Single Engine Go-Around in a Seminole (or other light twin)

[NoPax]

Gear down is the commit point. We used to practice ILS approaches to 50 feet because of this.

Yeah...took me a little while and a few 'experiences' to realise there is no rush in putting the gear down - and forget about flaps, completely unnecessary.

One engine inop, or in icing...gear comes down when I'm landing.

The original question about the go-around, reminds me of another thread, where someone asked 'what would you do if you had full flaps, and were running out of runway - force a landing, or risk going around into trees?'. The answer/technique is irrelevant, as both would involve a skill you didn't have to begin with - a "double negative". In the above situation, you'll either crash in the water, or crash trying to 'force' it on the runway, either way...........you're crashing.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

FAA says you will land in the first 1/3 of the runway or go around....period.

 

[CalifDan]

First 1/3?

I don' recall an FAR regarding the first 1/3 of the runway.

Many years ago I occasionally flew my Mooney into SFO. Kept up 130 knots until over the threshold and landed in the final 1/3 of 28R (I think thats it) with a quick exit at the end to Butler. The tower staff seemed to appreciate the blend and apparently they didn't know about the "rule" either, because they never asked me to call them.

 

[DC8 Flyer]

FAA says you will land in the first 1/3 of the runway or go around....period.

Not quite period. Single engine in a PA44 is an emergency situation. First 1/3 of the runway be damned. Of course if you are really caught up in it, you could always ask for a long landing.

 

[paid4training]

I fly a Duchess which is similar performance to the Seminole. Actually, my single engine service ceiling is higher, so rate of climb in this situation might be slightly better.

My Duchess manual says about 2000 feet to land over a 50 foot obstacle given the scenario you outlined prior to the wind shear. At 100' over the threshold, you aren't going to land on that runway even without the wind shear issue. This would be particularly true at 85 knots, however, I understand why you might want to stay at that speed. The decision to go around should be made much sooner. Strike One!

In this scenario you are at full flaps prior to having the runway made. 100' over the threshold on a 2500 foot runway is not having the runway made. Strike two!

Now you are down 3/4 of the runway at 40', 85 knots, and thinking time to go-around. You may well be in the water by the time you get up the power and take the hit from retracting that first notch of flaps. Are you sure you want to go for strike three?

When I was checking out in the Duchess my instructor did an engine cut on take-off at about 400 feet. Things went pretty well. The Duchess takes off with flaps up and all that really needs to be done is to get the gear up and secure the bad engine. In that scenario, the gear was already up and he set zero thrust. Slow climb to pattern altitude and I started setting up the approach. It was a nice Texas day with winds at about 30 knots gusting higher and not down the runway. Base was into the wind.

Gear down, first flaps on downwind, turn base, added the rest of the flaps on base and suddenly realized that this turkey was not going to get to the runway. I expressed that concern to the instructor and his response was "Well, what are you going to do?". I told him I needed to get rid of the flaps and he said "You better get going". I could not believe how much altitude I had to trade to get rid of the first 10 degrees or so of those flaps. We made the runway, but we would not have if I had left the flaps at full.

My personal opinion, if you decide to try the single engine go-around at the place and configuration you have postulated, be careful, watch out for VMC and make sure you ditch before you loose control. Your chances of striking out are very high, very very high.

If you ask me what I would do in that situation, I would tell you that I already made the decision to land when I put out the last of the flaps. Or, I would have gone around when I realized that I could not cross the threshold below 50 feet. The scenario you have created is the killer scenario.

Did he perform a drag demo to show you the difference in your sink rate/climb performance? During a drag demo you should see and hopefully the following info...

From clean slow flight you pull the left engine to "zero thrust" other engine to 20'. Put the gear down and notice the sink or climb rate increase power on good engine about 25'. Put the flaps down and add full power and notice the sink rate. Raise the gear and notice the sink rate with flaps out. Then after you put the gear up decrease left engine to idle to simulate windmilling prop. This would demonstrate the gear has less sink rate (due to assistance from keel effect) and the windmilling prop (adverse drag)the most sink rate with the flaps somewhere in the middle. During my trials I noticed the airplane (during the current Atomospheric conditions) my flaps did allow a sink rate and if you are close to the ground you need all the help you can get. During all my simulated engine out demos I never used flaps. Its all about speed control, maintain blue line all the way to the runway. Gear out at the last minute (of course allowing for the gear to go down and lock) runway made throttle back....etc

During the engine out proceedure you should establish blue line and hold it because it will give you the the best single engine climb rate...or at least in the pig I was flying. The duchess may have a different blue line speed but the proceedure is the same.

Just my .02 cents...

 

[CalifDan]

Flaps, Training, etc.

Ralgha,

I'm old school too. I've never earned an accelerated rating and I train to stay proficient in excess of any requirements.

The advice I was concerned about was the idea of a single engine go-around in the scenario that was presented. Some of the posters seem to ignore the fact that the scenario includes a 40 foot agl situation with an almost 900fpm descent. I don't think you are going to be successful and giving the advice to go for it is unrealistic.

Maybe you meant that anyone who can't handle the aircraft should not be in it, and to that extent I agree. If you meant that anyone who could not handle a go-around in the scenario provided should not be in the aircraft, well your bravado outweighs your good sense. If I took your comment wrong, I apologize.

I still feel that losing the flaps instantly (which can be accomplished in the Seminole) is dangerous, given the scenario. Again, 40 feet agl and almost 900fpm descent rate. I'm not sure if that is enough of a change in AOA to cause a stall, but coupled with a strong pull on the yoke (which it would take to arrest that descent rate) you may well stall. It's interesting that some of the responses to this question have ignored or overlooked the dynamics of the situation. In the scenario presented the aircraft can be on the runway with 1000 - 1500 feet remaining, why go around? In 1000 feet of heavy braking you can stop a Seminole or at least slow it enough you probably can make the turn at the end. Even if it isn't pretty.

Frankly, I'd rather loose one on takeoff than attempt a go-around in the scenario provided. At least on take-off I'm mostly heading the right direction and just need to clean up.

 

[lstorm2003]

That, to me, was the deciding factor.

Water usually doesn't have any obstacles out there unless you hit a bridge or oil rig...use the ground effect to clean it up at blue line and get climbing out.

Is it a slow climb? Yep. Should you have chose another runway? HELL yeah!

Is it doable? Most likely...depends on what the climb gradients are. I'd also be checking accel/go charts for my destination in that situation. If you're in the shaded area (such as in the Duchess POH), I'd be planning an "oh sh!t" alternate...just in case.

JMHO

-mini

There is no "accelerate go" published for the Seminole... That should tell you something...

 

[Ralgha]

Ralgha...Back in the early days of my flight training they used to do engine cuts on take-off as part of the multi-engine sylabus. Many of those were Twin Comanches and many of them crashed.

Yes, I'm aware of that. I don't know where in the takeoff process they cut the engine, but I do know that the twin commanche likes to levitate off the ground before reaching RED line, in which case you are well and truely screwed without some extremely quick action if an engine packs it in. Likewise, if you lose an engine during take off AT redline, or even at blue line, you have to be pretty quick on your toes to keep it under control. Regardless, it is COMPETELY beside the point, since in this scenario, you are LANDING, which near idle power, and you are bringing the power up to go around, not going from 100% power to 50% asymetrical power in the blink of an eye.

As I noted above, with 900FPM down, full flaps, and no you are not going to go "BAM" flaps gone, I think it is unlikely that you are going anywhere.

Oh really? Why not? You think it's not going to fly when you suddenly remove the flaps (you better be at blue line)? It will fly. You drop the flaps at adjust the pitch at the same time to maintain blueline. It will stay in the air just fine. Try it.

I'm surprised to see a CFI suggest that if you can't do it (the scenario) you should not be in the aircraft.

Are you from the school of thought that trains for the test and pushes them out the door? I'm not. I'm from the school of thought that you train them to until they're ready to handle reasonable abnormalities on their own, and this is one of those reasonable abnormalities. Sure it costs more, but if they know that up front, they don't have a problem with it, and many appreciate it. Of course if they don't stay in practice, then they might not be able to do it anymore, but that's beyond the CFI's control, and in that case I stand by what I said.

I can tell you that if you provided me that same advice on a training flight, I would discontinue our relationship and have a serious discussion with the flight school.

Which advice are you talking about? That you shouldn't be in the airplane if you can't handle it, or something else I said (which wasn't much)?