Simulated engine-out settings

[dkkim73]

All, 
I was just reading this thread

and thinking about the need to practice simulated engine-out profiles (descent angle, speed). I always try to visualize a return as part of the brief, taking into account runways, winds, etc. 

I'm reading Nato Jaros' engine-out procedures booklet and thinking about what would work well for the Acclaim Type S. Goal is to simulate a similar descent angle ("wire") at Vg (best glide speed) via throttle/RPM settings to practice flying simulated profiles. Obviously this will be different than flight idle with prop full-forward in many cases. 

Any parameters folks have to share with the community? 
DK

ETA: Would ideally simulate whatever would be the best-range settings, which might involve setting the prop finer for a power-off glide. Though I suppose you might have to work out what actually stretches the glide. 

Edited Saturday at 10:49 PM by dkkim73
clarification re: prop

[Marc_B]

This kinda of thinking was what led me to get my Commercial Rating. Power off 180s, spiral descents, emergency descents…great tools to have in the bag with your aircraft. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I always just pull the throttle to idle. You could practice at altitude with the mixture at ICO. 

Just hope you can actually make a runway and don5 have any hot start issues.

I once shut down an engine during multi training. It took us 20 minutes to get it going again.

[Fritz1]

Very good point, I was wondering about that myself, poh gives numbers for best glide, prop coarse pitch, turbo engines do not take well to rapid power reductions, so my standard procedure is midfield, center of runway 1000 ft 20", pull power to idle, gear down and approach flaps when landing is assured, however, this is babying it, to practice it for real you would have a flight instructor pull the power when you least expect it, preferably from a high power setting, which does not agree with a turbo engine, thoughts?

[Scottknoll]

I did some rough math for the Ovation a few years ago. ~90KIAS = 1.5nm/min (no wind)
10,000’ = 18nm glide (from engine out glide chart).
18nm divided by 1.5nm = 12 min glide.
10,000’ / 12 min = 833’/min

Then I went out and flew 90 knots with gear/flaps/speedbrakes out. Reduced power until I got roughly 800-900’/min descent. Used % power from the Garmin.

I think I came up with about 35% power, hopefully kinder on the engine than full idle. This makes me feel like I’m being gentler on the engine.

So for engine out practice I put everything out and set 35% power. Keeps the power up but gives me the same glide.

I “simulate” putting the gear down and flaps out by reducing power further when necessary.

Might not be the best training reinforcement, since I’m not doing it how I would in a real emergency. But I feel better doing this on a regular basis.

Then again training aircraft routinely go to TBO because they’re flown often and nobody babies those engines

[Jeff Uphoff]

20 hours ago, Scottknoll said:

I think I came up with about 35% power, hopefully kinder on the engine than full idle. This makes me feel like I’m being gentler on the engine.

So for engine out practice I put everything out and set 35% power. Keeps the power up but gives me the same glide.

Out of curiosity, is that 35% relative to the stock M20R 280HP or the O3 STC'd 310HP?

--Up.

[AJ88V]

Worth a look.  Makes a good point that the turn is loser to a 360 than a 180.

I’d guess our Mooneys would perform closer to the Bonanzas in the vid below.

 

[AJ88V]

Fantastic discussion here

 

[midlifeflyer]

 

On 1/4/2025 at 7:52 PM, Scottknoll said:

Then again training aircraft routinely go to TBO because they’re flown often and nobody babies those engines

And I’ve done that type of training with turbos too.  And, as an article I read years ago pointed out, high performance aerobatic airplanes do it multiple times a day. That’s not to say shock cooling is a good thing, but periodic proficiency training should have some kind of priority and may not be as bad as we think.

And even if it is, take the time for power idle be part of a power reduction/cooling sequence.

[Scottknoll]

18 hours ago, Jeff Uphoff said:

Out of curiosity, is that 35% relative to the stock M20R 280HP or the O3 STC'd 310HP?

--Up.

We have the 310HP and the Garmin is programmed for 2700RPM. So it should be based on 310HP.

[Ryan ORL]

7 hours ago, AJ88V said:

Worth a look.  Makes a good point that the turn is loser to a 360 than a 180.

I’d guess our Mooneys would perform closer to the Bonanzas in the vid below.

It would be (and is) just like the Bonanza.  There are practically no scenarios where a turnback is workable in a Mooney, unless you happen to already be on a crosswind before the failure occurs, and there is an intersecting runway available.  (Or similar)

The issue is the very high best glide speed.  Mooneys do have a good glide ratio, but do so at a relatively high speed, which causes the turning circle to be quite large.

Conversely, I still conduct flight training in 172s semi-regularly, and I demonstrate what does and doesn't work for turnbacks in that airplane.  With a 65kt (and practically even lower at typical weights) glide speed, turning back from 600 AGL is fairly easy, and often even results in being high.

[EricJ]

43 minutes ago, Ryan ORL said:

It would be (and is) just like the Bonanza.  There are practically no scenarios where a turnback is workable in a Mooney, unless you happen to already be on a crosswind before the failure occurs, and there is an intersecting runway available.  (Or similar)

It's been done.    He lands well past his point of lift-off.
 

 

 

[AJ88V]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

It's been done.    He lands well past his point of lift-off.

 

That was terrifying!