I was watching for that, but I suppose he just said screw it, let insurance deal with it!
In my experience over the numbers is too late for that. It's not going to stop windmilling that fast. When we made our gear up in the Cardinal I killed the mixture 500' up and tried slowing the plane to stop the prop and finally decided the effort wasn't worth the risk. The prop windmilled all the way down.
Comments like this are why as an occasional and relatively new pilot I read POA so frequently. Thanks RyanShort1 for the real world summary of your experience in a similar situation. Most useful thing I've read in a while.
Unless you’ve tested how fast it’s going to stop windmilling, worry about maintaining directional control and pitch. Aside from our prop, we set down softly enough that we didn’t replace a single rivet...
That’s right, that’s what insurance is for.
When the prop is feathered there’s really no wind for it to mill.
I get that, but there’s still the question of how fast the prop stops, killing the option for a go-around, and the possibility that it doesn’t stop spinning in the right spot anyway. I’d rather accept the likely tear down.
Yeah, but I betcha that pilot started that process 3-500 feet up if not higher and was obviously comfortable and competent in his aircraft and confident of his glide path to touchdown. My point earlier was that over the numbers is waaay too late for this kind of game.
There’s no way it takes 300-500 feet of altitude to stop a feathered prop. It’s nearly instantaneous. A few seconds probably.
Or if one wasn't low on fuel would it make sense to fly to an airport that did have more emergency services available?
But bumping it, focusing on that aspect should be done by 100’ IMO... fly the plane is 1st job. Changing the props and killing power is going to change your glide and etc... and destabilizing the plane close to the ground isn’t the best way to make a better 1 chance landing.
Certainly true that flying the airplane is job one. I’m not certain I would bump the starter, but I would feel totally comfy shutting down just over the threshold.
If they did, would it be wise to ask as a pilot? Not that I'm worried about the gear not going down on the old 140, but just curious...
You and I are probably both high-enough time pilots that we could nearly shut it down in our sleep at 200’, and yes, maybe the twin’s props will stop quickly and all will be well. I also think a 5000 hour freight dog pilot is gonna do a better job on this kind of landing than a 200-hour newbie CFI multi candidate, too, which is why I would hesitate to advocate the late change. Proficiency certainly allows pilots to make last minute changes with more ease, but that does not stack the odds in your favor, either, say if something (flock of birds, coyote, whatever) makes a go-around a better option.
Ya beat me to it. Foaming runways also decreases friction, so greasing the runways was discouraged in the 1980s IIRC. ICAO doesn't like foaming the runways just as much as the NFPA. Aluminum sparks don't seem to have the energy to ignite a fire, and titanium sparks don't care if there's a foam or not - they'll still start a fire. Foam is supposed to float on top of the organic fuels eliminating the oxygen from the fire triangle No water source other than what is on board a truck, deplete resources for the fire... bla bla bla, I'm a nerd.