selector kill and stalls on downwind seem a little excessive.
midlifeflyer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2003
- Posts
- 2,092
- Base airport
- KTTA
bobbysamd
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 5,710
(Simulated) engine failures
I like Avbug's well-reasoned post. The long and short of it is one should never actually shut down the engine on a single while in flight. The only way to do it is distract the student, quickly pull on carb heat and retard the throttle. You can bring up power momentarily from time to time to keep the engine clear. But don't shut it down with fuel selector or mixture.
We had a Riddle instructor who actually was a pretty good instructor and a good guy who shut down the engine one time with a student. They landed on a dirt road. It's been too many years to remember the exact outcome, but I believe he claimed the engine shut down for no apparent reason. Or something. I don't recall him setting into trouble. Just the same, don't do it. Pull on carb heat and pull back the throttle to simulate engine failures.
I like Avbug's well-reasoned post. The long and short of it is one should never actually shut down the engine on a single while in flight. The only way to do it is distract the student, quickly pull on carb heat and retard the throttle. You can bring up power momentarily from time to time to keep the engine clear. But don't shut it down with fuel selector or mixture.
We had a Riddle instructor who actually was a pretty good instructor and a good guy who shut down the engine one time with a student. They landed on a dirt road. It's been too many years to remember the exact outcome, but I believe he claimed the engine shut down for no apparent reason. Or something. I don't recall him setting into trouble. Just the same, don't do it. Pull on carb heat and pull back the throttle to simulate engine failures.
WhiteCloud
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2002
- Posts
- 1,012
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
