Minimum Safe Altitude for Engine Out Turn Back To Airport

[eman1200]

One of the best things you can do is look at your home airport in google earth and figure out where you might land, other than the airport, in the event of an engine out at low altitude. Then go up in the pattern and actually survey the airport, take pictures, decide where you might be able to go... 

Only thing I would add to this good idea is if possible, fly in someone else’s plane so you can really focus on doing this. You’ll be surprised how different fields look from google earth to real life, and how hard it can be to fly the plane while looking for specific fields and whatnot.

Also, what would Dan Gryder do?!?

[Mooney Dog]

On 8/28/2021 at 5:48 PM, eman1200 said:

what would Dan Gryder do?!?

Isnt that the dude who speculated on all the crashes and then went and crashed his own plane? 

[eman1200]

Isnt that the dude who speculated on all the crashes and then went and crashed his own plane? 

That’s the guy!

[Jerry 5TJ]

The startle time even with a good takeoff briefing is likely to be 5-10 seconds during which time the pilot may do nothing or may even take incorrect actions as his brain processes the situation.  

Reference

When training for the turn back after a simulated loss of power in a single engine plane it is probably realistic to add a 5-7 second wait to simulate the startle effect’s delay.   That can add significantly to the required altitude to make the field.  In some cases the response delay can make the situation unrecoverable if the airspeed decay is very rapid.  

[rpcc]

this was an interesting analysis - https://generalaviationnews.com/2021/06/07/the-impossible-turn-debate-continues/ 

[PilotX]

I determined my descent rate in the Bravo at best glide and it was about 500 ft./min. so if I don’t have 500 feet I might not make the turn even if you’re perfect. Of course the other consideration of trying to get back to the field is it is closer to the airport bathrooms and underwear dispenser. 

[kortopates]

I determined my descent rate in the Bravo at best glide and it was about 500 ft./min. so if I don’t have 500 feet I might not make the turn even if you’re perfect. Of course the other consideration of trying to get back to the field is it is closer to the airport bathrooms and underwear dispenser. 

500 ft/min is way more optimistic that what your POH specifies.
500 ft/min is a very popular descent rate under power.
but agree 500’ isn’t enough altitude to make the turn its a 180 or less and your close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

+1 for checking your actual descent rate with no power available…

If 500fpm is what you get… expect the engine to be supplying a lot more power than you expect, with the throttle out…

If Your challenges include difficulty landing on the first 200’ of runway… because your Mooney is extra slippery….  You might be experiencing the engine still producing a fare amount of power…

 

Or… are you one of those people that doesn’t like to dial out what ever is left in the throttle after pulling it back?  There might be a twist or two of the throttle knob to be removed…

I would really appreciate a 500fpm descent while engine out…

With respect to the topic…. Reaching a nicely developed descent speed, and vertical speed, takes about half the time you have left… while you add variables on top of it like bank angles…   So….  Start with having the good data before the occurrence….  

PP thoughts only, not a CFI…

Best regards,

-a-

[toomany]

On 8/23/2021 at 4:48 PM, alextstone said:

Hi Bravo Pilots!

Last weekend, I practiced engine out procedures with an instructor, first at 5500 feet, then upon departure from an altitude of 1200 ft AGL.  I learned that that I have altitude to spare to get back to the airport but I wonder how knowledge that I was going to do the procedure (reaction time) and the fact that the engine was idling changed the required altitude.  In other words, what do you consider to be your minimum altitude to attempt a return to airport upon engine out and why?  @donkaye?  Mike Elliott?

I'm thinking that the start of the turn needs to be at an altitude of at least 1000 ft AGL....

Alex

we had a catastrophic engine failure at 4500msl in the middle of the country at +/- 3800AGL, reaction time was prob on the order of 5-10 seconds.  we had to do a 180 and land at an airport 5 miles behind us.  Nominal winds gave us some more ground speed once turned around but we had more than enough altitude and speed to make it - so much so that we didn't bother trimming for best glide, just shut the engine inputs down and stalled it to stop the prop. We were going to do a 360 on final but only had 3 previous landings in this aircraft, so opted for a slip to the threshold - we were at 115kts over the numbers, pushed it onto the rnwy and bounced, put the nose up to scrub airspeed, gained 100' and put it back down with about a foot of rnwy left out of 5000' and two tires w flat spots - it was a great day.  Doing it again maybe would have widened things out or maybe have done the 360, but i have practiced engine outs in a comanche and have come up short using best glide speed and following the prescribed SOP's.  Best thing ive found once you are familiar witht an aircraft is to aim for the middle of the field and and slip it in or use whatever you have to slow you down once you have the field made.  countless times i have had winds change or go calm within 200' alt. of touchdown. i always pull the prop back the whole way in practice and push it fwd if im too hot on final - i also keep the gear/flaps up until i have the field made.  One thing i observed in our 4th landing in the bravo was that it doesnt slip like a comanche, so you'll build considerable speed if you are slipping with the nose down.  

[DXB]

35 minutes ago, toomany said:

we had a catastrophic engine failure at 4500msl in the middle of the country at +/- 3800AGL, reaction time was prob on the order of 5-10 seconds.  we had to do a 180 and land at an airport 5 miles behind us.  Nominal winds gave us some more ground speed once turned around but we had more than enough altitude and speed to make it - so much so that we didn't bother trimming for best glide, just shut the engine inputs down and stalled it to stop the prop. We were going to do a 360 on final but only had 3 previous landings in this aircraft, so opted for a slip to the threshold - we were at 115kts over the numbers, pushed it onto the rnwy and bounced, put the nose up to scrub airspeed, gained 100' and put it back down with about a foot of rnwy left out of 5000' and two tires w flat spots - it was a great day.  Doing it again maybe would have widened things out or maybe have done the 360, but i have practiced engine outs in a comanche and have come up short using best glide speed and following the prescribed SOP's.  Best thing ive found once you are familiar witht an aircraft is to aim for the middle of the field and and slip it in or use whatever you have to slow you down once you have the field made.  countless times i have had winds change or go calm within 200' alt. of touchdown. i always pull the prop back the whole way in practice and push it fwd if im too hot on final - i also keep the gear/flaps up until i have the field made.  One thing i observed in our 4th landing in the bravo was that it doesnt slip like a comanche, so you'll build considerable speed if you are slipping with the nose down.  

Being at 3800ft AGL and 5 miles out from a field means you needed a minimum glide ratio of ~7:1 to make it back assuming calm winds  - well within the glide range of Mooneys but marginal for some other piston singles.

[midlifeflyer]

3 hours ago, DXB said:

Being at 3800ft AGL and 5 miles out from a field means you needed a minimum glide ratio of ~7:1 to make it back assuming calm winds  - well within the glide range of Mooneys but marginal for some other piston singles.

Being at 3800 AGL gives a whole bunch of options you don't have at 700 AGL. Making it to an airport is only one of them.

[Danb]

On 9/18/2021 at 10:42 PM, kortopates said:

500 ft/min is way more optimistic that what your POH specifies.
500 ft/min is a very popular descent rate under power.
but agree 500’ isn’t enough altitude to make the turn its a 180 or less and your close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Attending the recent PPP of which you were at Paul, the seminar gave a good critique of what to do in various scenarios ie., Altitudes. For those who generally attend the board has been adding new items to the agenda therefore it’s not always a repeat of the previous year.

[rbp]

for what its worth, in gliders you have to demonstrate a simulated tow rope break at 200ft, and land back on the runway. so its pretty engrained in me. 

i will say, however, after reading this topic, i should consider amending my departure procedure to pitch for 85 (Vx) until 1000AGL, to stay close and get high, and be closer to Vglide for just this contingency.

 

[kortopates]

i will say, however, after reading this topic, i should consider amending my departure procedure to pitch for 85 (Vx) until 1000AGL, to stay close and get high, and be closer to Vglide for just this contingency.

I am of the opposite opinion. Losing the engine in a Vx climb has resulted in many stall/spin fatal accidents just because the startle factor delayed the pilot from pushing the nose down in time. In a Vx climb you don’t have more than a couple seconds to push.
I prefer to maximize my survivability climbing out about 10kts above Vy where i still have a good view over the nose and can still see options for an off field landing. Plus we already have about the best glide ratio in the light SEL GA fleet with about 1.9 to 2.1 nm glide per each 1000’ of altitude depending on model. A C172 with only about 1.5 nm per 1000’ provides a much more challenging turn back problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard TooMany!

Great first post!

Excellent detail…

 

 

Have to seriously think about slipping the Long Body… vs. using all the braking power that is available without the slip….

Have to be familiar with full flap landings and slips in Long Bodies for that…

 

rbp,  what’s the glide ratio of your glider?

With the Mooney we get approx. 10:1 to work with…

How many Mississippis of startle factor do you use with a known tow line break coming?

 

Real important… what is the stall speed and stall characteristics of a glider?

The biggest challenge of a Mooney engine out are not being able to fly the plane after it stalls…

MS has lost three planes during T/O related stalls…

one was an engine out, then turning back…

the next was an M20E too near trees… ran out of room.

The last was a long body on a really steep climb for unknown reasons…

 

So… have enough speed so your startle factor practice and real startle factor… don’t lead to a stall….

Push quickly, get light in the seat… know that Mooneys didn’t earn any special immunity to stalls…

PP thoughts of what I read around here…

Best regards,

-a-

[JohnB]

I practiced engine outs in a Redbird full motion simulator and told the instructor I wanted to practice the "possible" turn back in case of engine failure on takeoff and had him kill the engine at various altitudes known only to him.  Highly instructional. I learned my following limitations, and these were all with very short reaction times (less than 2 seconds) as I knew it was coming but I didn't know exactly when.  I counted a successful landing as landing anywhere on the airport environment (taxiway, misaligned with any runway) at each of these AGLs

• 500 Feet AGL - 50% chance of making it back to runway environment ( I tried less than 500 a few times, with dismal results)
• 650 feet AGL- 70% chance of making it back to RE
• 800 feet AGL - 100% chance of making it back to RE, and some of those times actually reasonably lined up with the reverse runway
• 1000 feet AGL - 100% made it back to runway, all lined up with reverse runway

Of course as I practiced this, I got a lot better, as this is a near immediate nose down and steep turn, not comfy,  acrobatic maneuver with a goal of maintaining an absolute airspeed at 90 knots during the maneuver, which may sound simple but it takes practice, and I probably could practice more and get these altitudes lower but this is where I am now. Still have yet to try this in my airplane at altitude but would like to do one day. 

So now as before I take off any runway, I always go through where will I be at 500-800 feet agl and options, and decide on my minimum turn around altitude for that runway (MTAA). Pre checking wind direction that will blow you toward the airport if possible, to decide on direction of turn etc.  If its a large runway environment, can I turn back and land on any asphalt, my MTAA might be lower than 800,  if short runway, or narrow runway environment, straight ahead or shallow turn to field might be the option until I am above 1,000 feet. Also the airports with very long runways (more than 10k feet long), or a very strong headwind,  landing straight ahead on the runway might be best, raising gear to slow down faster on landing if needed if I'm about to go over the edge may be an option. 

Taking a few moments to consider these factors before each takeoff is something I have incorporated.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by JohnB

[kortopates]

On 9/24/2021 at 8:28 PM, JohnB said:

I practiced engine outs in a Redbird full motion simulator and told the instructor I wanted to practice the "possible" turn back in case of engine failure on takeoff and had him kill the engine at various altitudes known only to him.  Highly instructional. I learned my following limitations, and these were all with very short reaction times (less than 2 seconds) as I knew it was coming but I didn't know exactly when.  I counted a successful landing as landing anywhere on the airport environment (taxiway, misaligned with any runway) at each of these AGLs

• 500 Feet AGL - 50% chance of making it back to runway environment ( I tried less than 500 a few times, with dismal results)
• 650 feet AGL- 70% chance of making it back to RE
• 800 feet AGL - 100% chance of making it back to RE, and some of those times actually reasonably lined up with the reverse runway
• 1000 feet AGL - 100% made it back to runway, all lined up with reverse runway

Of course as I practiced this, I got a lot better, as this is a near immediate nose down and steep turn, not comfy,  acrobatic maneuver with a goal of maintaining an absolute airspeed at 85 knots or greater during the maneuver, which may sound simple but it takes practice, and I probably could practice more and get these altitudes lower but this is where I am now. Still have yet to try this in my airplane at altitude but would like to do one day. 

So now as before I take off any runway, I always go through where will I be at 500-800 feet agl and options, and decide on my minimum turn around altitude for that runway (MTAA). Pre checking wind direction that will blow you toward the airport if possible, to decide on direction of turn etc.  If its a large runway environment, can I turn back and land on any asphalt, my MTAA might be lower than 800,  if short runway, or narrow runway environment, straight ahead or shallow turn to field might be the option until I am above 1,000 feet. Also the airports with very long runways (more than 10k feet long), or a very strong headwind,  landing straight ahead on the runway might be best, raising gear to slow down faster on landing if needed if I'm about to go over the edge may be an option. 

Taking a few moments to consider these factors before each takeoff is something I have incorporated.

 

 

Awesome John, excellent training for sure. I teach in the Redbird as well - was this a C172 emulation? If so, it has the added challenge that the C172 only glides 1.5 nm per 1000' of altitude compared to the 1.9 nm per 1000' of altitude in your Bravo.  If your near gross weight at takeoff, 85 kts is probably a bit slow with respect to stall margin but does make for a tighter turn. 

[exM20K]

On 9/23/2021 at 5:24 PM, Danb said:

For those who generally attend the board has been adding new items to the agenda therefore it’s not always a repeat of the previous year

That’s great news.  Last one I attended in Davenport was really thin on Acclaim materials.  Any improvement there?

-Dan

[exM20K]

Great work, @toomany  

a Mooney year will eat up a ton of runway at 115 KIAS.  

Turning away from a runway when dead stick is not a great idea.

Mid and long body planes are not great to slip if slow and full flaps.  The tail is working very hard to keep the nose up with that porky six cylinder engine out there, and blanking the tail with both full flaps and the fuselage cal start a buffet, which if allowed to progress into a tail stall will turn you into a lawn dart.

S turns or pitching to a slower than best glide speed will consume excess energy. 

I highly recommend Nate Jaros’s engine out book. https://www.amazon.com/Engine-Out-Survival-Tactics-Emergencies-ebook/

I created this Smart Card for my plane after reading his book, and I re read it from time to time. Last PPP I did, I flew all these engine out procedures with Parvez Darva, and it was really cool to see them work.

-Dan 

 

[Danb]

4 hours ago, exM20K said:

That’s great news.  Last one I attended in Davenport was really thin on Acclaim materials.  Any improvement there?

-Dan

Dan I would say nothing new in regard to your TN, most was generic Mooney info. You mentioned Pavez, great Mooney guy tough instructor for the PPP guys 

[rbp]

On 9/23/2021 at 8:56 PM, kortopates said:

the startle factor

as I mentioned, training for glider rope tow breaks (which are more frequent than engine out)  at 200AGL is all about eliminating the startle factor 

[rbp]

On 9/24/2021 at 4:55 AM, carusoam said:

rbp,  what’s the glide ratio of your glider?

With the Mooney we get approx. 10:1 to work with…

How many Mississippis of startle factor do you use with a known tow line break coming?

 

Real important… what is the stall speed and stall characteristics of a glider?

glide ratio depends on the glider, but anywhere from 20:1 to 50+:1. that's why we can do turn backs from 200ft.  

how many Mississippis? i was taught to annunciate 50,100, 200 feet corresponding to landing straight ahead on the runway, landing straight ahead beyond the runway, and turning back from a tow rope break. by annunciating, you're always ready! (how many of you have 1000ft checklists?)

[JohnB]

On 9/26/2021 at 9:45 AM, kortopates said:

Awesome John, excellent training for sure. I teach in the Redbird as well - was this a C172 emulation? If so, it has the added challenge that the C172 only glides 1.5 nm per 1000' of altitude compared to the 1.9 nm per 1000' of altitude in your Bravo.  If your near gross weight at takeoff, 85 kts is probably a bit slow with respect to stall margin but does make for a tighter turn. 

It was a Seneca setup, instructor said that was closest he had to a Mooney. He also said 85 was the absolute slowest limit I could go without a stall,  I was aiming for about 90 on each successful run. Certainly wish that someone would setup a Redbird simulator for a Mooney, that would be great! 

[mike_elliott]

13 hours ago, JohnB said:

It was a Seneca setup, instructor said that was closest he had to a Mooney. He also said 85 was the absolute slowest limit I could go without a stall,  I was aiming for about 90 on each successful run. Certainly wish that someone would setup a Redbird simulator for a Mooney, that would be great! 

Reach out to Kevin Kammer, John. I think he has a personal redbird setup this way. He might also be able to get the setup from the full motion sim Mooney has or had. I tried to purchase one of these full motion sims that Mooney owned back when Albert called the shots there, but Mooney wanted a bit more than what fair market for it was.

[kortopates]

4 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

Reach out to Kevin Kammer, John. I think he has a personal redbird setup this way. He might also be able to get the setup from the full motion sim Mooney has or had. I tried to purchase one of these full motion sims that Mooney owned back when Albert called the shots there, but Mooney wanted a bit more than what fair market for it was.

I have or had a copy of the Mooney RB set up on my laptop back from my Mooney days with Kevin. But I persoanllu found it pretty much unusable running it on the laptop. But af the time I had access to the full motion RB Mooney too which was really nice. Too much time has transpired now to even get it runnng (even if I still have it).