How many of you have had an engine failure?

FloridaPilot said:
When I started on these boards I got the impression that mechanical failures don't happen too often, next to never but now I realize that isn't true.
Click to expand...

The majority of mechanical failures can be attributed to lack of maintenance. Unfortunately GA has a big problem with this, starting with cheap owners and compounded with A&P's and IA's that will sell their signatures.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbqDTuAQoi4

October, 2012.

Collapsed lifters (3) on takeoff. Why three at that time with a fine preflight/runup? Who knows.

Mechanic said probably could've firewalled it, held my 200ft agl and come around to land. Also said there was a chance the camshaft would've gotten banged up and/or thrown a rod. Anyhoo, the field was always my number one.

I re-live that day with every takeoff I have made since that day almost 2 years ago.

Ps: Nowdays, I use the clip from a guy who hijacked my upload. He somehow is up to 800K+ views compared to the 70K of my original. Go figure!!
 
funkster9 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbqDTuAQoi4

October, 2012.

Collapsed lifters (3) on takeoff. Why three at that time with a fine preflight/runup? Who knows.

Mechanic said probably could've firewalled it, held my 200ft agl and come around to land. Also said there was a chance the camshaft would've gotten banged up and/or thrown a rod. Anyhoo, the field was always my number one.

I re-live that day with every takeoff I have made since that day almost 2 years ago.

Ps: Nowdays, I use the clip from a guy who hijacked my upload. He somehow is up to 800K+ views compared to the 70K of my original. Go figure!!
Click to expand...

Wow! Ive seen your video several times, you did an excellent job man! Thanks for sharing!
 
I've been flying since the early 80's. I can't say that I ever had a serious engine failure. I did experience a sticky valve though in my first airplane, a Cessna 150M. My gas burn rate went to crap and my power dropped off a bit. Carbon had built up around one of the valve stems.

I just had a major engine overhaul done on my Cherokee. I'm up to 11 hours so far on the new engine and everything seems to be running great so far. With the statistics I've read, infant mortality is still a concern for a while yet.
 
RotorAndWing said:
The majority of mechanical failures can be attributed to lack of maintenance. Unfortunately GA has a big problem with this, starting with cheap owners and compounded with A&P's and IA's that will sell their signatures.
Click to expand...

Yep. A disturbingly large percentage of the GA fleet is owned by people who can't really afford to maintain them properly.
 
Dead Stick said:
This is my tally so far over 48 years...

In piston singles: 3 partial (mag failure in C150/150 towing gliders, induction leak in C207 and swallowed valve in Mooney) and 1 total (mag switch failure in C172).
In piston twins: 2 partial (First flight on factory reman engine on C421 and swallowed valve on C411) and 1 total (first flight on Factory Reman engine on above mentioned C411).
In turboprop twins: 3 precautionary shutdowns (Propeller failure on MU2, loss of oil pressure in Cheyenne III and KA200).
In transport category jets: 1 total failures on startup on Lear 35, 3 precautionary shutdowns (one on B737, two on G100).

As others have said, it's not a matter of IF, it's a question of when.
Click to expand...

Details on the MU2 prop failure?
 
Lord Muck said:
Yep. A disturbingly large percentage of the GA fleet is owned by people who can't really afford to maintain them properly.
Click to expand...

What do you think of Mike Busch's "Savvy Maintenance Service?"

Right now, one of my mechanically inclined partners interfaces with the shop, but if I were to go on my own, I want to make sure the plane is well maintained. However I would not want the shop taking advantage of me or recommending unnecessary procedures.
 
RotorAndWing said:
The majority of mechanical failures can be attributed to lack of maintenance. Unfortunately GA has a big problem with this, starting with cheap owners and compounded with A&P's and IA's that will sell their signatures.
Click to expand...

Why I do not fly GA. I will not spare any expense in maintaining my EAB. I will go hungry or not fly until its mechanically in good shape. I know what I can afford and a GA airplane I can not afford. The Annual inspection would break me or empty my bank account and leave me divorced.


dans2992 said:
What do you think of Mike Busch's "Savvy Maintenance Service?"
Right now, one of my mechanically inclined partners interfaces with the shop, but if I were to go on my own, I want to make sure the plane is well maintained. However I would not want the shop taking advantage of me or recommending unnecessary procedures.
Click to expand...

Great now we are on a Mike Bush bash. I found most A&P's do not like him. I wonder why? :rolleyes: I have learned a lot from him.

I have never found an A&P who would just sign things wanting his pockets lined for doing it. Just the opposite I have found. A&P's are scared to death of anything, just ask one to do a Condition inspection on a EAB and you will see this fear for yourself.

I will never understand this. Never in history has an A&P been sued over a Condition Inspection on a EAB. That would be tough to do for all the A&P is saying when signing this is, this airplane is what the FAA says it is, in a safe condition for operation.

Nothing more or nothing less. mention this to an A&P and stand back.

Tony
 
RotorAndWing said:
The majority of mechanical failures can be attributed to lack of maintenance. Unfortunately GA has a big problem with this, starting with cheap owners and compounded with A&P's and IA's that will sell their signatures.
Click to expand...

I think this is very accurate. Include lazy mechanics with the " awwww shucks, it just needs fly'in approach. " other problems I encountered were an excellent mechanic and AI who I trusted to work on my plane, left it with him feeling very confident. Returned to find his drug addicted son had done the work. Lousy job and close call going over the Chesapeake bay on the way home, it missed badly. I paid him but never went back. Cessna 195. (It had a bad wiring harness that never got checked. ) another mechanic found it immed, replaced it. )
 
Last edited:
Kiddo's Driver said:
I get what you are saying, but EAB is part of GA...
Click to expand...


Not according to the FAA. I could start spouting all the differences but I believe we all know them. But here are a few

General Aviation "GA" needs Annual Inspection

Experimental home built EAB needs a Condition Inspection.

GA airplane is airworthy

EAB is not airworthy even though it has an airworthy certificate. Nothing about an EAB is airworthy. In the logs it states for safe operation.

I could go on but you are wrong..An EAB is not an General Aviation airplane.

Tony
 
I think a big problem is the Cuba syndrome. Old engines, old cranks, old carbs, on and on. We are using aircraft that are as old as the 1950 Chevys and ply mouths one sees on tv running in Cuba. When you put the coal to some of these old engines, they quit or come apart ( like in takeoff) leaving the pilot with bad choices in most instances. Couple that with idiotic mistakes made over and over again , running out of gas, bad weather, stalling in the pattern, on and on. In the faa monthly accident reports, lots of quitting on takeoff reports!
 
Jimmy cooper said:
I think a big problem is the Cuba syndrome. Old engines, old cranks, old carbs, on and on. We are using aircraft that are as old as the 1950 Chevys and ply mouths one sees on tv running in Cuba. When you put the coal to some of these old engines, they quit or come apart ( like in takeoff) leaving the pilot with bad choices in most instances. Couple that with idiotic mistakes made over and over again , running out of gas, bad weather, stalling in the pattern, on and on. In the faa monthly accident reports, lots of quitting on takeoff reports!
Click to expand...

This brings me to a question I've had for a while:
- I DO have an antique, and I fly it that way.
- At what point does an aircraft BECOME an antique?
 
1600vw said:
Not according to the FAA. I could start spouting all the differences but I believe we all know them. But here are a few

General Aviation "GA" needs Annual Inspection

Experimental home built EAB needs a Condition Inspection.

GA airplane is airworthy

EAB is not airworthy even though it has an airworthy certificate. Nothing about an EAB is airworthy. In the logs it states for safe operation.

I could go on but you are wrong..An EAB is not an General Aviation airplane.

Tony
Click to expand...

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/
 

Attachments

  • General Aviation.jpg
    General Aviation.jpg
    81.8 KB · Views: 16
FloridaPilot said:
When I started on these boards I got the impression that mechanical failures don't happen too often, next to never but now I realize that isn't true.
Click to expand...

If you take all the anecdotes mentioned here and divide them into the total hours flown by all the posters here, you'll find serious problems still are relatively rare. How many incidents did the 22,000 hour guy have? A half dozen....none catastrophic? Seems like not a lot to worry about.
 
Last edited:
Z06_Mir said:
Details on the MU2 prop failure?
Click to expand...
It had just come out of overhaul and something in the hub broke. There was an AD issued as a result. I was flying a MU-2B-60 Marquise and when we got on the ramp, I could take my hand and rotate each blade lock to lock. Unbelievably, there was no engine damage, but the airframe couldn't care less why the engine is not producing thrust.

I also left one off of the SE piston failures...

Back in 1976, I had the opportunity to go pick up a brand spanking new C182 at the Cessna delivery center in Wichita. On climb out, out of 5,000 feet, the engine started to run extremely rough. I declared an emergency and returned the d@mn thing back to Cessna. They had it for another day before I was able to leave.

Which brings up the point, most (80%?) of my inflight issues have occurred with new airplanes or new engines or recent major maintenance performed by factory service centers. The 737-40 precautionary shutdown was on a brand new airplane that had only been on the property one week.

My aviation mentor one told me that the most dangerous flying you'll ever do is in brand-new equipment or just out of major maintenance. I have come to know that he was bang on.

NEVER let your guard down. Fly safely, my friends.
 
Dead Stick said:
It had just come out of overhaul and something in the hub broke. There was an AD issued as a result. I was flying a MU-2B-60 Marquise and when we got on the ramp, I could take my hand and rotate each blade lock to lock. Unbelievably, there was no engine damage, but the airframe couldn't care less why the engine is not producing thrust.

I also left one off of the SE piston failures...

Back in 1976, I had the opportunity to go pick up a brand spanking new C182 at the Cessna delivery center in Wichita. On climb out, out of 5,000 feet, the engine started to run extremely rough. I declared an emergency and returned the d@mn thing back to Cessna. They had it for another day before I was able to leave.

Which brings up the point, most (80%?) of my inflight issues have occurred with new airplanes or new engines or recent major maintenance performed by factory service centers. The 737-40 precautionary shutdown was on a brand new airplane that had only been on the property one week.

My aviation mentor one told me that the most dangerous flying you'll ever do is in brand-new equipment or just out of major maintenance. I have come to know that he was bang on.

NEVER let your guard down. Fly safely, my friends.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation. I am always curious, partially because of the history of the MU2 and partially because I grew up in a South Dakota aviation family and This crash was often talked about, even in the late 90's.


I am slightly anxious/nervous to fly my airplane next. It will have a new engine and prop. I've been paranoid about the first flight since the choice was made that it was engine time. I'll probably give up flying at night for 100 hours or so too.
 
weirdjim said:
And mine told me NEVER to fly the A model of ANYTHING.

Jim
Click to expand...

But I fly a V1.0 (pre A35 model) Bonanza ... (Ok, with nearly 70 years of mods).

Maintenance is important. So is reading and following the POH (with training).

But yea, if I purchased a new 1.0 model, I would want a chute ...
 
brian];1545804 said:
This brings me to a question I've had for a while:
- I DO have an antique, and I fly it that way.
- At what point does an aircraft BECOME an antique?
Click to expand...

If it's like cars, 25years, boats are typically 50. I don't consider any Bo or plane designed post WWII as an antique though because there has been no technological change to the plane. You might have antique radios, but you have a modern airframe, and in aircraft parlance, a modern engine.
 
Henning said:
If it's like cars, 25years, boats are typically 50. I don't consider any Bo or plane designed post WWII as an antique though because there has been no technological change to the plane. You might have antique radios, but you have a modern airframe, and in aircraft parlance, a modern engine.
Click to expand...
Sad, but true.
 
Z06_Mir said:
Thanks for the explanation. I am always curious, partially because of the history of the MU2 and partially because I grew up in a South Dakota aviation family and This crash was often talked about, even in the late 90's.


I am slightly anxious/nervous to fly my airplane next. It will have a new engine and prop. I've been paranoid about the first flight since the choice was made that it was engine time. I'll probably give up flying at night for 100 hours or so too.
Click to expand...
The pilot of that airplane was a good friend of mine and we had flown together on several occasions. He was a very experienced and competent pilot. My incident happened shortly after that crash and resulted in an emergency AD on that prop and engine combination. There is no other way to say it, I was d@mn lucky that night.

You don't need to be paranoid about your new engine/propeller, just be extra alert for a few hours - some problems take time to develop. As for flying at night in a SE airplane, there's a reason why many highly experienced pilots choose not to take that risk. My history explains why I choose not to. It's not a question of if it's going to quit, only a matter of when. There's no good reason to run up your risks by flying at night if it's not necessary.
 
Zeldman said:
The other was at cruise altitude when one mag failed. Both times I turned the failed mag off and returned to base safely.
Click to expand...

How do you determine:

1) that a mag failed?
2) which one failed?

I'm a student and I would love to learn how to deal with such a situation.
I had what I thought was a bad mag during my run-up but it turned out
to be a fouled plug. It was with my instructor and very educational.
 
VictorValencia said:
How do you determine:

1) that a mag failed?
2) which one failed?

I'm a student and I would love to learn how to deal with such a situation.
I had what I thought was a bad mag during my run-up but it turned out
to be a fouled plug. It was with my instructor and very educational.
Click to expand...


Turn ignition key to right mag, engine runs. Turn it to left engine quits.

Left mag bad. :dunno:
 
Dead Stick said:
The pilot of that airplane was a good friend of mine and we had flown together on several occasions. He was a very experienced and competent pilot. My incident happened shortly after that crash and resulted in an emergency AD on that prop and engine combination. There is no other way to say it, I was d@mn lucky that night.

You don't need to be paranoid about your new engine/propeller, just be extra alert for a few hours - some problems take time to develop. As for flying at night in a SE airplane, there's a reason why many highly experienced pilots choose not to take that risk. My history explains why I choose not to. It's not a question of if it's going to quit, only a matter of when. There's no good reason to run up your risks by flying at night if it's not necessary.
Click to expand...

Nall report says the stats are only marginally higher.
There is no boogey man
 
Dead Stick said:
The pilot of that airplane was a good friend of mine and we had flown together on several occasions. He was a very experienced and competent pilot. My incident happened shortly after that crash and resulted in an emergency AD on that prop and engine combination. There is no other way to say it, I was d@mn lucky that night.

You don't need to be paranoid about your new engine/propeller, just be extra alert for a few hours - some problems take time to develop. As for flying at night in a SE airplane, there's a reason why many highly experienced pilots choose not to take that risk. My history explains why I choose not to. It's not a question of if it's going to quit, only a matter of when. There's no good reason to run up your risks by flying at night if it's not necessary.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to hear that was your friend. Although it was long before my time, I do know several people that know that group. That's why I asked about the details of your MU2 incident. I do know that the SD State pilots would still love to fly MU2's instead of the King Air's. Good group of guys still.


I flew at night fairly often, at least when I had the time. I really, really enjoy it. In Phoenix it's quiet and you can actually see traffic which is a nice change of pace from the hectic practice areas. But for a few months I do realize it's best to give up those wonderful night flights. I plan on getting some time on the new engine as quickly as possible so I can get back to normal. I really trusted the old engine, but we found evidence that overhauling was an excellent decision. 1800 hours and 33 years isn't too shabby
 
weirdjim said:
And mine told me NEVER to fly the A model of ANYTHING.

Jim
Click to expand...
The "A" model of anything doesn't bother me. But you can expect to run into "teething problems" anytime you are involved with the first 50 serial numbers of any new design. It takes a while for the folks on the floor to figure out how they are supposed to put them together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top