Engine Failure During Slip

RoscoeT said:
Since there's no evidence of this, this falls into "gut feel" opinion stuff. Your opinion is noted. Everyone has them, and they are wide-ranging.
Click to expand...

I don't feel a need to make a career of reviewing NTSB files. The FAA for some reason has concluded that a stabilized approach is the best way to handle routine landings.

You said earlier that there is " NO cost" to being high and slipping, although this thread was started by someone who lost engine power due to slipping.
 
vintage cessna said:
I don't feel a need to make a career of reviewing NTSB files. The FAA for some reason has concluded that a stabilized approach is the best way to handle routine landings.
Click to expand...

You are free to live your life to the letter of government advisories if you like.

vintage cessna said:
You said earlier that there is " NO cost" to being high and slipping, although this thread was started by someone who lost engine power due to slipping.
Click to expand...

Aircraft familiarity issue. Lesson learned for him.
 
vintage cessna said:
I don't feel a need to make a career of reviewing NTSB files. The FAA for some reason has concluded that a stabilized approach is the best way to handle routine landings.

You said earlier that there is " NO cost" to being high and slipping, although this thread was started by someone who lost engine power due to slipping.
Click to expand...

And in that incident, he did not have the selector positioned to the high tank. That was either a gap in training, or in POH knowledge, or an oversight. It was NOT due to using a slip and creating a hazardous situation.

Slips are one of those really "dangerous" things that some pilots fear, like spins or flying a taildragger. Fear of the unknown, mostly. Using a slip to get down sooner is far better than running off the end of the runway or some other high and fast approach accident. Such accidents are far more common than anything arising from any slip. Ballooning, wheelbarrowing, porpoising, overruns, loss of direction control--all caused by too much speed or altitude on final and a reluctance to slip or go around.

Dan
 
vintage cessna said:
Whatever. I just don't think it is a good thing for the average pilot to adopt a stategy that higher is better on approach as a hedge against an engine failure. What little risk that is mitigated is more than offset by the gain of risk.
Click to expand...

What risk is gained in this scenario?

I don't think we're talking about people wanting to be hundreds of feet high on approach, we're talking about being on the "high side" of a normal approach, maybe 50' or so difference in the last half of the final.
 
vintage cessna said:
A lot of mishaps don't generate NTSB reports. What happens, not infrequently I think, is that when someone realizes they are running out of runway they force it on and subsequently experience a " mishap " or incident.
Click to expand...

Most people that approach a little high and use slips regularly don't "run out of runway"...they hit the normal touchdown zone like everybody else. That's *why* they slip!
 
bullwinkle said:
What risk is gained in this scenario?

I don't think we're talking about people wanting to be hundreds of feet high on approach, we're talking about being on the "high side" of a normal approach, maybe 50' or so difference in the last half of the final.
Click to expand...

If you're only 50 feet high, you don't need to slip. Slow up a couple of knots or remove power. Oh wait, you eliminated that last control. So, remind me why that's a good thing? To prove your "thing" is bigger than other pilots'? Engine failures in the pattern are exceedingly rare.
 
Wow, the simple statement that slips work well and are preferred by some pilots really challenges the manhood of other pilots!
 
Here's the tail end of a practice engine out where I turned base in too close and ended up waaaay high - far higher than the GoPro makes it seem - and did a maximum effort slip to make it down:

(go to 5:50 or thereabouts)


Just another tool to have in one's bag of tricks!

https://youtu.be/dhauE4oUeE0?t=5m53s
 
Last edited:
Here's one of my failed attempts at self-extinction.


Doesn't look unstable to me.
 
Last edited:
FastEddieB said:
Here's the tail end of a practice engine out where I turned base in too close and ended up waaaay high - far higher than the GoPro makes it seem - and did a maximum effort slip to make it down:

(go to 5:50 or thereabouts)


Just another tool to have in one's bag of tricks!

https://youtu.be/dhauE4oUeE0?t=5m53s
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that you drop the right wing. I almost always drop the left wing as it gives me a better view of the runway.

Of course, I don't have a big bubble canopy and don't sit on the centerline, either! :idea:
 
bullwinkle said:
Here's one of my failed attempts at self-extinction.

Doesn't look unstable to me.
Click to expand...

Nor me. Nice job.

As a minor quibble, as a general rule I'd make sure full flaps wasn't getting the job done before slipping to supplement them - unless a plane has some prohibition on slipping with full flaps.

But like I said, a general rule - not meaning to criticize.
 
FastEddieB said:
Here's the tail end of a practice engine out where I turned base in too close and ended up waaaay high -
Click to expand...

That comes down better than I'd have expected. Little floaty on landing though. :)

I might have turned base a little close here. I never get tired of this.

 
MAKG1 said:
I guess you never fly with passengers.

There is definitely a cost.
Click to expand...
How extreme of a slip do you need???

I mean really. I slip all the time with my wife and kids in the Waco. They have yet to freak out or express any concern.....but then I am not doing anything extreme.
 
vintage cessna said:
Whatever. I just don't think it is a good thing for the average pilot to adopt a stategy that higher is better on approach as a hedge against an engine failure. What little risk that is mitigated is more than offset by the gain of risk.

Better to just pay more attention to what the wind is doing rather than being too high/low or overshooting or overly concerned about an engine failure.
Click to expand...

Easy for a flatlander to say (not implying you're a flatlander...just that your statement doesn't hold water at many airports in hilly terrain).

For example: A couple of years ago I was coming in for landing on a windy day (25kts +-, about 45* to runway heading) at the grass strip in a town about 10 miles down the road from where I live (Marble Hill, MO, 0T3). It's 2600' tucked into a valley between some decent sized hills.

My wife was with me. I turned final and I was on an up elevator. I kicked into a full deflection slip for the entire 1/2 mile final but I was still higher at the threshold than I was when I turned base to final (literally).

So I went around.

Next time around, I'm on a down elevator on final and have to give it full power to make it to the threshold.

So, let me ask, exactly how do I pay more attention to what the winds doing?

(BTW...are you a flatlander? :goofy: )
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
I don't feel a need to make a career of reviewing NTSB files. The FAA for some reason has concluded that a stabilized approach is the best way to handle routine landings.

You said earlier that there is " NO cost" to being high and slipping, although this thread was started by someone who lost engine power due to slipping.
Click to expand...
It would behoove you to actually read some accident reports to understand why pilots crack up airplanes and not just assume why the FAA makes a recommendation.

FWIW, the original concept of 'stabilized approach' was derived in the early days of jet aircraft because all the guys trained in WWII in piston airplanes were coming up short of the runway in the early jets due to the engine spool up time.
 
FastEddieB said:
Nor me. Nice job.

As a minor quibble, as a general rule I'd make sure full flaps wasn't getting the job done before slipping to supplement them - unless a plane has some prohibition on slipping with full flaps.

But like I said, a general rule - not meaning to criticize.
Click to expand...

No problem. What happened there was just before coming around the base-to-final turn I saw I was high, so I just left the nose where it was pointed and went into the slip, rather than add more flaps.

That was when I was doing most landings with 15° flaps, now I do most with 30° and don't need "corrective" slips nearly as much.
 
How does slipping down final make it any less of a stabilized approach than using flaps?
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
How extreme of a slip do you need???

I mean really. I slip all the time with my wife and kids in the Waco. They have yet to freak out or express any concern.....but then I am not doing anything extreme.
Click to expand...
Yes, I don't think there's any validity to the general rule that some express here, that naive passengers will predictably freak out if you slip the plane. A couple of years ago a friend who thought she was okay with a trip to TVC (from my then home base at VLL) started to have a panic attack once we were at about 1500 MSL and wanted to get on the ground ASAP. We had been climbing at a good clip and so were only about 1.5 NW of the field, too close for a normal descent and landing on rwy 9 except by overflying the field and entering the pattern on upwind or crosswind. To avoid keeping her off the ground any longer than necessary, I entered on base and did an aggressive slip on final. After apologizing for making me turn back, she thanked me for getting her back so quickly and added that she felt she'd been in good hands. I don't think she had any idea that my maneuver was in any way unusual.
 
MAKG1 said:
If you're only 50 feet high, you don't need to slip. Slow up a couple of knots or remove power. Oh wait, you eliminated that last control. So, remind me why that's a good thing? To prove your "thing" is bigger than other pilots'? Engine failures in the pattern are exceedingly rare.
Click to expand...

This is a product of poor training.....the reason you stay close in , in the pattern is to make the runway from any point in the pattern. Aircraft engines are prone to fail when throttle settings are changed. Slips used to be part of this training for the above stated reason . Also included in this training were spins. Many current low time CFIs may never have felt comfortable doing either spins or slips so they do not demonstrate or teach either. This is too bad and a dumb down. If you watch the fellow in the Pitts slip it down to the runway you'll see how accurate and safe a slip is. ( especially if you have an engine failure and are forced to land in a small field as happened to me in my Stearman. The slip saved me, my wife and damage to the airplane. )
 
Fearless Tower said:
It would behoove you to actually read some accident reports to understand why pilots crack up airplanes and not just assume why the FAA makes a recommendation.

FWIW, the original concept of 'stabilized approach' was derived in the early days of jet aircraft because all the guys trained in WWII in piston airplanes were coming up short of the runway in the early jets due to the engine spool up time.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it's taught that way to attain primacy in training for when they get into an airliner.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
This is a product of poor training.....the reason you stay close in , in the pattern is to make the runway from any point in the pattern. Aircraft engines are prone to fail when throttle settings are changed. [...]
Click to expand...
Do you have a reference for that? I suspect it's an OWT. From what I was taught, carbureted engines fail more often in the pattern due to carb ice at low power settings, but I've never seen any evidence that changes in power, by themselves, make engine failure any more likely.
 
azure said:
Do you have a reference for that? I suspect it's an OWT. From what I was taught, carbureted engines fail more often in the pattern due to carb ice at low power settings, but I've never seen any evidence that changes in power, by themselves, make engine failure any more likely.
Click to expand...

I think potential carb ice from power reduction IS what was being referred to.
 
I think engine failures are more common with a power change. One of my two piston engine failures happened at first power reduction........that makes it 50% in my book.

The throttle cable, which was not assembled correctly after an overhaul, disconnected itself. It was after takeoff at the Portland seaplane base in a Cessna 185. Fortunately, it went to full throttle and I continued the flight to Renton.
 
RoscoeT said:
I think potential carb ice from power reduction IS what was being referred to.
Click to expand...

That is certainly one reason not to mention poor float settings, lousy mechanics working on carbs, and so forth. . If you've flown older aircraft with a carb. And you've flown them a lot , you expect anything mainly due to the older mechanics who knew these things inside out are now long gone. I always use a steep approach as I was taught that in a single,an airliner type approach is asking for trouble. Two bonanzas on my home field. (2300 foot paved )One pilot makes a straight in approach and lands long. The other is always in a close in pattern, uses the radio, and is always in sight in the pattern if your watching from the ground. Always lands short, barely chirps the tires. One is afraid of the airplane and admits it. The latter is a real pro and shows it. I do as I was taught which has worked for 4000 hours. I'm very very careful of what I fly, who works on it and who I fly with as a passenger.
 
RoscoeT said:
Because the ball is off center, which means you're on the edge of spinning to your death. ;)
Click to expand...

You don't spin from a slip. The first reaction the airplane makes when the high wing stalls, which is the one that stalls first, is the airplane "un-slips." You actually have a bit of time to react before it spins. It don't spin until the ball goes off center to the other side. Unlike the classic "stall spin on final" where you"re trying to tighten up the turn by adding more rudder in the diirection you're already turning. The opposite of a slip.
 
luvflyin said:
You don't spin from a slip. The first reaction the airplane makes when the high wing stalls, which is the one that stalls first, is the airplane "un-slips." You actually have a bit of time to react before it spins. It don't spin until the ball goes off center to the other side. Unlike the classic "stall spin on final" where you"re trying to tighten up the turn by adding more rudder in the diirection you're already turning. The opposite of a slip.
Click to expand...

Your sarcasm radar is weak. I agree with you in general even though I could take you up in an aerobatic plane and show you how you're wrong. ;)
 
Jimmy cooper said:
And you've flown them a lot , you expect anything mainly due to the older mechanics who knew these things inside out are now long gone.
Click to expand...

Oh, they're out there. My mechanics is great with carbs. I'm not too bad either so, even if I find a young one who's clueless, I can cover for him since I owner assist on almost all work done on my plane.
 
timwinters said:
Oh, they're out there. My mechanics is great with carbs. I'm not too bad either so, even if I find a young one who's clueless, I can cover for him since I owner assist on almost all work done on my plane.
Click to expand...

Some Strombergs were wrong from the factory meaning that the float could never be 100 percent if not properly repaired not to mention setting the float correctly. I've never met a mechanic who admitted that he wasn't really all that good. They usually say they " know all about aircraft engines" including the one who annualed the mooney that almost killed me at teterboro on takeoff when it quit 2 days after he'd annualed it. Or the one who did not set the rocker arms correctly on the Stearman causing a forced landing. They both knew "everything" and could not wait to tell you.
 
The key is, you have to know enough to know if they're blowing smoke or not. If you don't...well...then your flying is far more risky.
 
RoscoeT said:
Your sarcasm radar is weak. I agree with you in general even though I could take you up in an aerobatic plane and show you how you're wrong. ;)
Click to expand...

I haven't flown aerobatic, but I've watched it. I'd bet you could show me everything I think I know about flying is wrong
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top