Always, Always, Always, Be Ready!

RyanB

RyanB

Super Administrator
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
16,524
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Display Name
Display name:
Ryan
We had an engine failure this morning in one of my buddies airplanes. He owns a 152 Aerobat that I'll take up every so often, and last night, was a calm, smooth evening so I figured I would take his airplane up. It was a nice low and slow local flight and operation was normal and routine as any other flight I have had. Run-up was normal and in flight operation was normal.

This morning around 10am one of the CFI's at my drome took it up with a student of his and they had a catastrophic engine failure resulting in a forced landing to a nearby field. Me being the last one to fly this airplane, has me wanting to spread the word to always, always, be ready and never get complacent, no matter how many different airplanes we can fly and how many hours we have in our logbooks, because it's certainly easy to. I'll be the first one to admit it.

Fortunately, the occupants are safe and the airplane doesn't have a scratch on it, other than a broken engine. I keep asking myself if I could have done as good of a job as my buddy did this morning bringing her down to a tee. He executed a textbook landing.

Ironically enough, I went out to another local airport last night and did a few power off 180's/ engine failure to landing maneuvers in it.

He has yet to determine a probable cause for the failure, but I'm certainly anxious to find out. It was a nice little aerobat, but it's an airplane I'll have to cross off my list for a few months.

Fly safe everybody!
 
Don't let it get to you. I have gotten out of a couple planes and on the next flight those planes crashed.

Glad to hear that Aerobat will fly again. I had a student that bought one to finish his training in. Fun little plane.

Oh, good to hear no injuries as well..!!
 
Zeldman said:
Don't let it get to you. I have gotten out of a couple planes and on the next flight those planes crashed.

Glad to hear that Aerobat will fly again. I had a student that bought one to finish his training in. Fun little plane.

Oh, good to hear no injuries as well..!!
Click to expand...
Yeah, it definitely becomes more real when you hear about things like this.

Thanking the Good Lord that both guys made it out without a scrape.

Here's the news clip for those interested.
http://newschannel9.com/news/local/small-plane-make-emergency-landing-in-field-near-highway-58
 
I fly with the mentality of not IF my engine will fail but rather WHEN my engine will fail.

That way when I actually land after a flight I am always pleasantly surprised!
 
Well, I'm guessing he won't be going to the 150-152 flyin next week in Clinton! But if he does he has to give a talk about his experience! Probably too soon though. Good news Ryanb.
 
More and more I do too, like every flight. As I depart uncontrolled fields in my area, I generally already know where the most favorable put-down spots are so I turn early toward them. For my home drome, on 22 it's pretty much straight out early on. On 4 a lot fewer options.
 
Shawn said:
I fly with the mentality of not IF my engine will fail but rather WHEN my engine will fail.

That way when I actually land after a flight I am always pleasantly surprised!
Click to expand...
I agree, that's the right way to think. I'm surprised, but then I'm not surprised as I do expect all of our club airplanes to have similar occurrences at some point. It just hits home when you were just flying the airplane and less than 12 hours later it's in a field after a catastrophic engine failure. Using this as a learning opportunity and to not let myself get complacent.

Within the past year or two, I have began to brief myself before takeoff, to solidify what I'll be doing if the fan quits during the initial climb, I just need to reiterate this during cruise as well.
 
iflyvfr said:
Well, I'm guessing he won't be going to the 150-152 flyin next week in Clinton! But if he does he has to give a talk about his experience! Probably too soon though. Good news Ryanb.
Click to expand...
Thanks buddy!
 
That's good news,

What if you land and take off at an airport with no suitable landing spots anywhere? :(

Do you think planning should start by the selection of an airport with suitable spots to put her down in case of engine failure?
 
FloridaPilot said:
That's good news,

What if you land and take off at an airport with no suitable landing spots anywhere? :(

Do you think planning should start by the selection of an airport with suitable spots to put her down in case of engine failure?
Click to expand...
Not much you can do to fix that. My advice in a situation like that would be to climb out at Vx to give you the most altitude as fast as you can gain it. That way if something were to happen, you have the most options (altitude wise) available. Some may disagree, but that's what I'd suggest.
 
That's the bad thing about my local airport...it's in the city so if you have an engine failure on takeoff your landing on a roof or a small back road...it's one reason why I flight a pretty tight pattern
 
Last edited:
When a 172 quits on climb out, it requires a real firm push to maintain airspeed; I keep that in the back of my mind, and also do a quick, SWAG compute of my minimum "turn back" altitude for the day's conditions - my home drome is surrounded by trees and wires and train tracks and etc.
 
In the middle if the Adirondacks where I fly there are not many great choices for emergency landing areas. Lots of trees and mountains. Rivers and lakes are abundant. Roads are sparse, and narrow. Climb and always start planning...

Glad to hear the C152 crew was thumbs up.
 
Ryanb said:
Not much you can do to fix that. My advice in a situation like that would be to climb out at Vx to give you the most altitude as fast as you can gain it. That way if something were to happen, you have the most options (altitude wise) available. Some may disagree, but that's what I'd suggest.
Click to expand...
You would climb at Vy to gain altitude as fast as you can.
 
MassPilot said:
You would climb at Vy to gain altitude as fast as you can.
Click to expand...
During the climb yes, but initially a Vx climb will give you the most altitude in the shortest distance, if something were to happen shortly after takeoff. I always climb out at Vy, but given an airport surrounded by a densely populated area and I may change that, at least for the first 1K feet or so.

I suppose arguments can be made for both and each could provide viable benefits in a situation as mentioned.

I worded the post wrong, that's my mistake. Mean't to say climb at Vx to gain the most altitude in shortest time.
 
Last edited:
Ryanb said:
During the climb yes, but initially a Vx climb will give you the most altitude in the shortest distance, if something were to happen shortly after takeoff. I always climb out at Vy, but given an airport surrounded by a densely populated area and I may change that, at least for the first 1K feet or so.

I suppose arguments can be made for both and each could provide viable benefits in a situation as mentioned.

I worded the post wrong, that's my mistake. Mean't to say climb at Vx to gain the most altitude in shortest time.
Click to expand...
Vx will not gain you the most altitude in the shortest time. That's Vy. Vx will gain you the most altitude in the shortest horizontal distance. I only use Vx if there is a concern of obstacle clearance. Otherwise I use Vy to gain altitude as fast as possible so I have more options if the engine quits early on.
 
MassPilot said:
Vx will not gain you the most altitude in the shortest time. That's Vy. Vx will gain you the most altitude in the shortest horizontal distance. I only use Vx if there is a concern of obstacle clearance. Otherwise I use Vy to gain altitude as fast as possible so I have more options if the engine quits early on.
Click to expand...
I know what I meant, I just use the wrong words to describe the two. Thanks for catching it.
 
Ryanb said:
I know what I meant, I just use the wrong words to describe the two. Thanks for catching it.
Click to expand...
I still have trouble seeing an advantage to Vx when it's not necessary for obstacle clearance.
 
Ryanb said:
Vx is used for obstacle clearance.


This.
Click to expand...
Lol we appear to be having some communication problems here. I meant that I didn't see the point of using Vx at times when there was no concern about clearing obstacles.
 
MassPilot said:
Lol we appear to be having some communication problems here. I meant that I didn't see the point of using Vx at times when there was no concern about clearing obstacles.
Click to expand...
The point that I was trying to make, if I can get my words right, is that if the departure airport sits in a suburban area with little to no options, than a climb at Vx will give you a greater amount of altitude over the shortest distance of ground traveled (I think I got that right this time) than a climb at Vy would. This would be done during the first 1K feet of altitude or so and then transition to a Vy climb, once you have some air underneath you.

Keep in mind this is just my hypothesis, and the course of action that I would take given this scenario. It makes sense to me anyway.
 
Ryanb said:
The point that I was trying to make, if I can get my words right, is that, if the departure airport sits in a suburban area with little to no options, than a climb at Vx will give you a greater amount of altitude over the shortest distance of ground traveled (I think I got that right this time) than a climb at Vy would. This would be done during the first 1K feet of altitude or so and then transition to a Vy climb, once you have some air underneath you.

Keep in mind this is just my hypothesis, and the course of action that I would take given this scenario. It makes sense to me anyway.
Click to expand...
I understand now. My concern is what happens if the engine quits after maybe 30 seconds. It may be too late to put it back down in the airport environment and you'll have less altitude to work with then if you climbed at Vy.
 
MassPilot said:
I understand now. My concern is what happens if the engine quits after maybe 30 seconds. It may be too late to put it back down in the airport environment and you'll have less altitude to work with then if you climbed at Vy.
Click to expand...
I suppose there's trade off's to each situation. In the end, it's all a crap shoot.
 
As said earlier in the thread, a Vx climb will keep you closer to the airfield environment, whereas a Vy climb will get you higher faster, but at the expense of getting farther away from the sanctuary of the runway.

By climbing at Vx, as was noted is used for obstacle clearance, I treat 700' AGL as an arbitrary obstacle. For my own personal comfort unique to my home drome, that will get me either back to the field or to a suitable off field landing site. Once above 700' AGL I transition to Vy, then to a cruise climb as needed.

Different approached for different scenarios/departure airfields, but in practice, this departure method has worked best for me in the airplane I fly.
 
Glad to hear this was a good outcome! Thanks for sharing, Ryan.

I ALWAYS climb out Vx for the first 700-800 AGL if not more (watching the temps). Here's a good (and controversial) article by Michael Church on the subject. However, I am a child of Sunrise Aviation "initial climb at Vx" theory, so I cannot resist.

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/safe-turnarounds/#.WXPH6oTyuHs

"...it's safer to climb as close as possible to the airport (Vx) than to stretch your climb out over a greater distance (Vy). If you insist at climbing at Vy, as you were almost certainly taught in primary instruction, no amount of skill in turning around is going to do much good: Vy climbs maximize altitude gain, but cover too much ground in the process. Experimentation will quickly demonstrate that an increase in climb efficiency is of no benefit if your angle of climb takes you so far from the runway that you can't glide back after a successful turn..."
 
3 in the green said:
Glad to hear this was a good outcome! Thanks for sharing, Ryan.

I ALWAYS climb out Vx for the first 700-800 AGL if not more (watching the temps). Here's a good (and controversial) article by Michael Church on the subject. However, I am a child of Sunrise Aviation "initial climb at Vx" theory, so I cannot resist.

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/safe-turnarounds/#.WXPH6oTyuHs

"...it's safer to climb as close as possible to the airport (Vx) than to stretch your climb out over a greater distance (Vy). If you insist at climbing at Vy, as you were almost certainly taught in primary instruction, no amount of skill in turning around is going to do much good: Vy climbs maximize altitude gain, but cover too much ground in the process. Experimentation will quickly demonstrate that an increase in climb efficiency is of no benefit if your angle of climb takes you so far from the runway that you can't glide back after a successful turn..."
Click to expand...
Well said and explains my theory well. Thanks for posting this. :)

TRocket said:
This is a good reminder...always keep this in the back of your mind
Click to expand...
Absolutely! Something I'm working harder at.
 
When discussing vx vs vy climbs, I never see anybody talk about staying in the pattern until pattern altitude. When I'm really concerned about having no options departing an airport, I turn crosswind at 500 feet and stay in the pattern until I've reached pattern altitude safely. Am I missing something? Why doesn't this seem to come up in these discussions?
 
Salty said:
When discussing vx vs vy climbs, I never see anybody talk about staying in the pattern until pattern altitude. When I'm really concerned about having no options departing an airport, I turn crosswind at 500 feet and stay in the pattern until I've reached pattern altitude safely. Am I missing something? Why doesn't this seem to come up in these discussions?
Click to expand...
If you're turning crosswind at 500 feet that's contradicting the AIM (yes I know the AIM isn't regulatory). If you are departing the pattern, you should climb to at least pattern altitude before turning and if you are remaining in the pattern you should start your turn within 300ft of pattern altitude.
 
jordane93 said:
If you're turning crosswind at 500 feet that's contradicting the AIM (yes I know the AIM isn't regulatory). If you are departing the pattern, you should climb to at least pattern altitude before turning and if you are remaining in the pattern you should start your turn within 300ft of pattern altitude.
Click to expand...
Even turning at 700 feet would give more options than continuing straight out. Maybe everyone assumes a by the book AIM takeoff so it doesn't need to be said. I doubt that though.

Again, if I'm concerned about options on departure, I'm going to turn at 500 feet to give me more options Regardless of what the AIM says.
 
Flying a slow climbing plane from an airport surrounded by forest as my home field is, I will often fly a full pattern to climb to an altitude I feel comfortable crossing the forest at.
 
jordane93 said:
If you're turning crosswind at 500 feet that's contradicting the AIM (yes I know the AIM isn't regulatory). If you are departing the pattern, you should climb to at least pattern altitude before turning and if you are remaining in the pattern you should start your turn within 300ft of pattern altitude.
Click to expand...

Can you point me to that in the AIM? I'm a low-time student still and haven't come across that. At the airport I fly out of they gave us turn at 500' (or sometimes sooner if the tower tells us to turn early when able for traffic).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
abqtj said:
Can you point me to that in the AIM? I'm a low-time student still and haven't come across that. At the airport I fly out of they gave us turn at 500' (or sometimes sooner if the tower tells us to turn early when able for traffic).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Quote from AIM: "If remaining in the traffic pattern, commence turn to crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300 feet of pattern altitude."

The AIM isn't regulatory. Do what ATC tells you to do.
 
Ryanb said:
Quote from AIM: "If remaining in the traffic pattern, commence turn to crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300 feet of pattern altitude."

The AIM isn't regulatory. Do what ATC tells you to do.
Click to expand...

OK, that makes sense...the way I first read his post was I had to reach pattern altitude before turning crosswind. I was thinking "that's gonna take forever with the density altitude here at 5300' field elevation!".

I should fully wake up before posting next time :D
 
Salty said:
When discussing vx vs vy climbs, I never see anybody talk about staying in the pattern until pattern altitude. When I'm really concerned about having no options departing an airport, I turn crosswind at 500 feet and stay in the pattern until I've reached pattern altitude safely. Am I missing something? Why doesn't this seem to come up in these discussions?
Click to expand...
If I'm climbing at Vx and I turn crosswind at 500agl and I lose an engine, I would have to make a very tight turn to put me back onto final, not to mention that 500agl isn't enough altitude to even attempt a turn back. Good setup for a stall spin scenario.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top