Cessna 182 Engine Failure

FloridaPilot

FloridaPilot

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
2,456
Location
Florida
Display Name
Display name:
FloridaStudentPilot
I just watched a You Tube video and it has a pilot that made a crash landing. What could've been done to prevent this? I noticed he didn't "Run up" the engine before take off. It also seemed like he didn't notify ATC by at least saying "Mayday" but he was so low he probably didn't have enough time. Just trying to learn the proper procedure.

Thanks in advance!

 
Last edited:
There was probably no ATC to talk to. The last thing he had time to do is tune to an approach if he's on a non-towered frequency. Not like they can do anything for him anyway.

He put the plane down just like you are trained to do.

The procedure is to get to your best glide speed as fast as possible, pick a place to put it down, and head there. If there's time, check fuel flow, mags, throttle, mixture, etc. to see if you can get it running again. If the engine is still dead, shut everything off. Pray and land.

The go pro or whatever camera distorts the picture and makes things look further then they are. That field he landed in had to be much closer then it appears in that video.
 
Last edited:
You'd need a heck of a lot more information to know what went wrong first in order to know what could have been done to prevent it. It's not going to be as simple as "he skipped one thing in the checklist."

Also, he absolutely did do a runup... he even said it outloud at about :35 into the video.
 
dukeblue219 said:
You'd need a heck of a lot more information to know what went wrong first in order to know what could have been done to prevent it. It's not going to be as simple as "he skipped one thing in the checklist."

Also, he absolutely did do a runup... he even said it outloud at about :35 into the video.
Click to expand...

Yep, I caught that watching it a second time!
 
FloridaPilot said:
I read the whole thread,

This happened in 2012. I wonder what happened to him and the plane!
Click to expand...

The plane is still flying and so are the owners, which are POA members too (a pair of brothers I believe). The airframe didn't suffer damage.

It was hydraulic lifter failure on one or multiple cylinders which caused partial power loss. There were ADs issued for hyd lifters on Contis a while back.

Friends don't let friends fly behind Contis, especially ice making ones. :D j/k
injected lyco guy here.
 
The microphone is not a flight control. If there is nothing that anyone on the ground can do to help at the critical moment, flying the airplane is priority one. The media never fails to amuse me with the "no distress call" blurb when the pilot(s) had their hands full solving the immediate problem.

If you are in cruise flight, hopefully with flight following, and find yourself in a situation that might lead to an emergency (lost, low on fuel, etc), the radio is certainly useful. You have time to tell ATC where you are (not necessary if you are on FF), the nature of the problem, and plan for an off-airport landing if that is called for. If you have just taken off and are short on altitude, airspeed, and/or ideas, forget the radio and do what needs to be done.

From the AIM:

6-1-2. Emergency Condition-Request Assistance Immediately

a. An emergency can be either a distress or urgency condition as defined in the Pilot/Controller Glossary. Pilots do not hesitate to declare an emergency when they are faced with distress conditions such as fire, mechanical failure, or structural damage. However, some are reluctant to report an urgency condition when they encounter situations which may not be immediately perilous, but are potentially catastrophic. An aircraft is in at least an urgency condition the moment the pilot becomes doubtful about position, fuel endurance, weather, or any other condition that could adversely affect flight safety. This is the time to ask for help, not after the situation has developed into a distress condition.

b. Pilots who become apprehensive for their safety for any reason should request assistance immediately. Ready and willing help is available in the form of radio, radar, direction finding stations and other aircraft. Delay has caused accidents and cost lives. Safety is not a luxury! Take action!

I might add, since I am on my soapbox, that declaring an emergency takes the regulatory handcuffs off of ATC...they have certain limitations on their actions under normal circumstances but all bets are off when you say the E word. BTDT.


Bob Gardner
 
Last edited:
Yeah.

The comments on the video are funny. One guy is arguing over and over that he made some huge mistake not announcing an emergency.

I love YouTube "aviation experts."
 
Bonchie said:
Yeah.

The comments on the video are funny. One guy is arguing over and over that he made some huge mistake not announcing an emergency.

I love YouTube "aviation experts."
Click to expand...

youtube is proof positive not everybody should be allowed to vote.
 
FloridaPilot said:
I just watched a You Tube video and it has a pilot that made a crash landing.
Click to expand...

That wasn't a crash landing, it was a successful off airport emergency landing.

You should always be prepared to execute one.
 
hindsight2020 said:
The plane is still flying and so are the owners, which are POA members too (a pair of brothers I believe). The airframe didn't suffer damage.

It was hydraulic lifter failure on one or multiple cylinders which caused partial power loss. There were ADs issued for hyd lifters on Contis a while back.

Friends don't let friends fly behind Contis, especially ice making ones. :D j/k
injected lyco guy here.
Click to expand...

Yep, we're still flying. Have my first BFR scheduled for tomorrow in this plane. Glad this happened to my brother and not me. :yes:

And this was at an uncontrolled airport in a rural area. Declaring an emergency and/or making a mayday call was at the bottom of the priority list here.
 
Last edited:
Every takeoff I've made since that day has come with the expectation that the engine is going to miss the same way it did on 10/23/2012. I'm a more confident pilot because of it.

Every move i made was instinctive. I only remembered my thought process after watching the video. My initial disbelief eliminated the option to dump everything and put it back on the runway. Banked right to ponder the taxiway to 35 option, but decided unable, so went to work on the engine thinking water in fuel. Knew at this point i had the pipeline and field south of me. Sputtered again once i got the throttle wide open, and banked left to position myself over the pipeline clearing (i always had a putdown option). Throttled up one last time only to get my biggest miss of the event. Expletive and time to try to make this a soft landing.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

Didn't check the carb heat, didn't check the primer lock. Neither wouldve helped given the lifter issue, but should be automatic. If it happened the same way again, i still would not have made a radio call.
 
Last edited:
funkster9 said:
Every takeoff I've made since that day has come with the expectation that the engine is going to miss the same way it did on 10/23/2012. I'm a more confident pilot because of it.

Every move i made was instinctive. I only remembered my thought process after watching the video. My initial disbelief eliminated the option to dump everything and put it back on the runway. Banked right to ponder the taxiway to 35 option, but decided unable, so went to work on the engine thinking water in fuel. Knew at this point i had the pipeline and field south of me. Sputtered again once i got the throttle wide open, and banked left to position myself over the pipeline clearing (i always had a putdown option). Throttled up one last time only to get my biggest miss of the event. Expletive and time to try to make this a soft landing.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

Didn't check the carb heat, didn't check the primer lock. Neither wouldve helped given the lifter issue, but should be automatic. If it happened the same way again, i still would not have made a radio call.
Click to expand...

Amazing landing might I add. I read on the You Tube post that you are going to be more involved in the Maintenance of the Airplane. What exactly did you mean by that?

Thanks for your post!
 
Funkeruski said:
Yep, we're still flying. Have my first BFR scheduled for tomorrow in this plane. Glad this happened to my brother and not me. :yes:

And this was at an uncontrolled airport in a rural area. Declaring an emergency and/or making a mayday call was at the bottom of the priority list here.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you didn't let that incident stop your flying.
 
FloridaPilot said:
Amazing landing might I add. I read on the You Tube post that you are going to be more involved in the Maintenance of the Airplane. What exactly did you mean by that?

Thanks for your post!
Click to expand...

Only had my ticket for 15 months when that happened and only the most basic understanding of airframe and powerplant. I have really focused my efforts on learning the mechanical aspects of owning an airplane. Start with Mike Busch's free webinars on Saavy website. Also, the mechanic section of this and other boards are so valuable.

I'd love to start owner assisted annuals someday, but personal time in too much demand right now
 
Last edited:
funkster9 said:
Every takeoff I've made since that day has come with the expectation that the engine is going to miss the same way it did on 10/23/2012. I'm a more confident pilot because of it.

Every move i made was instinctive. I only remembered my thought process after watching the video. My initial disbelief eliminated the option to dump everything and put it back on the runway. Banked right to ponder the taxiway to 35 option, but decided unable, so went to work on the engine thinking water in fuel. Knew at this point i had the pipeline and field south of me. Sputtered again once i got the throttle wide open, and banked left to position myself over the pipeline clearing (i always had a putdown option). Throttled up one last time only to get my biggest miss of the event. Expletive and time to try to make this a soft landing.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

Didn't check the carb heat, didn't check the primer lock. Neither wouldve helped given the lifter issue, but should be automatic. If it happened the same way again, i still would not have made a radio call.
Click to expand...

My phrase for this is "constructive paranoia." Accept the fact ahead of time that on THIS takeoff, the/an engine is going to quit. Have a plan ready for when it happens. Aviation physiologists tell us that there are four stages in an emergency: confusion, recognition, denial, and action...they add up to about seven seconds before any action is taken. If you accept the fact that an engine will fail and have a plan in mind, that shrinks to about one second between failure and action (if you think that one second is a short time, I volunteer to stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for one second).
I've never had a takeoff emergency in a single, but have had five "events" in twins; each time, I was ready for it.

A corollary for landing is to assume that every landing approach will result in a missed approach/go-around...then you won't be operating on wishful thinking as you float off the end of the runway.

Bob Gardner
 
funkster9 said:
Every takeoff I've made since that day has come with the expectation that the engine is going to miss the same way it did on 10/23/2012. I'm a more confident pilot because of it.

Every move i made was instinctive. I only remembered my thought process after watching the video. My initial disbelief eliminated the option to dump everything and put it back on the runway. Banked right to ponder the taxiway to 35 option, but decided unable, so went to work on the engine thinking water in fuel. Knew at this point i had the pipeline and field south of me. Sputtered again once i got the throttle wide open, and banked left to position myself over the pipeline clearing (i always had a putdown option). Throttled up one last time only to get my biggest miss of the event. Expletive and time to try to make this a soft landing.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

Didn't check the carb heat, didn't check the primer lock. Neither wouldve helped given the lifter issue, but should be automatic. If it happened the same way again, i still would not have made a radio call.
Click to expand...

It totally makes sense to be involved in the Maintenance of your own airplane because at the end of the day it's YOUR life at stake, (Also whomever you fly with as well).
 
bobmrg said:
My phrase for this is "constructive paranoia." Accept the fact ahead of time that on THIS takeoff, the/an engine is going to quit. Have a plan ready for when it happens. Aviation physiologists tell us that there are four stages in an emergency: confusion, recognition, denial, and action...they add up to about seven seconds before any action is taken. If you accept the fact that an engine will fail and have a plan in mind, that shrinks to about one second between failure and action (if you think that one second is a short time, I volunteer to stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for one second).
I've never had a takeoff emergency in a single, but have had five "events" in twins; each time, I was ready for it.

A corollary for landing is to assume that every landing approach will result in a missed approach/go-around...then you won't be operating on wishful thinking as you float off the end of the runway.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Bob,

Care to elaborate what happened in the twin? Many people told me on here that twins are more "Safe".
 
FloridaPilot said:
Bob,

Care to elaborate what happened in the twin? Many people told me on here that twins are more "Safe".
Click to expand...

I don't know what happened with Bob's planes, but:

Twins ARE much more safe, right up until there is a problem with an engine. Then the safety of twins plummets off the chart. Insurance rates have finally caught up with this reality instead of the wishful thinking about "if one engine goes out, you still have one left to fly on."

As he is still here to tell us about them, Bob apparently was practiced, proficient and ready when the events happened. Many twin owners are less practiced and prepared, hence the bad safety record.
 
FloridaPilot said:
Bob,

Care to elaborate what happened in the twin? Many people told me on here that twins are more "Safe".
Click to expand...

They're not. But the reason they're not safer, is because the average recreational pilot is generally lousy at those skills on an on-demand basis, especially when in IMC. It's politically incorrect to say it, but it's true. They're simply not consistently exercised enough to deal proficiently for such an eventuality, as a demographic. At that point they're no better off than the guy trimming the single engine bird to a dead stick off-runway "landing", in fact worse off as they either Vmc it or crash it on its temple.

I'll be completely honest with ya. Single engine approach to single engine go-around in IMC single pilot is straight up WORK and a bad enough day that would put most commercial operators on sweat alert. Those cocky enough to deny it are lying to ya. No way I'm not doing that recreationally. Can I do it? Sure. Do I want to do it? Hell no. I got "flip flops on my mind" when I fly man, this stuff is supposed to be fun on my days off. :D

Ways to mitigate general suckage at multi-engine emergency for the weekend warrior? 1)Don't do IMC on it. 2) Fly well undergross. 3) Takeoff and land from retarded long runways. Presto. Even the most cockeyed dummy can keep it coordinated enough to swing it back around VMC, chop the good engine and land it dirty side down, if all you do is stick to #1. You'll probably live long enough to sell the thing too.

We have a couple twin contributors on here who probably fly enough to keep themselves honest in IMC or short departure engine loss. Do I think they're reflective of the twin owner/operator sub-demographic they belong to? Nope. And if they're honest with themselves they'll probably admit it.
 
This forced landing was done under optimum conditions. Sort of a walk in the park. Much different if lots of trees, rocks or water had been on the menu. And why would he converse on the radio? To explain his theories on why it had quit? To say he was scared? It certainly was not a crash landing but rather a landing.
 
Last edited:
FloridaPilot said:
Bob,

Care to elaborate what happened in the twin? Many people told me on here that twins are more "Safe".
Click to expand...

Twins ARE more safe....in just one situation: If one engine fails, the airplane is controllable and can be flown to a safe (or, at least, survivable) landing. OTOH all of the costs of single engine flight are doubled...it's a toss-up. These days, I would opt for a nice turbo single over a twin if'n I had to choose.

I had an engine failure in flight in a 421 at 14,000 feet, caged the prop and landed safely; I was IFR, so there was no need to do anything with ATC other than to tell them that my trip was going to be cut short. I did not transmit any kind of distress signal.

I had an engine failure in a P-Navajo climbing through 400 feet after taking off from Oakland in the wee small hours. As I went through the well-rehearsed scenario of feathering the prop the engine came back to life and I continued on to Seattle...it was a fuel controller problem forcing the engine to consume more fuel than it was willing to swallow all at once. Pulling the mixture back as part of the securing process solved that problem.

I recall two occasions on which it became apparent during the takeoff roll that either I was not getting enough boost from the turbo on one side or I had a sticking waste gate and aborted in plenty of time. A few more minutes of warmup and all was well. It's all about being mentally ready.

Bob
 
hindsight2020 said:
They're not. But the reason they're not safer, is because the average recreational pilot is generally lousy at those skills on an on-demand basis, especially when in IMC. It's politically incorrect to say it, but it's true. They're simply not consistently exercised enough to deal proficiently for such an eventuality, as a demographic. At that point they're no better off than the guy trimming the single engine bird to a dead stick off-runway "landing", in fact worse off as they either Vmc it or crash it on its temple.

I'll be completely honest with ya. Single engine approach to single engine go-around in IMC single pilot is straight up WORK and a bad enough day that would put most commercial operators on sweat alert. Those cocky enough to deny it are lying to ya. No way I'm not doing that recreationally. Can I do it? Sure. Do I want to do it? Hell no. I got "flip flops on my mind" when I fly man, this stuff is supposed to be fun on my days off. :D

Ways to mitigate general suckage at multi-engine emergency for the weekend warrior? 1)Don't do IMC on it. 2) Fly well undergross. 3) Takeoff and land from retarded long runways. Presto. Even the most cockeyed dummy can keep it coordinated enough to swing it back around VMC, chop the good engine and land it dirty side down, if all you do is stick to #1. You'll probably live long enough to sell the thing too.

We have a couple twin contributors on here who probably fly enough to keep themselves honest in IMC or short departure engine loss. Do I think they're reflective of the twin owner/operator sub-demographic they belong to? Nope. And if they're honest with themselves they'll probably admit it.
Click to expand...


Your posts are funny, yet informative....Thanks!
 
bobmrg said:
I had an engine failure in flight in a 421 at 14,000 feet, caged the prop and landed safely; I was IFR, so there was no need to do anything with ATC other than to tell them that my trip was going to be cut short. I did not transmit any kind of distress signal.
Click to expand...

Bob,

Thanks for your input. Due to the fact that you were up pretty high why wouldn't a quick call to ATC help? Doesn't ATC send authorities to your location? (I'm just trying to understand) Suppose it didn't turn out how you expected and you were hurt? Would ATC send people to find you?

Again, just trying to understand what to do!
 
It's up to the pilot, I probably would declare an emergency if I shut one down, or at least notify ATC, but so far it hasn't happened to me. :D

FloridaPilot said:
Bob,

Thanks for your input. Due to the fact that you were up pretty high why wouldn't a quick call to ATC help? Doesn't ATC send authorities to your location? (I'm just trying to understand) Suppose it didn't turn out how you expected and you were hurt? Would ATC send people to find you?

Again, just trying to understand what to do!
Click to expand...
 
hindsight2020 said:
They're not. But the reason they're not safer, is because the average recreational pilot is generally lousy at those skills on an on-demand basis, especially when in IMC. It's politically incorrect to say it, but it's true. They're simply not consistently exercised enough to deal proficiently for such an eventuality, as a demographic. At that point they're no better off than the guy trimming the single engine bird to a dead stick off-runway "landing", in fact worse off as they either Vmc it or crash it on its temple.

I'll be completely honest with ya. Single engine approach to single engine go-around in IMC single pilot is straight up WORK and a bad enough day that would put most commercial operators on sweat alert. Those cocky enough to deny it are lying to ya. No way I'm not doing that recreationally. Can I do it? Sure. Do I want to do it? Hell no. I got "flip flops on my mind" when I fly man, this stuff is supposed to be fun on my days off. :D

Ways to mitigate general suckage at multi-engine emergency for the weekend warrior? 1)Don't do IMC on it. 2) Fly well undergross. 3) Takeoff and land from retarded long runways. Presto. Even the most cockeyed dummy can keep it coordinated enough to swing it back around VMC, chop the good engine and land it dirty side down, if all you do is stick to #1. You'll probably live long enough to sell the thing too.

We have a couple twin contributors on here who probably fly enough to keep themselves honest in IMC or short departure engine loss. Do I think they're reflective of the twin owner/operator sub-demographic they belong to? Nope. And if they're honest with themselves they'll probably admit it.
Click to expand...

Here we go again:hairraise:, and once again all of the points made can be applied to the recreational SE pilots or any pilot for that matter. How many don't practice for engine out landing or any of the other skills the they should maintain. The bottom line is we all need to maintain our skillset, whatever skills makes it up. We achieve that through practice.

The OP did a wonderful job and I'm sure learned a lot about himself in the process. Glad he is still flying.:yes:
 
FloridaPilot said:
Bob,

Thanks for your input. Due to the fact that you were up pretty high why wouldn't a quick call to ATC help? Doesn't ATC send authorities to your location? (I'm just trying to understand) Suppose it didn't turn out how you expected and you were hurt? Would ATC send people to find you?

Again, just trying to understand what to do!
Click to expand...

I was already talking to ATC....that's part of the IFR game. My location at the time was over the Lewiston, ID VORTAC, so sending someone there would not have made much sense. As PIC, I didn't ask, I told...ATC that I was going to land at Lewiston...it was only six miles away and I had to maneuver in the descent to lose altitude. (Side note: My passenger was a WWII veteran who was a member of the Caterpillar Club....he had been forced to bail out of his plane over Germany.)

Twins are perfectly capable of flying on one engine, so it was more of an annoyance than an emergency. I was going to land on a paved runway at a tower-controlled airport, so getting hurt was not part of the scenario.

What to do? Keep talking to ATC all the way down...if you are not already talking to them (flight following is your friend as a VFR pilot), get on 121.5 and make contact. Squawk 7700 if you think it necessary...I did not because it was not an emergency in my mind.

The gap between us is experience. I had several thousand hours logged at the time...you are just getting started; what seemed routine to me would certainly not be routine to you, and it shouldn't be.

Bob
 
I have 25 multi-engine hours, and already had a partial engine failure on departure (about 200 AGL)!

Fuel controller sending too much fuel. Started running smooth again during "verify" as I brought the throttle back. Making 50% power on that engine, we still only made it to 500 ft in the pattern.

Went around the pattern and landed.
 
dans2992 said:
I have 25 multi-engine hours, and already had a partial engine failure on departure (about 200 AGL)!

Fuel controller sending too much fuel. Started running smooth again during "verify" as I brought the throttle back. Making 50% power on that engine, we still only made it to 500 ft in the pattern.

Went around the pattern and landed.
Click to expand...

Damn, that [performance] sucks.
 
This is a great discussion. I will no longer fly to an unfamiliar airfield without looking at the satellite imagery and planning as many "places to put her down" as possible. Once you're at a cruising altitude the options are generally more abundant, but in this critical stage of flight the time you take finding a place to land can be critical.
 
What about the salt flat? We're just looking for survivable here..
 
dans2992 said:
What about the salt flat? We're just looking for survivable here..
Click to expand...

Salt flats can be soft, too, if wet. You can't see that from the air.

The point is that you can't really tell from a satellite, and it might be difficult to tell from the air from any altitude except very low, where you're already committed.

It's remarkable how hard it is to make out airplane sized things from the air, let alone smaller stuff like rocks. Above 1000 AGL, you are going to have a very tough time.

If I didn't know about that site -- there have been some crashes there -- I might have tried an emergency landing there based on the view from above. I don't think that terrain is survivable.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
Satellite imagery can be very unreliable. It will find the trees, but not the soft ground or even some very rough rocks.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm missing your point? He's making an effort to learn what he can about the area in the immediate vicinity of the airport with the tools he has available, until he has an opportunity to verify it once airborne. Sure satellite imagery can be misleading, but having an initial plan needing only verification is better than no plan at all. :dunno:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top