poweroff 180

[carusoam]

Nice shared report, LT!

 

It seems the standards can’t possibly work in all conditions... like strong gusts of headwinds...

Adding the gust factor... you have a high chance of getting to the touchdown zone with too much Airspeed... depending on whether or not you get the gust or don’t get the gust...

Not Adding a gust factor, will be great for the maneuver, but only if the headwind remains... headwinds die out in two ways... gusts, and distance from the ground and trees...

Using the Long Body adds to the challenge.  The additional mass carries a fair amount of momentum that is tough to get rid of when you have too much speed...

 

Is the FAA examiner more interested in your logic, as nicely explained by DK (above), or the ability to plunk down on the one spot with no excess energy...?

Thinking out loud...

Best regards,

-a-

[Txbyker]

18 hours ago, L. Trotter said:

I hesitate to tell my power off 180º story, but It might benefit someone.

Two months ago I was performing my check ride for a CPL. I chose to use my Acclaim for the flight test. All the reference maneuvers, steep turns, short/soft field techniques and 3 Precision power landings were spot on. I wish I could have stopped there. The last maneuver was the power off 180º Precision spot landing. Flight conditions-clear skies, wind 20-25 kts with rather freq gusts to 35kts down the runway. Our normal.

At 1000 ft (pattern alt), 90 kts and abeam touch down point, throttle pulled full aft. started turn to base-then gear down. Making the runway was not an issue, hitting the exact point was. The head wind with gusts became a real unrecognized danger. As we all know, Moonies like to float (1 kt extra = 100 ft). That extra 100 ft on a CPL test is a bust. I was right where I needed to be maybe 5 feet above ground at 67 kts (per FFA examiner). Then the unthinkable.....I instantly lost a good 15 kt head wind. With an unexpected sudden 52 kt air speed, I experienced an immediate stall and my plane literally fell out of the sky just before the touch down site-all in about 2 milliseconds. I landed VERY firm of the main gear. At the time I did not notice any significant bounce, just a "were did that come from" feel. We returned to the hanger having completed the exam, engine running fine, no vibration.

Upon shut down, I immediately became nauseous at what I saw. You guest it, I had a prop strike. Seeing the bend tips of your prop can bring a grown man to tears. After a full inspection I had also literally blown out all of the rubber gear biscuits, TKS sling ring had chewed up the lower cowl by 1 inch, engine mount bent down 1/4 inch and the lower front edges of the main gear doors bent up. I still get sick thinking about it.

Items to consider:

-I'm not sure the power off, precision 180 (in the pattern) is realistic and necessary. Possible just a high risk/benefit maneuver. Yes, I completed many successful power off landings, but the risk was still present.

-Landing with no power (it's really like negative thrust) is a very different circumstance when compared to a std low power landing. Beware!

-Stalling a few feet off the ground is not recoverable. The entire experience was instantaneous.

-A prop strike may not be immediately noticed. A hard landing means taxi back, shut down and look.

-Even with insurance, a prop strike is expensive.

-Completing a CPL in a Mooney is very doable. It is also very difficult, thus making you a better pilot. Keeping speeds under control is a real challenge. There is nothing lazy about "lazy 8's". The whole point of a CPL is to perfect our piloting skills. No regret from this pilot.

In thinking this event over-a million times, I really don't know how I could have prevented this from happening, given the circumstances and requirement. Chose a different day? It's always windy at our airport. This was a typical day. Had the wind been consistent I would have had no problem. Plus, you don't get to choose when an engine will fail. Carry more speed? Then you bust your distant, particularly if you get a nice gust. Under a real engine failure, I don't think anyone cares if you were >100 ft from a "your" landing spot. Keep the speed and force the plane to the ground? Not happening.Typically, very little power under similar circumstances makes a big difference. This was not an option. These are just my thoughts.

After 25 years and 5000+ hrs of PIC I still have more to learn!

Wondering if I passed the CPL check ride? Well the answer is yes...and no. I passed initially. On the taxi ride back the examiner provided his assessment, all very complimentary. At one point he suggested my instruments were rigged. After recognizing the prop strike, he changed his mind and failed me. I get my plane back on Monday and have the pleasure of performing one more power off, precision 180º landing. Ya, I can't wait. haha

 

Thanks for this story.  This is what I was cautioned could happen in an unfortunate situation by my MAPA Mark Johnson) instructor who btw is not who is training the CPL. I have had those helpless drops in the past although less extreme.  With power off my prop (MT) actually provides some braking. I hope all is well with your plane.

Russ

[midlifeflyer]

54 minutes ago, donkaye said:

In my opinion the configuration one should use is dependent on the SLOPE to the airport at the time of engine failure.  I like to see at least 6°.  That gives a 3° safety factor.  If the slope falls below 3°, there is a very good chance that you will not make the airport and immediately start looking for an off field landing spot.  This can be confirmed in several ways:  1. If you have a G500, you are in the best shape to quickly determine if you can make it.  After going to best glide clean and with the prop all the way back, set in the field elevation as the base altitude (worst case situation instead of TPA) and see if the range arc shows past the airport. Since wind is automatically taken into account, you have the best of all worlds.  2.  Most people have GPS so, after setting up best glide as discussed above,  press direct to the airport and observe the time to the airport.  Note the altitude you have to loose to get to the airport.  Let's assume it's 5,000 feet.  As a rule of thumb for a quick calculation, double the altitude in thousands if feet and strip off the zeros.  That would make it 10 minutes.  Since the best glide in most Mooneys gives about a 600-700 ft/min descent rate, just note that you will need a little more time than the rule of thumb 500 ft/min to reach the airport.  Compare the time to the airport with the GPS to the time you calculated.  The time you calculated should be greater than 5 minutes more. 

When you absolutely know you have the field made, then configure the plane, but still make sure you have at least 3° safety factor on the slope.  You can't get altitude back if you are on speed, but you have many options (speed brakes if you have them, gear, flaps, s-turns, and finally slips) if you have the extra time afforded by the additional slope.

 

That is way too much mental math and headwork for me after an engine failure, even a simulated one. 

[Yetti]

If these are the standards:

The applicant demonstrates the ability to:

•  Complete the appropriate checklist.
•  Make radio calls as appropriate.
• Plan and follow a flight path to the selected landing area considering altitude, wind, terrain,and obstructions.
• Position airplane on downwind leg, parallel to landing runway.
• Correctly configure the airplane.
• As necessary, correlate crosswind with direction of forward slip and transition to side slip for landing.
• Touch down within -0/+200 feet from the specified touchdown point with no side drift, minimum float, and with the airplane’s longitudinal axis aligned with and over the runway centerline

Then in gusty conditions I would be turning really early to carry more speed and fly it on to the runway at a higher rate of speed.

I am thinking about getting my commercial.   Congrats to those that have done it and improved their skills.

 

.

[donkaye]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

That is way too much mental math and headwork for me after an engine failure, even a simulated one. 

Really?  Examples: 5,000 ft = 10 minutes, 10,000 ft = 20 minutes, 8,000 feet = 16 minutes, 4,500 ft = 9 minutes.  Practically no thought at all.

[donkaye]

23 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Ha!  That’s funny.  Almost the entirety of this discussion has been about the power off 180 commercial maneuver.  When I glanced at Don’s post I thought to myself what a different world TAA operators live in than do I. I mean, who on earth is considering slopes and looking at their G500 when they are abeam the numbers at 1000’ AGL with a failed engine anyway?  

I just expanded on the usefulness of the 180° power off approach and landing.  Even in the pattern, slope management is critical to a safe outcome engine out  or simulated engine out.

[carusoam]

Don,

For the attitude references you gave ... 3° and 6°...

Are these references that a pilot uses from experience... more or less?

Or is this taking a look right at the attitude indicator and really having a direct measurement for angle of descent?

Something I want to look into further...

This would help in determining that a nearby field is better than a stretch to the runway...

Fortunately, my runway has fields on both ends...

Thanks,

-a-

[ArtVandelay]

What happens if you lose the engine somewhere other than even with the numbers?

 

[donkaye]

5 hours ago, carusoam said:

Don,

For the attitude references you gave ... 3° and 6°...

Are these references that a pilot uses from experience... more or less?

Or is this taking a look right at the attitude indicator and really having a direct measurement for angle of descent?

Something I want to look into further...

This would help in determining that a nearby field is better than a stretch to the runway...

Fortunately, my runway has fields on both ends...

Thanks,

-a-

Yes, it is from experience with conscious attention placed on the proper slope recognition.  No, not by a small attitude indicator that has nowhere near satisfactory resolution.  By the time a transitioning student is ready to be signed off by me they recognized the nominal 3° slope that will lead to perfect landings every time when combined with the proper speed.  It is so important that I spend probably more time on slope management than on speed control.  Unfortunately, I haven't met ANY instructor who has recognized the issue, so they miss a more effective way to teach good landing technique.

[Guest]

Pulling the prop control all the way back with the throttle closed as Don suggests, will dramatically increase glide distance.  If you have done it you should try it.

Clarence

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, M20Doc said:

Pulling the prop control all the way back with the throttle closed as Don suggests, will dramatically increase glide distance.  If you have done it you should try it.

Clarence

How much oil pressure do you have after the engine failure to control the prop?

[Guest]

Just now, midlifeflyer said:

How much oil pressure do you have after the engine failure to control the prop?

I guess it all depends on the mode of failure.  If the engine is able to windmill and still has oil it may still be able to coarsen the propeller.  I do this regularly in my RV4 while practicing engine out landings and it’s amazing what a difference it makes to glide performance.  All you can do is try it on your own Mooney.

Ive never experienced an engine failure, but if I do I will pull the prop back fully, it can’t hurt.

Clarence

 

 

[midlifeflyer]

19 hours ago, donkaye said:

Really?  Examples: 5,000 ft = 10 minutes, 10,000 ft = 20 minutes, 8,000 feet = 16 minutes, 4,500 ft = 9 minutes.  Practically no thought at all.

Oh. I thought we were talking about close to the ground at or near pattern altitude, not with time to spare at a high AGL altitude.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Just now, M20Doc said:

I guess it all depends on the mode of failure.  If the engine is able to windmill and still has oil it may still be able to coarsen the propeller.  I do this regularly in my RV4 while practicing engine out landings and it’s amazing what a difference it makes to glide performance.  All you can do is try it on your own Mooney.

Ive never experienced an engine failure, but if I do I will pull the prop back fully, it can’t hurt.

Clarence

 

 

I agree. I've done that in all the controllable prop models I've  flown. But most of the posts I read discussing pulling the prop back never contemplate it being an ineffective  exercise in certain circumstances. So I figured I'd mention it.

[carusoam]

Mark,

Consider the Missile and Rocket that may have their props fail to coarse setting when OilP goes to zero...

They are the only Mooneys that may have this odd behavior...

A selling point for engine out issues...

Not such a great point if the governor’s oil pump breaks...

Best regards,

-a-

[midlifeflyer]

7 hours ago, carusoam said:

Mark,

Consider the Missile and Rocket that may have their props fail to coarse setting when OilP goes to zero...

They are the only Mooneys that may have this odd behavior...

A selling point for engine out issues...

Not such a great point if the governor’s oil pump breaks...

Best regards,

-a-

Absolutely. 

[1964-M20E]

sorry about the plane.  I would almost want to challenge the DPE on the failure or at least discuss it with him.  Yes you damaged the plane a very unfortunate thing but you did land it and after all it was a power off "emergency landing".

Did you successfully do the following?  The standard does not say you cannot damage the plane nor do you want to however if you met the standard he should pass you regardless.

•  Complete the appropriate checklist.
•  Make radio calls as appropriate.
• Plan and follow a flight path to the selected landing area considering altitude, wind, terrain,and obstructions.
• Position airplane on downwind leg, parallel to landing runway.
• Correctly configure the airplane.
• As necessary, correlate crosswind with direction of forward slip and transition to side slip for landing.
• Touch down within -0/+200 feet from the specified touchdown point with no side drift, minimum float, and with the airplane’s longitudinal axis aligned with and over the runway centerline.