So just how common IS a "power off landing"?

[Fearless Tower]

Well, I'd want to qualify that....

There is nothing wrong with a power-off 180 at an empty uncontrolled field.

Don't do it at VNY on a nice summer Saturday, at least without approval from Tower (which would be doubtful). It's hard to follow #3 with a power-off 180 when he's on a 2 mile final.

That is very true. At many class D airports, you cannot make a power off 180 your SOP. I did plenty of them when I was based at MYF, but at best I could only get about 50% with tower coordination.

 

[Jay Honeck]

The only time i don't do power off landings from abeam historically, is when i am rusty or there are passengers aboard who might feel its a tad too exciting for their taste. Make short approach are three of my favorite words to hear from atc. But that's in small Cessnas and Cherokees typically.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Bingo! We have a winnah!

The only reason I rarely do power off landings in the Pathfinder is because it makes turns in the pattern uncomfortably tight to passengers. Creature comfort is important.

In fact, I would venture a guess that the #1 reason why so many wives and girlfriends don't like to fly is because their S.O. flew an extremely tight, power off approach on their first flight together.

I did that with Mary, because, hey, that was the way I was taught. Only later did she tell me how terrified she was, landing like that.

In the -8A, we are taught to fly a VERY tight pattern, not power off, but close. The first time you do it, it almost feels aerobatic. From the ground, it looks like you're going to be a lawn dart.

During transition training, I did a power-off spot landing from 6500' in the -8A. Much fun!

 

[azure]

You fly a retract right? As I said earlier, where I see people get into trouble is when they have a rigid routine and being forced to mix it, can screw up their routine - bad things can happen (like gear ups). Nothing wrong with making a power off 180 your standard approach, but you should not be bound to it.

What does flying a retract have to do with it vs down and welded? I don't know anyone whose habit is to put the gear down after passing the numbers on downwind, and I certainly don't do it that way. Anyway I agree, you should not be bound to a particular routine, but that's completely orthogonal to the question of which is the better SOP when flying the pattern, "stabilized power on" vs "power to idle abeam the numbers". Regardless of what your SOP is, you always need to be flexible and capable of adjusting for other traffic, obstacles, ATC instructions for whatever reason, etc. I'm just agreeing with the earlier poster that building a very intimate familiarity with the power off part of the performance envelope in order to be better prepared for the possibility of engine out for real is a good argument for "power off abeam the numbers" as SOP.

 

[Fearless Tower]

What does flying a retract have to do with it vs down and welded? I don't know anyone whose habit is to put the gear down after passing the numbers on downwind, and I certainly don't do it that way. Anyway I agree, you should not be bound to a particular routine, but that's completely orthogonal to the question of which is the better SOP when flying the pattern, "stabilized power on" vs "power to idle abeam the numbers". Regardless of what your SOP is, you always need to be flexible and capable of adjusting for other traffic, obstacles, ATC instructions for whatever reason, etc. I'm just agreeing with the earlier poster that building a very intimate familiarity with the power off part of the performance envelope in order to be better prepared for the possibility of engine out for real is a good argument for "power off abeam the numbers" as SOP.

You're the one who is limiting it to "stabilized power on" vs "power to idle abeam the numbers". I am just saying there is alot more to it than that. You say you can't see it happening, and yet it does. The decision (either by the PIC or Tower) to extend the downwind is typically made before you are abeam the numbers and that is what is going to keep you from putting the gear down at your usual time.

 

[azure]

You're the one who is limiting it to "stabilized power on" vs "power to idle abeam the numbers".

I am doing no such thing. You may have read what I said to mean that, but that is not what I said. SOP is not the same thing as a rigid routine. It is just standard. Flexibility is always necessary.

I am just saying there is alot more to it than that. You say you can't see it happening, and yet it does. The decision (either by the PIC or Tower) to extend the downwind is typically made before you are abeam the numbers and that is what is going to keep you from putting the gear down at your usual time.

Well, I never told you what my usual time is so how can you know what is going to keep me from putting the gear down at that time?

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Not sure what you mean by "pattern work" if i'm approaching from the pattern side i usually enter on the base leg so i am way too far from the field to glide there if both squirrels quit. If approaching from the non-pattern side, after crossing mid field i like to make a sweeping turn to bleed off speed and roll out pretty much abeam the numbers. Again at that moment i'm too far to glide with no engines. I dont give it a second thought. The last thing i'm going to do is try some heroics to reach the runway, thats a good way to get killed. I'm perfectly happy to call avemco and tell them which cornfield their airplane is in.

Pattern work is take off and landing practice where ones stays in the pattern.

If you think practicing engine failures is "heroic" you ether are a horrible pilot, soon to be a lawn dart, or don't under stand what heroic means.

As for the BS about once a engine dies it's the insurance Co.s plane, after two engine failures, I have yet to even scratch the paint, seems like a **** poor mindset to write the plane off the second the engine quits.

 

[Jaybird180]

As for the BS about once a engine dies it's the insurance Co.s plane, after two engine failures, I have yet to even scratch the paint, seems like a **** poor mindset to write the plane off the second the engine quits.

There is some validity to the saying, as there is validity to what you're saying. A desire to save metal has led to the loss of much flesh. I agree with you also, that it is possible to save the ship; I know a guy that has had MULTIPLE failures in SE aircraft. He told me about some of them around the time I was doing checkride preparation, gave me something to aspire to in my readiness.

 

[JHW]

Pattern work is take off and landing practice where ones stays in the pattern.

If you think practicing engine failures is "heroic" you ether are a horrible pilot, soon to be a lawn dart, or don't under stand what heroic means.

As for the BS about once a engine dies it's the insurance Co.s plane, after two engine failures, I have yet to even scratch the paint, seems like a **** poor mindset to write the plane off the second the engine quits.

you've nailed it. I can't recall the last time I flew around just to "practice landings". Future lawn dart here. For some reason though, I have the lowest insurance rates of virtually anyone I know. I guess I'm just lucky they haven't caught onto what a hazard i am to myself and others.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

you've nailed it. I can't recall the last time I flew around just to "practice landings". Future lawn dart here. For some reason though, I have the lowest insurance rates of virtually anyone I know. I guess I'm just lucky they haven't caught onto what a hazard i am to myself and others.

Give it time

If you're not practicing for it, you're asking for it...



as a commercial rated pilot you should know this