Nicely Done Emergency Landing - Cessna 210 - 6 on board

CT4ME

CT4ME

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
1,321
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Display Name
Display name:
CT4ME
Just ran across this video of a recent successful emergency landing. Lost vacuum and a cylinder, but did a great job of aviating, communicating, and navigating. I can only hope that I would be as cool and collected...
 
How's a young guy like that get that much airplane? I think I need to reexamine some of my life choices...
 
Take meeeee homeeeeeeee West virginiaaaa
 
Nice job! Not the ideal way to begin a vacation!
 
'posed to notify ATC when a system like vacuum fails...
 
mscard88 said:
Didn't they tell ATC after they declared what was wrong? Pretty sure I heard that.
Click to expand...
They declared the engine failure. Notification of the vacuum system failure was not documented in the vid.
 
steingar said:
How's a young guy like that get that much airplane? I think I need to reexamine some of my life choices...
Click to expand...
When it comes to airplanes getting is a lot less expensive than keeping .
 
He did a great job. I think the pax were calm because he inspired that in them.
Me, I think I am right over the field til its time for high key position however.
 
Well done! While the young lady on the right appeared to be nervous, everyone maintained their composure extremely well. Just another day at the office for all. :)
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
He did a great job. I think the pax were calm because he inspired that in them.
Me, I think I am right over the field til its time for high key position however.
Click to expand...
That and when on CTAF don't be bashful about the emergency status. I flat out tell traffic "emergency inbound get out of my way". On every subsequent call I use "emergency". Don't mess around if ya need priority.
 
That was an interesting watch. Learned a lot from it.
 
It didn't seem much more than a pre-cautionary landing. It wasn't in IMC and it wasn't a total loss of power.

I haven't been to Beckley in about 20 years, but I remember it as a pretty nice airport.
 
At 5:10 pilot states he is burning 9 gph. Checking my poh at 10,000 feet 18” mp and 2200 rpm 44% BHP should burn 9.7 gph. That is the lowest fuel flow shown in the book? I never run at that low a setting and certainly have never flown a 210 at 9 gph, don’t think it is advisable during cruise?
 
Briar Rabbit said:
At 5:10 pilot states he is burning 9 gph. Checking my poh at 10,000 feet 18” mp and 2200 rpm 44% BHP should burn 9.7 gph. That is the lowest fuel flow shown in the book? I never run at that low a setting and certainly have never flown a 210 at 9 gph, don’t think it is advisable during cruise?
Click to expand...

That “seems” really low to me.

Another thing I found odd was being near IMC and continuing on with a loss of primary attitude indicator. But I don’t have his experience. Just trying to learn.

Did we ever hear why the door was hot and what the relationship of loss of vac and loss of cylinder was caused by?

Nice vid though. I’m glad the guy shared.
 
I know it's easy to Monday morning quarterback, but...

Your vacuum pump fails 20 minutes into an IFR flight with your family on board and you press on? You're worried your engine is going to quit and you overfly the airport? Not decisions I would have made...
 
Briar Rabbit said:
At 5:10 pilot states he is burning 9 gph. Checking my poh at 10,000 feet 18” mp and 2200 rpm 44% BHP should burn 9.7 gph. That is the lowest fuel flow shown in the book? I never run at that low a setting and certainly have never flown a 210 at 9 gph, don’t think it is advisable during cruise?
Click to expand...
If the fuel flow is balanced then running LOP is not a significant concern at less than 65% power. Both Lycoming and Continental have published their official opinion that their engines can’t be hurt with the mixture setting when power is below 65%.
 
idahoflier said:
I know it's easy to Monday morning quarterback, but...

Your vacuum pump fails 20 minutes into an IFR flight with your family on board and you press on? You're worried your engine is going to quit and you overfly the airport? Not decisions I would have made...
Click to expand...
I’ve ended fights for less reason than partial panel. An alternator failure is reason enough for me to land. Other posters have reported continued flight in IMC when partial panel like it was no big deal. Everyone has their own level of risk tolerance. Maybe that’s why we live with the statistic that most accidents are caused by pilot error.

OTOH, as I understand it failure of a significant system is a required report to ATC when operating under IFR. There is usually a strong drive to complete a flight. Maybe the rules are in place to help us realize when it is time to change the plan. Landing to get something fixed doesn’t have to be a big deal. Sure it’s inconvenient but what’s an inconvenience compared to being one failure from no gyro in IMC? Of course the macho guys can handle it, they don’t even see the line they crossed in the name of finishing the flight.
 
Clark1961 said:
I’ve ended fights for less reason than partial panel. An alternator failure is reason enough for me to land. Other posters have reported continued flight in IMC when partial panel like it was no big deal. Everyone has their own level of risk tolerance. Maybe that’s why we live with the statistic that most accidents are caused by pilot error.

OTOH, as I understand it failure of a significant system is a required report to ATC when operating under IFR. There is usually a strong drive to complete a flight. Maybe the rules are in place to help us realize when it is time to change the plan. Landing to get something fixed doesn’t have to be a big deal. Sure it’s inconvenient but what’s an inconvenience compared to being one failure from no gyro in IMC? Of course the macho guys can handle it, they don’t even see the line they crossed in the name of finishing the flight.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing about reporting it to ATC. Maybe he did off camera. I don't think I would have pressed on being only 20 minutes into that long of a cross country.
 
Clark1961 said:
I’ve ended fights for less reason than partial panel. An alternator failure is reason enough for me to land. Other posters have reported continued flight in IMC when partial panel like it was no big deal. Everyone has their own level of risk tolerance. Maybe that’s why we live with the statistic that most accidents are caused by pilot error.
Click to expand...

I had a night failure of the alternator over West Virginia, immediately diverted to Bluefield. Good thing, too, as the plane went dark on final.

They say most accidents are a chain of events, break the chain and land before the accident!
 
Bill Jennings said:
They say most accidents are a chain of events, break the chain and land before the accident!
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing as I was watching that video. He seemed to be lining up a few holes in the swiss cheese. Rental plane with a vac failure and press on in IMC? No thanks.
 
Wouldn't have been my choice to press on once I'd lost vac, but for calmness in the face of an emergency kudos to all of them.
 
Bill Jennings said:
I had a night failure of the alternator over West Virginia, immediately diverted to Bluefield. Good thing, too, as the plane went dark on final.

They say most accidents are a chain of events, break the chain and land before the accident!
Click to expand...
I’ve had a couple charging system failures. One was on runup so that was an easy abort after accepting the disappointment of not getting to fly. The other was VMC over the foothills with a fellow POAer onboard and headed for breakfast/lunch. I just returned to homebase and fellow POAer agreed. I think ATC was more concerned than I was with the second failure. Approach told tower and they cleared me to land on first call.
 
Read the YouTube video comments.
They never figured out why the cylinder failed.
He flew it again a month later and it happened again.
Sounds like the plane is still flying and they don’t know what happened with the cylinder.

Eek.
 
Hmmm, can't figure it out just fly again. In fairness though I think the comment said they are looking at maybe an intermittent valve issue.
 
cylinder went totally cold? Hmmmm
 
So renters, are you on the hooks for hobbs time to point of aog?
Prob cost them to get home.
 
C210s I know sometimes have cooling issues. I don't know what his power setting was but if he was at 9GPH, I could see that as an issue.

But yeah, if I have a vacuum pump go out 20 mins in on a long flight with PAX (particularly kids) knowing that I'll be in and out of the clouds with a weather system between me and my destination, I'm landing. But, I'm also a chickenchit.
 
Fruck that...
Heftiger said:
Read the YouTube video comments.
They never figured out why the cylinder failed.
He flew it again a month later and it happened again.
Sounds like the plane is still flying and they don’t know what happened with the cylinder.

Eek.
Click to expand...
 
labbadabba said:
But yeah, if I have a vacuum pump go out 20 mins in on a long flight with PAX (particularly kids) knowing that I'll be in and out of the clouds with a weather system between me and my destination, I'm landing. But, I'm also a chickenchit.
Click to expand...

I would have turned around as well. If the weather was good at the starting point I probably would have returned there instead, but that is just me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top