Engine failure, what phase of flight?

[BKlott]

My experience(s) have been more flukey than others. First, a partial blockage of airflow into the carburetor of our Grumman Cheetah as we were climbing through about 300 ft on departure, caused a rough running engine and partial power loss. Carb heat (what you are trained to do) further enriched the mixture, worsening the situation. The only possible solution from the cockpit would have been to lean the mixture, adjusting the fuel air ratio for best performance, the one thing we are not trained to do in this situation. Our solution was to fly a tight pattern at about 400 ft...to a safe landing.

Next, a plugged fuel vent in the Cheetah, caused by some tiny bugs deciding to build a nest in the right tank vent, caused a total power loss at altitude after switching from the left tank to the right tank. This was resolved by switching tanks, boost pump on and a return to the airport for a visit to the FBO's maintenance hangar.

Finally, another rough engine / partial power loss event occurred while climbing through about 200 ft of altitude on departure. Carb heat, once again, exasperated the condition. Fortunately there was a cross Runway at KISM Kissimmee Airport and no other traffic because the engine quit all together just as the nose wheel settled on the runway. The mechanic on duty found that the engine was flooded due to a small piece of fuel tank sealant that somehow managed to get through the two sumps on the right wing (we were on the right wing tank at the time) and the fuel strainers to lodge where the float valve would normally seat in the carburetor. This resulted in another "too rich" condition followed by our second forced landing in the Cheetah.

Speculation is that the earlier plugged fuel vent, engine quitting event caused some flexing of the integral right wing tank which later resulted in this piece of fuel sealant breaking free. It was about the size of a small booger. This same tank later developed a leak which resulted in the wing being de-mated from the plane for repair.

My opinion is that you cannot predict when it will happen IF it ever happens to you.It does not happen to the vast majority of pilots. I would suggest that you should consider it a possibility every time you strap yourself into an airplane and be prepared to act when the problem occurs. You need to KNOW that if you lose power on takeoff that you MUST come forward on the controls to maintain airspeed and control of the airplane. You should also have a pre-planned place to go at your home airport if you have to deal with this problem. Figure out your options while you're sitting on your living room sofa. Don't wait until you have a problem in the airplane to try to figure out what to do.

One last thought for you is this. When you take someone flying with you, you may be their spouse, their Dad, their friend or their relative but there is only one thing that you absolutely must be...and that is THE PILOT. That must be foremost on your mind. The lives of your loved ones depend on it.

I sincerely hope that you never have a power loss experience in your flying career.

P.S. You might think that after having two forced landings and the power loss at altitude that I would probably not miss the Cheetah. Well, believe it or not, I absolutely loved flying that airplane and miss it to this day. We sold it twenty seven years ago...almost to the very day. That was one nice flying airplane.

Edited September 27, 2017 by BKlott

[jetdriven]

I could only find 13 inflight breakups of single engine Comanches in the NTSB files. Perhaps the Bonanza is higher in number  but still the Comanche ranks highly per airframe for infliggt breakup rate. Perhaps the several AD's involving that have helped, as they did on the Bonanza. 

As to the complete submersion In Flood water, well, it's a steel tube fuselage and a laminated spar. If your car flood will you trust it for the next 20 years? I'd call Mooney Engineering and get a letter from them saying it was airworthy before signing my A&P on the annual. Same with Lycoming  for the engine. I have a feeling what they would say.  Peter Lyons said on BT that the Aspen installed was unairworthy and not eligible for certification. What you do is your choice. But I would never sign  off a completely submerged airframe and engine. Corrosion will happen in places it cannot be inspected and eventually something will happen. The insurance company totaled it once already, for basically that reason. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by jetdriven

[Marauder]

There have been a few submerged Mooneys over the years.  It isn’t hard to track the owners and ask if they are having issues due to the submersion.

Fresh water:

Salt water:

Just fat in the water:

[Guest]

Canadian Aviation Regulations CAR625 Appendix G has a section on submersion, scrapping the engine or airframe are not required.  

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part6-standards-a625g-509.htm

Many float planes are recovered after submersion and returned to service every year around the world.  I doubt they are falling out of the sky any faster afterward than those which have never been submerged.

Clarence

[Hank]

46 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Canadian Aviation Regulations CAR625 Appendix G has a section on submersion, scrapping the engine or airframe are not required.  

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part6-standards-a625g-509.htm

Many float planes are recovered after submersion and returned to service every year around the world.  I doubt they are falling out of the sky any faster afterward than those which have never been submerged.

Clarence

Clarence, thanks for bringing facts, and possibly sanity, to the opinion-driven witch hunt!

[MIm20c]

From the responses and links it looks like the first 10 mins after takeoff might have considerably higher rates of engine failures.  Lately my sop is to pull back to 25 squared when I get to pattern altitude.  My instructor suggested that for noise reasons. I’m wondering if I should leave it full forward until MP comes down on its own.  At what MP would it be safe to reduce RPM to 2500? I’ve been told not to reduce prop at full power settings.

If the engine is more likely to have a problem after a power change I feel like 3-4K feet would give me a lot more options vs 1000 ft pull to 25 squared. 

[Hank]

I go WOT / 2700 while sitting on the numbers, and leave it there until I level off and the plane accelerates to a steady airspeed. Then I set my desired power, lean and accelerate some more. When I remember, I use the Target EGT method to lean during the climb.

25 / 25 actually reduces your climb rate, and the reduced airflow over the engine increases all engine temps for the duration of the longer climb . . . You may want to rethink that method. Visit the MAPA site (www.mooneypilots.com) and read the articles written by Bob Kromer about how to climb, cruise and descend in your Mooney. He started as a test pilot, and moved up through VP of Engineering, so he knows wherefrom he speaks / writes.

[Rwsavory]

19 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

From the responses and links it looks like the first 10 mins after takeoff might have considerably higher rates of engine failures.  Lately my sop is to pull back to 25 squared when I get to pattern altitude.  My instructor suggested that for noise reasons. I’m wondering if I should leave it full forward until MP comes down on its own.  At what MP would it be safe to reduce RPM to 2500? I’ve been told not to reduce prop at full power settings.

If the engine is more likely to have a problem after a power change I feel like 3-4K feet would give me a lot more options vs 1000 ft pull to 25 squared. 

I suggest that you read this article:  https://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182179-1.html  and others by Deakins.  He dispels a lot of OWT's  (old wives tales) about engines.

The bottom line is that there is no good reason to reduce MP or rpms until reaching your cruising altitude.  But if you want to reduce your rpms at full throttle, go ahead.  You're just reducing power by other means.  You will not damage your engine.

 

 

[FloridaMan]

On 9/27/2017 at 10:19 AM, N6758N said:

Didn't this one go in as well Byron?

It did, but it was at night, the pilot was intoxicated and ran out of gas. I don't think it was related to the history at all. 

[FloridaMan]

I lost my engine post maintenance at 200ft leaving a reputable MSC. Shit happens. I declined an intersection departure and was able to land in the field at the end of the runway without injury or airframe damage. The cause was FOD that was never found, but evidenced by the spark plugs in the #4 cylinder being smashed. There were no symptoms or evidence during the long taxi, run up or takeoff roll. 

[Guitarmaster]

When my kid was about that big I took him up flying.
I strapped his car seat into the co pilots seat.
When I was about 200 feet high he put both feet on the yoke and pushed as hard as he could. ( the little guy was stronger then he looks)
They don't tell you about that in flying school!

That could be exciting!

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[EricJ]

Another source of trouble is fuel contamination.    For the most part the times I've personally had significant issues or people I've known personally had issues were due to fuel contamination (either water or something undefined from a truck/pump, whatever).   I had an issue yesterday that, fortunately, manifested itself just when I was pushing the throttle forward to take off.   I had just refueled at that field about a half-hour prior and I'm pretty sure I got some nasty crap from that pump.   A return to the ramp was necessary.  I had an issue last week that was nearly certainly water contamination, so I'm not doing well lately with fuel quality.  Some fluorosilicone O-rings in the caps have, hopefully, fixed the water issue, and checking the sumps after every refuel is now highlighted in my brain.

Somehow this was all easier when I was renting.

[Cyril Gibb]

3 hours ago, EricJ said:

...checking the sumps after every refuel is now highlighted in my brain.

Not clear here.  After fueling, dId anything show up in the sample while sumping those two occasions?  Or did you not sump?

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, Cyril Gibb said:

Not clear here.  After fueling, dId anything show up in the sample while sumping those two occasions?  Or did you not sump?

It had been getting water in it due to leaky fuel cap o-rings, and I'd been draining the sumps until no water showed up.   It subsequently still swallowed a slug of water (is the consensus) and caused a bit of a moment on takeoff.   The o-rings were replaced and I haven't detected any significant water since.   

Yesterday I did not check it at the fuel stop (flame away).   It started and taxied fine, and ran up fine, and then ran like crap when I tried to advance to full throttle.   Taxied back to the ramp and checked the sumps and didn't see anything, but it eventually cleared after an extended run up period.   I switched tanks, it ran like crap again but cleared after an extended run up again.  Checked the sumps again, didn't see anything.  Did more extended runups with no issues.  I've no idea what it was, but it definitely prevented me from taking off.   It'd consistently hold around 2300 rpm but just ran rough and wouldn't go any higher.   After running whatever it was out of both tanks it was fine.   There wasn't much of it, but enough to be an issue.   If it had done it during climb out or something it would have been a big problem.

To the OP's question, both of these instances in my personal experience happened at takeoff or attempted takeoff.   The only other instance I know of personally (to someone I knew) also happened at takeoff and resulted in a successful impossible turn.   That case was the result of the fuel truck being left out during a rain storm with one of the hatches not fully secured.   Fuel contamination isn't really engine failure, but power failure and has pretty much the same effect.

[cujet]

Other than a few episodes of rough running (stuck valve, fouled plug, etc) I've only had one real in flight failure. It was during flight training in a 150. The instructor and I noticed a severe loss of power while cruising at about 2500-3000 feet altitude. The engine still ran, but was only able to achieve 1700RPM, mostly windmilling due to our 700 FPM descent to the nearby airport, which we barely made. 

The culprit was a cracked piston, that was then perforated by hot combustion gases. The failure was not instant, and worsened over a period of about a minute or two. Always remember that the loss of 1 cylinder in a 4 cylinder engine can result in near zero power. While every situation is different, a 6 cylinder engine will often make 50% power with the loss of one cyl. 

Because of that incident during training, I always try to maintain sufficient altitude to glide to the next airport. 

Edited October 2, 2017 by cujet

[Cyril Gibb]

10 hours ago, EricJ said:

Yesterday I did not check it at the fuel stop (flame away). 

I could have worded my question better.  I in no way intended it to be flamer, just a learning experience.  When I read about an incident, I really want to hear if there was anything I could do to avoid the same issue.