What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Airport turnback procedure

T

trib

Well Known Member
Sunday afternoon, working on my annual with another EAAer in my hanger at KCPK, we heard an aircraft which had just taken off start backfiring and lose power. Running out of the hanger we saw a Lancair 360 making a steep turn back towards the runway he had just departed at no more than 200' altitude. As we watched in horror, we saw the stall/spin entry we have all been taught from the beginning of our PPL lessons in full view. The right (inside wing) dropped and the plane impacted the ground nearly vertical. We rushed to the aircraft, which was upright with the canopy ejected, and both occupants were unresponsive, still strapped in and blood emanating from their ears. Both appeared to have broken necks. No pulses could be found (a doctor was also in our group of responders) and all that could be done was get extinguishers in case of a fire (did not happen) and let the police and FAA clean up. There were several fields to each side and straight ahead that could have been effective for a crash landing, hopefully with much different results for the occupants, but the pilot succombed to the impulse to turn back to the nice runway he had just left. My plan following witnessing this tragedy, is to edit my pretakeoff checklist to add as a last item something to the effect of "if power loss occurs prior to XXX feet, do not turnback and land straight ahead". My immediate thought when I saw the Lancair begin a turn was that it was way to low to turn, but I feel this would be a good thing to remind myself of prior to each takeoff.

I know I have read before where a number of persons have experimented with the amount of altitude needed, and that for a 6 it was about 400'. I was planning on 500' for a bit of a factor of safety and plan to experiment at altitude to verify and keep myself proficient.

The question I have for those with a lot of piloting experience here is on minimum airspeed during the turnback. I was curious if anyone had actually recorded their parameters, such as bank angle and airspeed in this maneuver when they were testing. Since my pitot is on the left wing, it follows to my logic that a right turn would be most limiting as the airspeed would read higher than the speed on the inside wing. If the airspeed indicated is sufficient for a right turn, then if a left turn was made with the same indicated airspeed, each wing would have a higher actual airspeed than with a right turn, giving additional margin for a left turn.

So the question is what bank angle and airspeed limit to use for an emergency turnback? I'll start there with my experimentation to find the best for my airplane (and then add an appropriate margin).
 
That is a pretty good article, it is in the aopa pilot magazine also, the one with the yellowstone / yellow aviat cover edit- its the April 2011 issue
 
Last edited:
Schiff and McClellan

First, let me express my sympathy to you and to the families of the people involved. No doubt this made an impact on you. You'll remember this for the rest of your life.

Two recent articles come to mind. One is by Barry Schiff in a recent AOPA Pilot magazine. Sorry I don't have the issue with me but I believe it was published in the last 3 or 4 months. He doesn't say, "Don't turn back." But he does say you had better practice, practice, practice and know the limits as to when and where you MIGHT be able to get back to the runway. I've always liked Schiff's writing. He's very easy to understand, plus he's been there and is willing to talk about his experiences.

The second is by Mac McClellan who now writes a column for EAA. I'm not sure if I got it from being a subscriber to his email blog or from the EAA Sport Pilot magazine. His philosophy is plan ahead, know when to abort the takeoff and either hit the brakes or put it back on the remaining runway, or if sufficiently (?) airborne, know where you're going to aim the airplane. The bottom line is before every takeoff, you should self-brief so you'll know exactly what you're going to do when the engine quits.

I respect both guys for their excellent insight and for their willingness to share their many hours of flying experience with folks like us.

P.S. You may have to be an EAA member to read it online, but in the March 2011 issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine, Mac McClellan's last paragraph reads, "Bottom line, the takeoff is the only maneuver in flying that gives us unlimited time to plan in advance. The more we consider what could go wrong, and develop a plan to deal with that emergency, the safer each takeoff will be."

P.P.S. And in the same FAA list of fatal accidents is the four person crew of experienced test personnel working for Grumman who perished after something went bad on the takeoff roll. If you haven't read the McClellan article then you won't understand why I mentioned the Gulfstream accident. The two accidents are related in that they show how the takeoff can go wrong for anyone, either an experienced corporate test pilot or a less experienced general aviation pilot. McClellan's article makes a good point. The takeoff pre-brief, even if it's a "self-brief," is important.
 
Last edited:
sorry to hear this.

the thing to remember is airspeed is paramount. I've had two incidents with each of my airplanes where the engine lost power on take off(half) but it got my attention. The first thing you do is fly the airplane, watch the airspeed, no matter what you do if you have the airspeed you can do what you need to do. Once you loose the airspeed you level wings and fly it straight wherever and land the plane, period. But still if you have airspeed I myself limit the bank to about 30 but prefer 15. I use the rudder for turning if needed. Main thing is to maintain airspeed, I like 15 above stall, after that it's level wings and forward on the stick to maintain airspeed and land.

Ok now your asking what happened on the two. Well I was able to maintain airspeed and I returned to the runway and landed, took off on 21 and landed on 03.
 
Sorry you had to witness that, Tim. As others mentioned above, the recent AOPA article has some really good info regarding the turn back. One thing I picked up from the article that I've never considered is the presence of a crosswind and how it should affect which way you turn should you decide to return to the airport. Another thing I sometimes do is to NOT depart straight out from the runway centerline depending on the emergency landing sites at a given airport/runway. Departing the field at a slight angle to the runway centerline means that you have a little bit less turning (and thus altitude loss) to complete your "180" back to the runway. The AOPA article lays out a good plan to practice the turnback at altitude.
 
Pierre that posts a lot on here did lots of these turn backs in his 6 a year or two ago. He could probably chime in and provide some of his experiences.
 
Agree with Larry...

...that's the input that leads to a snap roll! Do as coordinated of a turn as you can..just about always.

I am so sorry to read about this accident and even more inclined to not comment on my turnback experiences. Yes, I did them several years ago, in my 180 hp -6A to find out if it was possible and I did it lower and lower until I found the absolute minimum that I could handle.

If you're even inclined to consider this maneuver as a possibility, please go and practise it at altitude....a lot! Find the minimum altitude that suits your emotions and abilities, because I won't recommend any altitude for you, since this is a WWW. arena!

Regards,
 
Lucky for me I already have some popcord pre-made (thanks Darwin) so I can sit back and watch this unfold! :)

What I can say to Tim is that I understand completely having been in your position not to terribly long ago. If it hasn't hit you emotionally yet it will, and it will hit like a bag of bricks. I wish I had something creative or inspiring to say, but I don't. It's a disgusting and physically sickening thing to witness.

No 2 cents from me this time....I think I particpated in one of the past horse beatings.

Cheers,
Stein

PS, Given what Pierre does for a living - his experience with Turnbacks is not what I'd consider as the average typical pilot or experience level (I mean that as a compliment)!
 
Last edited:
Forget the airspeed indicator. It's about feel. Obviously use the airspeed as a guide, but that's it. Just because you are 15kts above stall, doesn't mean you are safe. An airplane can stall at any airspeed.

Keeping it coordinated is the most important thing.

I had one experience similar to this. My dad and myself were doing touch and go's in our Cessna 170. On my take off, at about maybe 300 ft, we lost a cylinder. It ended up being just a broken exhaust rocker arm, but we didn't know that. It sounded and felt like it was going to lose all power at any time.

Anyway, we had reduced power. Unfortunately, there are few options at our position. Landing straight ahead was out of the question. Beyond that, a river. Beyond that, trees with one tiny field. The field would absolutely be a crash, but we'd live.

I started a left hand turn. The stall warning was chirping at us the entire time. The turn seemed to take a half an hour, be we made it. Passed over the FBO at maybe 150 ft and landed down wind.


This happened at an airport we've been flying out of for many years. We've talked about what to do if... The reason for the left turn, to the right, nothing but trees. To the left, if we could turn 90 degrees, we could ditch in the river. If we made it only 180 degrees, we would be lined up with a highway. More options to the left.

When I was learning to fly gliders as a teenager, right before we took off, the instructor would always ask, "which direction are you turning if you get a rope break?" The answer, "Below 100 ft, land straight head, 200 or above, turn into the wind which is (left or right)).

As an airline pilot, same thing. If your engine fails on take off, what are you doing? Where are you going? Which procedure are you following?


What it all comes down to is, if you have a plan, you're one step ahead of the game. That and fly the plane. It's far better to fly your plane into the trees, as opposed to being out of control.


Trib, I'm really sorry you had to see that.
 
Last edited:
SteinAir said:
What I can say to Tim is that I understand completely having been in your position not to terribly long ago. If it hasn't hit you emotionally yet it will, and it will hit like a bag of bricks. I wish I had something creative or inspiring to say, but I don't. It's a disgusting and physically sickening thing to witness.
Click to expand...

Yep, I have to agree with Stein.

I spent 37 years dealing with other peoples tragedies, and the best I can offer is to you is this; realize you did not have anything to do with causing this, and that you did in fact take action to help the situation.

Many folks would have just called 911, and then turned away.
 
n5lp said:
I feel compelled to mention that I think this is an extraordinarily bad idea.
Click to expand...

you only use rudder to center your spot and be very selective on that use as well. But given don't do a cross control at any time if that helps you. Also with what I said, 15 above stall or you just keep things straight and land the plane.
 
Last edited:
turn back

The Gulfstram accident and the Lancair are two entirely different scenarios. The initial NTSB report on the Gulfstream is that they dragged a wingtip on takeoff. Takeoff testing involves very agressive rotation to get the best numbers. On a swept wing aircraft this can bring the wingtips very close to the ground, so there is very little margin for error.
The turnback has been beat to a pulp previously. The turn should be coordinated and the optimum bank angle is somewhere in the 45-60 degree range. For an ag pilot or a Seat Tucker type this is a non event. For the average private pilot it is often a death sentence.
 
jrs14855 said:
The Gulfstram accident and the Lancair are two entirely different scenarios...
Click to expand...

Different scenarios...but if you'll read the McClellan article the two accidents are related in that the takeoff pre-brief should include emergency procedures for "what could go wrong?" That's the only reason I brought it up.
 
turnback ... or not

I plan to test the turnback procedure (at altitude) described in the AOPA article, in part to prove to myself that the necessary altitude is significant and to further drill in the fact that, without a lot of altitude, the "straight ahead" is your best default emergency procedure.
 
I agree that airspeed is next to useless in this situation where someone is in a very steep bank trying to turn around. How many people have their airplane's stall speed vs bank angle relationship chart memorized and can figure this in their head while in an emergency turn back?

AOA indication would be a lifesaver in this situation...

I agree with Stein, Pierre is a master at this, normal people should not compare his results with what they might expect in the same circumstance.

Jan Bussell only recommends it with more than 500ft AGL and only if you have been practicing. From his training I know it takes a very nose down attitude to keep the AOA in check to make this successful. Not sure how most people would react to that sight picture.
 
turn back

Lauren Paine Jr did an excellent article a while back on this subject. The issue that a lot of people miss or gloss over, is the very agressive push required to get the nose down if the engine quits on takeoff.
Something to consider, especially in early test stages, is to let the airplane drift downwind on takeoff. This positions the airplane so that less maneuvering is required for turnback.
If memory serves me this is the first fatal Lancair accident in quite a while???
Several years ago a Lancair 4 tried exactly the same thing with the same predictable results.
 
You could always climb to 800 ft or so straight out then chop the power. That'll give you an idea of what it takes to get it turned around. I think what's so difficult is you are going from climb, to decent. The pitch attitude that needs to happen quickly is huge! I'm guessing, but maybe from +5 degrees, to -5 degrees. It'd be very easy to lower the nose, but just not enough.

Steve
 
first off

What an intense experience for you Trib. Here's to much strength in dealing with it, as deal with it you must.

When thinking about turnback, I always recollect my experiences with 60 degree AOB accellerated stalls during Phase 1 - My thought was "man you can really crank this thing around quickly at low speed in short distance without stalling!!!!" while I struggled to keep the nose up and enough G on to get it to stall - then you realize the huge descent rate generated during the manuever to maintain any airspeed and you realize that it wouldn't be possible at low altitude.

Only lot's of fore thought and practice (at altitude) could standardize the turnback manuever enough to reduce the risk.

This type of standardization (by aircraft type) is what will be necessary to make a dent in the accident rate as discussed in Van's recent article.

Generating this type of standardized data, and then training to it is the best contribution us living guys could make to attacking the sorry AB accident rate data.

Kinda takes some of the fun out of just blasting around in your air scooter, but at some point, it will probably have to happen if we have a hope at maintaining this wonderful freedom.


PS: funny that we never ever even thought about teaching the turn back in military primary training, where we did have the assets to standardize it if we had wanted to - we taught dump the nose for airspeed and find your best alternative IN FRONT OF THE WINGS NOW!!
 
Last edited:
jrs14855 said:
The issue that a lot of people miss or gloss over, is the very agressive push required to get the nose down if the engine quits on takeoff.
Click to expand...

I haven't flown power planes yet, but I had my share of cable breaks (simulated and real ones) during winch launches with a glider. This suddenly puts you in a situation with 40 degrees nose-up attitude, no power, 300 ft altitude, somewhere in the center over an airfield with 1200 ft runway and trees on all four sides. The first thing to do is to push the stick forward to get into a normal flight attitude. It's not uncommon to push hard enough to see all the dirt coming up from the floor of the aircraft. Remember that at zero g the stall speed is zero, too. Now wait until you've established a healthy airspeed. This takes a second or too, which might seem like an eternity. You can use the time to look out of the cockpit (forget about the altimeter!) and decide whether you can land straight ahead, make a 180 and land downwind, make an elongated 360 to land on the runway (or anywhere else on the airfield!), or even pick a field off the airport. As some mentioned before, it is important to think about those options before takeoff -- it's part of my start check. When you are in the air, you only have time to pick one of those options, not to make up a new one.

Reading the AOPA online article I was surprised about a few things. The author recommends to push the nose down and start turning simultaneously, rather than establishing a normal glide attitude and airspeed first and turning then. The second thing is that he turns into the wind. I have learned to turn with the wind (note that I establish airspeed first, then turn), because then my last turn is with the nose into the wind, so that I'm less likely to overshoot my landing spot which might cause me to bank more, pull more and therefore stall or put a wingtip on the ground -- all this in the turn when I'm closest to the ground. With the nose pointing in the wind during the last turn I have (1) more time for the turn (lower ground speed and more distance to the center line) and (2) don't have to turn that much, because the nose is already pointing in the direction of the crab angle rather than the other way.

I'd be interested to hear your opinions on those two points.
 
All I can say is this fellow was very experienced in several types of aircraft. If he couldn't do a turn back under the stress involved then I most certainly could not at 500 hours. It just reinforces my idea to just try to keep the plane from stalling and hopefully pick a spot ahead that won't kill me and my passengers. I can't imagine losing a son and daughter at the same time like this. Absolutely heart breaking.
 
rv9aviator said:
All I can say is this fellow was very experienced in several types of aircraft. If he couldn't do a turn back under the stress involved then I most certainly could not at 500 hours. It just reinforces my idea to just try to keep the plane from stalling and hopefully pick a spot ahead that won't kill me and my passengers. I can't imagine losing a son and daughter at the same time like this. Absolutely heart breaking.
Click to expand...

When things like this happen, it's a great time to learn from it. Many pilots do things that are wrong. It happens to everybody. But just to say "hey, this guy had loads of time and he couldn't, means that I have no chance". You can't think like that.

Many people who are very experienced make huge mistakes. Please don't think the way it seems you are. It's like you are giving up.
 
I guess what a person has to do is evaluate how you deal with emergencies. Do you freak out, some do, do you stay calm, get the picture. When I had a problem with take off I emmediately pushed the stick forward and leveled the plane, than I figured out what I was going to do. I have heard many people start jerking things and freaking out and that is when the wrong thing happens. For me I still had the engine running, not good, but it was running. I went from there. I'm sure if the engine went silent than it would have been a no brainer for me to keep the airplane on course and land it no matter what because as long as the air is moving over the control serfaces you have a better chance at surviving over a drop out and +feet to a stoppage.

I remember from my training where one guy, explained to me, had troubles with the engine out and crawled into the back and rolled up in a ball. That's how they found him, plane hit tail first.

Another example was a guy that lost an engine and flew it to the ground, the wings were broke off and the guy survived without any injuries. So I guess you need to evaluate your means to an emergency more than anything.

Mine is to keep things in perspective and don't freak. level the plane and take a deap breath and deal with what you have and keep a level head.
 
Last edited:
This story is heartbreaking. Tim, I feel for you and what you had to deal with and the memories you will still have to deal with. Sigh... :(

Regarding what to do in this situation, I won't judge the pilot. He was judged too harshly in the outcome already.

The best advice I recall ever reading is to fly the plane all the way to the ground. Situations will be different (altitude, airspeed, cross runways, trees, playgrounds, etc), which may or may not make an attempted turnback the right thing to do, but regardless of the decision, you always have to fly the plane to make it work. It is my belief that so long as you have your flight surfaces, you have a chance.
 
Not a good day at all for the Lancair people, very sad indeed.

On the subject, I flew today (after being away from the airplane since February 15) and the last thing on my mind before take off was if the engine quits - push the nose over and fly straight ahead as long as possible. I will not consider a turn back because there are too many variables to screw it up and one of those variables is proficiency.

After flying to 4 airports and 8 landings, I finally felt connected to the airplane again. There's no way I could have made an intelligent decision about turning back on that first take off. In fact, I believe one could practice the turn back on every flight and there still is a good possibility it won't work out because the circumstances of what went wrong and where it went wrong can not be predicted.

I decided long ago to take my chances straight ahead. The theory being, flying into a crash is always better than stalling into it.
 
our departure briefing always covers takeoff emergencies in 3 phases:
on ground stop, when airborne below x feet land straight ahead and above return to field, possibly circuit or opposite.

we haven't done many practice turnbacks but we have simulated engine failure by chopping power to one another during simulated hard climbouts at altitude. the comforting thing with our slightly nose heavy/neutral 180hp constant speed RV-7A is that it actually takes surprisingly little push on the stick to nose over sufficiently to keep a safe flying speed. (trim neutral)
cutting power seems to do a good job of killing downwash on the horizontal stabilizer as well. but obviously there is a short phase during every takeoff between liftoff and the first maybe 50ft where an engine failure in an rv could be an especially tricky proposition.

a few more points i took from jan bussell's transition training:
- turnback is possible, but only at sufficient altitude and quite steep bank angles and nose down pitch (and speeds accordingly)
- whenever possible, stay clean and even increase speed to around 85-90kts.
- the RV actually floats/glides better than expected, especially with some excess speed
- to steepen the glide consider actually pulling the nose and slowing down vs pitching down and going faster.

rgds, bernie
 
The recurrence of this discussion makes me wonder if I should quit visiting this forum. If I hang out here, I can't let a discussion like this pass, but it really makes me wonder if it makes a difference????

The only thing more predictable than stall, spin, crash, burn, die, accident from a turn back from EFATO, is this discussion. The people who have convinced themselves that because it is technically possible, and have practiced it once or twice at altitude means that they can pull it off when the horse-hockey hits the fan...

It is a very low percentage maneuver that involves betting your life on the outcome....

This thread has been beaten to death on this forum and people consistently kill themselves attempting a turn-back, and yet there are lots of people who are smart enough to know better, and yet they convince themselves they can pull it off and post their plans on forums like this....

Everyone wants to read accident reports to "learn from others mistakes." Here is the deal.... Every year lots of people kill themselves in a turn-back from an EFATO.

This is a very simple way to reduce fatalities... Change behavior... Commit to lower the nose and land on a soft spot, into the wind, ahead of the wings, undercontrol at minimum airspeed....

Tailwinds
Doug Rozendaal
 
Thanks Doug.

This is a very simple way to reduce fatalities... Change behavior... Commit to lower the nose and land on a soft spot, into the wind, ahead of the wings, undercontrol at minimum airspeed....

Tailwinds
Doug Rozendaal
 
My plan

I was involved in cutting a victim of a low altitude stall/spin out of an airplane. He survived, but it wasn't pretty!

Since then, I've given a lot of thought to the question "What would I do?", and here's what I finally realized. If my plane isn't insured, I'm going to try to save the plane. That means I'll try to make the "impossible turn". The following week, I sent my check in to the insurance company.

Now, the value of the plane is no longer my first consideration, and I'll land straight ahead - trees - field - whatever.
 
If you make the decision to turn back in a SHORT wing RV, you'd better be a darn good pilot or you're a very brave soul! :)
 
What a terrible outcome, and my sympathies to all involved.

As a flight instructor, I thought I'd share what we teach our students regards a pre-takeoff safety brief:

In the event of an engine failure during the takeoff roll (still on the ground), close the throttle, apply the brakes, and bring the a/c to a stop.

In the event of an engine failure during the climbout, with runway still below, lower the nose, close the throttle and land on the remaining runway ...

In the event of an engine failure with no runway remaining, perform immediate actions: lower the nose for best glide speed, switch on c/h and confirm fuel pump on. If no improvement, land the aircraft no more than 30 degrees left of right of current track. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES ATTEMPT TO TURN BACK.​

And then we also assess and discuss what lies beyond the runway, such as powerlines, fences, buildings etc.

As others have said, being prepared is the key. Understanding the dangers of a turn-around goes a long way towards ensuring people don't attempt it.
 
DakotaHawk said:
I was involved in cutting a victim of a low altitude stall/spin out of an airplane. He survived, but it wasn't pretty!

Since then, I've given a lot of thought to the question "What would I do?", and here's what I finally realized. If my plane isn't insured, I'm going to try to save the plane. That means I'll try to make the "impossible turn". The following week, I sent my check in to the insurance company.

Now, the value of the plane is no longer my first consideration, and I'll land straight ahead - trees - field - whatever.
Click to expand...

I'm with you. My engine quits, I no longer own the plane. It is a big part of the reason I pay (heartily so) hull insurance.
 
Whether a sailplane rating made me a better pilot or not, I don't know, but I do know I never depart w/o worrying about my abort options.
 
B25Flyer said:
The recurrence of this discussion makes me wonder if I should quit visiting this forum. If I hang out here, I can't let a discussion like this pass, but it really makes me wonder if it makes a difference????

The only thing more predictable than stall, spin, crash, burn, die, accident from a turn back from EFATO, is this discussion. The people who have convinced themselves that because it is technically possible, and have practiced it once or twice at altitude means that they can pull it off when the horse-hockey hits the fan...

It is a very low percentage maneuver that involves betting your life on the outcome....

This thread has been beaten to death on this forum and people consistently kill themselves attempting a turn-back, and yet there are lots of people who are smart enough to know better, and yet they convince themselves they can pull it off and post their plans on forums like this....

Everyone wants to read accident reports to "learn from others mistakes." Here is the deal.... Every year lots of people kill themselves in a turn-back from an EFATO.

This is a very simple way to reduce fatalities... Change behavior... Commit to lower the nose and land on a soft spot, into the wind, ahead of the wings, undercontrol at minimum airspeed....

Tailwinds
Doug Rozendaal
Click to expand...

Sorry Doug, it is just not that "black and white". Nothing in aviation really is, and it is the inability to distinguish and deal with it that ultimately kills people.
We shall agree to disagree, and that is fine.
Cheers!
 
The definitive turnback thread

B25Flyer said:
The recurrence of this discussion makes me wonder if I should quit visiting this forum. If I hang out here, I can't let a discussion like this pass, but it really makes me wonder if it makes a difference????

Tailwinds
Doug Rozendaal
Click to expand...

Relax Doug (Stein also ;)), I'll provide the URL to our definitive 2008 turnback debate on VansAirforce that ran for 231 posts and covered every possible opinion imagineable on the topic. There's no need for any of us to duplicate those comments.

For those interested in this grandaddy of all turnback discussions (and some very interesting video of super experienced Ag pilot Pierre Smith doing a turnback in his RV6A from just 250 feet) see here:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=30649
 
I understand people here are saying "DO NOT ATTEMPT!" But to what point? These RV's climb like crazy. So if you are at 800 ft, why not turn around?

At 400 ft, yeah, it'd be pretty dangerous. But at 600 ft? At 800 ft?

At 600 ft, you would have enough altitude to get the airspeed and crank it around.

I'm sure most people here are probably talking about under 400 ft.

I think it's important to also know at what point should you make a turn.

Steve
 
B25Flyer said:
... Commit to lower the nose and land on a soft spot, into the wind, ahead of the wings, undercontrol at minimum airspeed....
Click to expand...

Sometimes, there just is no "soft spot". I had an engine fail on takeoff and ahead was nothing but a forest of trees. The only clearing was the airport I just departed. I did a 180+/-. That was in a Cherokee 140 at about 500ft. Full fuel (50gls) and 2 souls aboard. Needless to say. We were on the ragged edge. Still I made it to the runway and lived to tell the story.

When I was in flight training my instructor would, while practicing engine out maneuvers, say "you lost your engine, what are you going to do?". That was my call to action. When my engine went kaput for real, the first thought that when through my brain was "this is the day I die". Not particularly comforting. The second thought, which awakened me from the terror of the first, was the voice of my flight instructor saying "you lost your engine, what are you going to do?". I was taught early on by a good bush pilot to "always have a plan". When I surveyed the scene, my plan was to turn to my left 90 to the airport property. As I made the 90, I still had altitude and continued to the 180+.

I agree that PLAN A should be to land straight or within 30 degrees left or right. However, sometimes PLAN A won't work, then you have to have another PLAN. Ideally, you should already know the possible landing sites near most of the airports you operate out of. At my home airport, there are certain airplanes that I won't use RW18 as there are NO options. I will take a cross-wind takeoff, before I will use it. There is one airport nearby that I won't fly out of all because I think the options are so bad.

When I did my first flight, I gathered several flight instructors (including myself) and wrote out an engine failure procedure. At my home airport (KUES) my plan was at 100' straight, 200' left 90, 300' the golf course across the freeway, 400' right 160 to cross runway.

I think it's wise when landing at an unfamiliar airport to include "Possible landing sites" in your landing checklist. Hopefully it's straight ahead. But not every airplane is the same. Take off in an Arrow and have an engine fail and you are a brick. Yep, forget turning, your going down. Take off in an RV9 and well, its a different story.
 
Captain Avgas said:
Relax Doug (Stein also ;)), I'll provide the URL to our definitive 2008 turnback debate on VansAirforce that ran for 231 posts and covered every possible opinion imagineable on the topic. There's no need for any of us to duplicate those comments.

For those interested in this grandaddy of all turnback discussions (and some very interesting video of super experienced Ag pilot Pierre Smith doing a turnback in his RV6A from just 250 feet) see here:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=30649
Click to expand...

Just for curiosity, I dug through 20 pages of postings to find Pierre's videos.
If you are interested, here you go.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=30649&page=21
 
jetjok said:
Sorry Doug, it is just not that "black and white". Nothing in aviation really is, and it is the inability to distinguish and deal with it that ultimately kills people.
We shall agree to disagree, and that is fine.
Cheers!
Click to expand...

I agree that we live in the gray in GA... And we love the freedom it gives us, but the black and white SOPs of the Airline world yield a much safer result.

What is black and white is that every year several people attempt this maneuver and die trying.... Most people that fly to the ground off the end of the runway survive. The ones that do die, most of them stall before they hit. If they stall before they hit with the wings level, what are their odds of flying out of a G'd up turn looking back over their shoulder while pushing the nose around with the rudder?

One more comment, there has been lots of reference to the stall speed vs bank chart in this thread. It is meaningless in this case. The wing stalls when it reaches the critical angle of attack without regard for airspeed. All it takes is a brisk tug, or little shove on the rudder to help bring the nose around to unhook an airplane at or near it's critical angle of attack....

Anyone who has a surface level acro card (I do) and is accustomed to finishing loops at the surface knows what the ground rush looks like and the airplane feels like and has a good chance of success. Everyone else has absolutely no idea what it looks and feels like and how they will react when this happens... There is no possible way we can safely train for this maneuver... The fatality rates of flight instruction would skyrocket....

Even with a surface card, I don't plan to turn back, because when I do a loop, (there is no loop in my acro routine BTW, it isn't worth the risk) I have a long list of known parameters and a known starting point.

To be clear, I have no intention of changing the minds of those who have this "all figured out." My intent is always to bring a honest assessment of the risks of this to those sitting on the fence.

Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
 
Doug,

As the originator of this thread, I felt your initial reply was a bit harsh. My question was meant to share something I witnessed which I thought could be of value to others and solicit any input which I hoped could be of value to myself and others in dealing with a similar situation. Even if it serves only as a reminder of the risk, I think it adds value. Wondering if you should continue to visit the forum because of "posts like this" adds nothing constructive.

If you reread my original post, maybe it would clarify that I was looking to find out what others with more experience might consider a safe altitude to turn back towards an airport with the goal of reducing the possiblity of an unsafe maneuver. At some point you can safely turn around, whether it is 500 feet or 5000 feet. I certainly don't intend to put it into a field if I can safely avoid this. The AOPA discussing the impossible turn that Hen07 provided is very helpful information. I can use this to determine at what point it is logical to return to the field and when it would be unsafe to do so.
 
One thing that I have found in general is that once pilots quit their training, they simply do not practice emergency procedures. I found myself in this position several years ago. So what I did, and continue to do, is practice at least one hour a month of takeoff emergencies. Two years ago I had a cylinder let go on takeoff and I managed to turn around with idle power and a really rough running engine. I wouldn't have done it unless I was "in shape". Ever since that incident I have it burned in my thick skull to always go over what my options are in the event of power loss before I advance the throttle. Having a plan beforehand is the only way a turnaround can be done successfully in my opinion. If you aren't always anticipating this event on takeoff, and able do some analysis before taking off to know what altitude you can be at to perform a slow-flight turn, then don't bother attempting it.
 
I apologize for being harsh, but I have lost too many friends in this business...

And it continues... Last year a Test pilot who should have known better tried a turnback from a very low altitude in a YAK 52 with predictable results... This most recent Lancair, and several other between....

The siren song of the concrete is so strong, I know I had an engine failure at low altitude and I had to fight to keep from initiating what would have been a fatal choice.... I was no where near high enough and yet I had a incredibly strong desire to save the plane... I knew an off airport landing would tear it up and I knew I would survive.. Both were correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top