I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options, and
both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude in
cloud without a working transponder.

I'd appreciate some insight from the group.

Replace the fuse on the avionics bus.


"paul kgyy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
> set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
> electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
> occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
> carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
> and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
> continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options, and
> both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
> nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude in
> cloud without a working transponder.
>
> I'd appreciate some insight from the group.
>

If your plane goes dark, and the batteries in your GPS go dark as well,
then you have a bad situation. Presumably you still have altimeter,
ASI, clock, compass, attitude indicator, and maybe heading indicator,
so you can still fly a heading and an altitude and, with an estimate of
wind, dead reckon to somewhere.

If you know where VFR is, then climb to OROCA and head there.
If you know where you can make a letdown to VFR - say by flying out
over water - dead reckon your way there and make the letdown.

Next time, be sure to check the batteries in your GPS (and, if you
don't have a reasonable redundant power system in your airplane, which
most light singles don't) consider carrying a spare GPS or at least
spare batteries.

To give you an idea of how I manage this - I fly a twin with an
electric system that will survive any point failure short of a bus
fault to ground, AND I have a portable GPS with batteies mounted on the
yoke and turned on. Widespread low IMC makes the GPS a no-go item.
Every year, I practice shooting an approach with just the GPS and no
other navaids.

Just something to think about.

Michael

> complete electrical failure in IMC

"Finding VFR" is going to be difficult (with no comm) unless you noted
it during flight planning. So thinking through this should help you
resolve to, prior to departure IMC,

A) Know which direction or in which region the best conditions exist,
i.e. "which direction do I head if things really go bad"

B) Have good batteries in your handheld GPS, and fresh spare batteries
in your flight bag.

My handheld GPS is just a cheap hiker's GEKO ($100), but I usually turn
it on and throw it on the dash to record my flight track. But for IMC
flight, in addition to the battery check, I always have an airport
waypoint set as the navigation destination. I usually choose the
departure or destination airport-- one that I'm familiar with the
approaches or at least have reviewed them and have them out on my
clipboard. The nav page of the Geko is set to display track, desired
track, distance, and altitude. I must admit that I haven't yet
simulated such a scenario yet, but its on my "training todo list". I'm
thinking it will work ok in a daylight scenario, even if I have to hold
it in my hand. But a nighttime scenario might be pretty dicey trying
to manage the flashlight(s) and handheld gps. A passenger could help
for that though.

I don't even own a handheld tranceiver. My thinking is that I
shouldn't even consider the distraction of communicating in this
scenario. Would like to hear other opinions though...

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

"paul kgyy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
> set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
> electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
> occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
> carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
> and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
> continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options, and
> both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
> nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude in
> cloud without a working transponder.
>
> I'd appreciate some insight from the group.
>

You answered your own question. If the only option is heading for VMC then
head for VMC. Perhaps ATC will have a good primary target and be able to
keep other IFR aircraft away, but if they don't there's nothing you can do
about it.

"Michael" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> If you know where VFR is, then climb to OROCA and head there.
>

Reaching OROCA will probably require a descent.

I have had a total electrical failure. It was night, but fortunately
not IMC.

That experience got me to rethink my IFR cockpit mgmt techniques.
Having a GPS and handheld radio are not enough. The GPS needs to be
turned on and tracking sats. The handheld needs to be easily
accessible (think map pocket) vs. in a flight bag in the backseat.
Jacks to easily plug the headset to the handheld COM are a must.

Also handheld COMs have terrible transmission/reception due to their
small antenna. Expect no more than a few miles. Many people put an
antenna splitter off the main COM antenna to an empty cable
specifically to be connected to the handheld in this event.

-Nathan



On 17 Mar 2005 07:05:22 -0800, "paul kgyy" >
wrote:

>I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
>set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
>electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
>occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
>carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
>and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
>continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options, and
>both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
>nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude in
>cloud without a working transponder.
>
>I'd appreciate some insight from the group.

Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>
>"paul kgyy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>>
>> I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
>> set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
>> electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
>> occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
>> carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
>> and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
>> continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options, and
>> both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
>> nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude in
>> cloud without a working transponder.
>>
>> I'd appreciate some insight from the group.
>>
>
>You answered your own question. If the only option is heading for VMC then
>head for VMC. Perhaps ATC will have a good primary target and be able to
>keep other IFR aircraft away, but if they don't there's nothing you can do
>about it.

Living near the coast (and a flat coastline too), I've often figured
in such a situation I'd dead-reckon out over the ocean, do a blind
letdown as low as I dared (500 MSL?) and hope I broke out. Then
scud-run back to land and hope I could find a coastal airport by
pilotage before I got run over by a jet. Or maybe land on the beach.

"John Clonts" > wrote in
oups.com:

> But a nighttime scenario might be pretty dicey trying
> to manage the flashlight(s) and handheld gps. A passenger could help
> for that though.

If you're going to fly IFR at night, you need to give some thought to
your setup. The passenger doesn't automatically know what you want to
look at. I use a cheap LED headlight I bought at WalMart, which comes
with white and red LEDs. I changed the red LED to green, because red is
problematic with many colors, and with the LCD computer we use. The
white instrument lights have already done away with my night vision
anyway, but the green doesn't distract my copilot as much, and lets me
see enough. I used to use a liplight, a green LED mounted on my
microphone, but have abandoned it for the headlight. It's usually turned
off, but if I need it, it's ready to go, and always illuminates what I
look at. I use it for starting, etc, before the instrument lights start
working, and for doing paperwork, etc. I fly almost exclusively at
night, and that has made me think a lot about how to organize and
illuminate things. We have separate electrical busses, two engines, etc,
so I don't worry that much about electrical failure. In a piston single,
it's much, much more likely, and the pilot needs to be prepared for it.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

Thanks to everybody. I do in fact carry portable gps and have it
operational in flight, portable comm with external antenna and
headphone adaptor, and extra batteries. Since my hope port KGYY is on
the border of Lake Michigan, if I'm near the lake and need VFR one
option is to stay clear of the STARs and DPs and scud run if I can
expect 1000 feet or so.

Bad events often don't come in groups of 1.

My Garmin 296 will run for 15 hours after losing power from the
aircraft.

Roy Smith wrote:
> Living near the coast (and a flat coastline too), I've often figured
> in such a situation I'd dead-reckon out over the ocean, do a blind
> letdown as low as I dared (500 MSL?) and hope I broke out. Then
> scud-run back to land and hope I could find a coastal airport by
> pilotage before I got run over by a jet. Or maybe land on the beach.

That's always been my idea of a final backup plan as well. (Total
electrical failure at the same time my handheld GPS fails seems pretty
unlikely, but you never know.) Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems
like pretty much your last out. Why not descend until you can see the
water (which, if you are really unlucky yet a third time on this flight,
will be when it hits your windshield). Unless you have some expectation
that you can stay up until the clouds break, what other choice is there?

--
David Rind

David Rind > wrote:
> Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems like pretty much your last out.
> Why not descend until you can see the water

I don't really have a good answer to that. At some point I guess you're
down to picking the least of several evils.

In article >, Roy Smith
> wrote:

> David Rind > wrote:
> > Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems like pretty much your last out.
> > Why not descend until you can see the water
>
> I don't really have a good answer to that. At some point I guess you're
> down to picking the least of several evils.

Have you ever read "Flying South" by Barbara Cushman Rowell? There's an
amazing story in there about flying up along the coast of Brazil at
100' MSL in the fog, a VFR pilot, trying to keep the coastline in sight
and find a place to land before she got lost in the fog.

In article
<180320052329234845%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjunkatma >,
Tom Fleischman > wrote:

> In article >, Roy Smith
> > wrote:
>
> > David Rind > wrote:
> > > Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems like pretty much your last out.
> > > Why not descend until you can see the water
> >
> > I don't really have a good answer to that. At some point I guess you're
> > down to picking the least of several evils.
>
> Have you ever read "Flying South" by Barbara Cushman Rowell? There's an
> amazing story in there about flying up along the coast of Brazil at
> 100' MSL in the fog, a VFR pilot, trying to keep the coastline in sight
> and find a place to land before she got lost in the fog.

No, I haven't read it. Sounds like a good book. Also sounds like a good
sales pitch for buying a seaplane :-)

You mean, you will *ever* depart IFR without spare batteries for your
handheld GPS? I usually carry two sets of spare batteries.


paul kgyy wrote:
> I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator,
and
> set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
> electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
> occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
> carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
> and I'm in IMC? I know where I am, but there's no way that I can
> continue on course for very long. There seem to be only 2 options,
and
> both involve finding VFR (go down if ceilings permit, or head for
> nearest VFR laterally), but both involve flying off course/altitude
in
> cloud without a working transponder.
>
> I'd appreciate some insight from the group.

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article
> <180320052329234845%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjunkatma >,
> Tom Fleischman > wrote:
>
> > In article >, Roy Smith
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > David Rind > wrote:
> > > > Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems like pretty much your last
out.
> > > > Why not descend until you can see the water
> > >
> > > I don't really have a good answer to that. At some point I guess
you're
> > > down to picking the least of several evils.
> >
> > Have you ever read "Flying South" by Barbara Cushman Rowell? There's an
> > amazing story in there about flying up along the coast of Brazil at
> > 100' MSL in the fog, a VFR pilot, trying to keep the coastline in sight
> > and find a place to land before she got lost in the fog.
>
> No, I haven't read it. Sounds like a good book. Also sounds like a good
> sales pitch for buying a seaplane :-)

On a sad note, after being intrigued by this post, I searched for the book
to buy (found it used on Amazon), but found that the author and her husband,
who was a serious nature photographer mentioned in the same breath as Ansel
Adams, both died in a small plane crash near their home in Bishop, CA, just
before this book came out. Neither was flying the plane at the time. This
news kind of put a damper on my desire to read the book. Then I found a site
with an excerpt from the first chapter. She took off for the flight (the one
in the book, not the other) from Oakland, and met up in the air with someone
who took off from Gnoss, where I learned to fly (crosswind special!) So in
the end, I decided I had to buy it.

No special point here. Just sharing.

Harvey

"Michael" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> If you know where VFR is, then climb to OROCA and head there.


If are on a low-level airway, is it good form to immediately climb to a
"plus-500-foot" VFR cruise altitude, especially since there won't be anybody
there in IMC except IFR climbers-descenders????

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
news:180320052329234845%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjun ...
> In article >, Roy Smith
> > wrote:
>
> > David Rind > wrote:
> > > Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems like pretty much your last
out.
> > > Why not descend until you can see the water
> >
> > I don't really have a good answer to that. At some point I guess you're
> > down to picking the least of several evils.
>
> Have you ever read "Flying South" by Barbara Cushman Rowell? There's an
> amazing story in there about flying up along the coast of Brazil at
> 100' MSL in the fog, a VFR pilot, trying to keep the coastline in sight
> and find a place to land before she got lost in the fog.

Having read that book, I was amazed at the stupidity and arrogance displayed
by both the Rowells and their traveling companions. Absolutely incredible.
These people lived to take risks simply for the thrill of risking their
lives, heedless of anyone else.

"Eclipsme" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> On a sad note, after being intrigued by this post, I searched for the book
> to buy (found it used on Amazon), but found that the author and her
husband,
> who was a serious nature photographer mentioned in the same breath as
Ansel
> Adams, both died in a small plane crash near their home in Bishop, CA,
just
> before this book came out. Neither was flying the plane at the time.

Galen Rowell was not a pilot, so he was not flying the plane. However he
pressured and bullied a pilot to fly them back to Bishop from San Francisco.
The pilot, although a commercial pilot, did not at first want to do the
charter flight because neither he nor the plane nor his operation were
certified for charter flights. The pilot finally agreed to do it in exchange
for some of Galen's pictures. There is some evidence that the pilot had
flown other informal "charter flights" for compensation.

This was a night flight to a mountainous area. The plane was an Aero
Commander and the pilot had slightly over 50 hours in type, but was not
night current. In fact, he had only 1.6 night hours in the plane. Turning
base to final the airplane suddenly banked very steeply and crashed. Given
the Rowells' personalities and their relationship with the pilot, it would
not surprise me terribly if it had actually been Barbara at the controls.
NTSB report here:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020819X01425&key=1

The Rowells were truly great photographers. But they were risk addicts who
already had been nearly killed many times. These sort of people are like
bright meteors who streak across the sky of our lives, and then are gone. I
think that the short duration of their lives is not so much sad, as it is
simply the way they chose to live.

"paul kgyy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> I was doing some practice IFR at home last night with my simulator, and
> set up for random failures. First thing that happened was complete
> electrical shut down - no radios, no VOR, no Xponder, and it suddenly
> occurred to me that I'd never thought through what I would do. I do
> carry backup comm and gps but what if those batteries were also dead,
> and I'm in IMC?

This comes very close to the category of a non-critical emergency, defined
as an emergency where, no matter what you do, you are going to die. It is
one of the reasons that single engine light aircraft are unsuitable for long
periods of flight in IMC. Another, of course, is what do you do if your
engine quits? I think that it depends somewhat, too, on where you are and
what you are doing when everything goes dark. Suppose you were on an ILS,
500 feet above DH and in IMC, and you lose your electrical system, what do
you do? You just might be better off trying to continue the approach holding
your heading and rate of descent as closely as possible. You have to have an
out, or you don't do it. It is that simple.

I would hate to have to rely on a handheld GPS in such an emergency, though
of course it would be welcome as better than nothing. Not having that, dead
reckoning is a possibility and it is a skill that should be practiced. A
handheld radio is probably going to be almost useless, though some of them
have VOR.

I also have considered the practicality of heading for the shore, descending
to where I could see the ocean, then flying back in below the scud. The
trouble with this is that visibility usually gets worse over the ocean and
near the shoreline. There are still obstructions and terrain to be dealt
with, and now you have lost any practical ability to navigate with dead
reckoning. You are also going to use up a lot of fuel and you are burning
daylight (if it is night, well, you are welcome to try anything you want,
but your chances of surviving a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head are
probably better).

If you know that you can climb out of the clouds, then that is probably a
good option, but this presupposes either more luck than you deserve or you
planned on this being your out in the first place (do you really trust the
area forecast that much, and where are those tops, anyway?). You are still
left with the problem of finding a place to descend through the clouds
safely and land without running out of fuel, daylight, and ideas. Descending
out of the clouds might work, provided you don't hit anything on the way or
end up in a box canyon somewhere.

Newer single engine aircraft with glass cockpits have backup instruments and
some sort of backup electrical system, even if it is only certified for 30
minutes. They also have terrain displays so that you have at least a small
chance of descending out of the clouds without killing yourself. If equipped
for it, I would consider a total loss of the electrical system a legitimate
reason for deploying an emergency parachute such as CAPS. Beyond that, I
would say that you are taking a serious risk if you insist on flying a
single engine piston airplane in actual IMC beyond, say, punching through a
thin layer.

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
>
> Living near the coast (and a flat coastline too), I've often figured
> in such a situation I'd dead-reckon out over the ocean, do a blind
> letdown as low as I dared (500 MSL?) and hope I broke out. Then
> scud-run back to land and hope I could find a coastal airport by
> pilotage before I got run over by a jet. Or maybe land on the beach.

Well, as long as the coast is flat, it is day, and the weather does not get
worse at the coastline, maybe. So you land on the beach, which sounds best
to me, but suppose you are forced to land in someplace not so suitable and
you damage the plane and perhaps yourself? Now you are a long way off course
and nobody has any idea where to look for you.

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Roy Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Living near the coast (and a flat coastline too), I've often figured
> > in such a situation I'd dead-reckon out over the ocean, do a blind
> > letdown as low as I dared (500 MSL?) and hope I broke out. Then
> > scud-run back to land and hope I could find a coastal airport by
> > pilotage before I got run over by a jet. Or maybe land on the beach.
>
> Well, as long as the coast is flat, it is day, and the weather does not
get
> worse at the coastline, maybe. So you land on the beach, which sounds best
> to me, but suppose you are forced to land in someplace not so suitable and
> you damage the plane and perhaps yourself? Now you are a long way off
course
> and nobody has any idea where to look for you.
>


Now the only question is, do you have a beautiful woman with you, or not?



>

" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > Well, as long as the coast is flat, it is day, and the weather does not
> get
> > worse at the coastline, maybe. So you land on the beach, which sounds
best
> > to me, but suppose you are forced to land in someplace not so suitable
and
> > you damage the plane and perhaps yourself? Now you are a long way off
> course
> > and nobody has any idea where to look for you.
> >
>
>
> Now the only question is, do you have a beautiful woman with you, or not?

Generally not. She hates to fly.

C J Campbell wrote:
> This comes very close to the category of a non-critical emergency,
defined
> as an emergency where, no matter what you do, you are going to die.

That's a hell of a defeatist attitude, and demonstrably wrong since
people HAVE survived exactly this situation.

> I would hate to have to rely on a handheld GPS in such an emergency,
though
> of course it would be welcome as better than nothing.

Actually, it is DRAMATICALLY better than nothing. It is more accurate,
more precise, and more reliable than any NDB and most VOR's. It can
effectively be used to shoot an overlay of any published NDB, VOR, or
VOR-DME approach to published minima. Being self-contained with its
own batteries, it is independent of the failure modes of the aircraft
(including the electrical bus) and thus is superior as a navigation
backup to anything installed in any certified single or light twin.

The ability to shoot an overlay using a handheld GPS should be part of
the repertoire of any instrument pilot. If you don't know how, ask
your instructor to show you. If he can't, he's not much of an
instructor.

> Newer single engine aircraft with glass cockpits have backup
instruments and
> some sort of backup electrical system, even if it is only certified
for 30
> minutes.

That's because they lack vacuum, and thus in such aircraft electrical
failure also means gyro failure. I find that pretty scary. Vacuum may
suck, but at least it's a totally independent system. There are ways
of making electric backup systems truly independent and failsafe, but
none are available for certified single engine airplanes.

> They also have terrain displays so that you have at least a small
> chance of descending out of the clouds without killing yourself.

Terrain displays are available on the newer high-end handheld GPS
units.

> Beyond that, I
> would say that you are taking a serious risk if you insist on flying
a
> single engine piston airplane in actual IMC beyond, say, punching
through a
> thin layer.

That must be why self-flown business flights, which do this routinely,
are so much more dangerous than personal flights, which rarely do this.
Oh, wait...

Michael

"Michael" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> C J Campbell wrote:
> > This comes very close to the category of a non-critical emergency,
> defined
> > as an emergency where, no matter what you do, you are going to die.
>
> That's a hell of a defeatist attitude, and demonstrably wrong since
> people HAVE survived exactly this situation.
>

Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a parachute
at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think the
way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld radio
is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can happen.

> > I would hate to have to rely on a handheld GPS in such an emergency,
> though
> > of course it would be welcome as better than nothing.
>
> Actually, it is DRAMATICALLY better than nothing. It is more accurate,
> more precise, and more reliable than any NDB and most VOR's.

NDB, yes. VOR, highly questionable.

>
> The ability to shoot an overlay using a handheld GPS should be part of
> the repertoire of any instrument pilot. If you don't know how, ask
> your instructor to show you.

I would agree with that.

>
> > Newer single engine aircraft with glass cockpits have backup
> instruments and
> > some sort of backup electrical system, even if it is only certified
> for 30
> > minutes.
>
> That's because they lack vacuum

Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have dual
vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.

>
> > They also have terrain displays so that you have at least a small
> > chance of descending out of the clouds without killing yourself.
>
> Terrain displays are available on the newer high-end handheld GPS
> units.

True, mine has that.

>
> > Beyond that, I
> > would say that you are taking a serious risk if you insist on flying
> a
> > single engine piston airplane in actual IMC beyond, say, punching
> through a
> > thin layer.
>
> That must be why self-flown business flights, which do this routinely,
> are so much more dangerous than personal flights, which rarely do this.
> Oh, wait...

In fact, self-flown business flights do not do this routinely, especially in
single engine piston aircraft. They are less dangerous than personal flights
because the pilots are better trained, the planes are better equipped, and
they are not going to kill themselves with low level VFR maneuvers, which is
the biggest killer of GA pilots.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:52:31 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>> > I would hate to have to rely on a handheld GPS in such an emergency,
>> though
>> > of course it would be welcome as better than nothing.
>>
>> Actually, it is DRAMATICALLY better than nothing. It is more accurate,
>> more precise, and more reliable than any NDB and most VOR's.
>
>NDB, yes. VOR, highly questionable.

The fact that a GPS is handheld has little to do with its accuracy.

With WAAS enabled, most handhelds are good to 10meters, and all GPS
are better than 100m accurate. Throw in the pseudo-HSI displays, and
I guarantee I can fly a more accurate emergency approach (assuming the
AI is still working ok) with the handheld GPS than I can with an NDB,
VOR, or LOC alone.

Where the handheld lacks is reliability, influenced by factors like:
no RAIM, lack of permanent antenna installations. Having said that,
I have flown with a Garmin 295 for 3 or 4 years now, and it is
accurate and reliable.

Would I launch into IMC with known electrical problems - of course
not. However, the odds having having a total electrical failure +
G295 failure + Iow IMC are small enough that I believe the risk to
flight caused by navigation/electrical failure is much lower than
mechanical failure or pilot error.

-Nathan

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:52:31 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote:
>
> >> > I would hate to have to rely on a handheld GPS in such an emergency,
> >> though
> >> > of course it would be welcome as better than nothing.
> >>
> >> Actually, it is DRAMATICALLY better than nothing. It is more accurate,
> >> more precise, and more reliable than any NDB and most VOR's.
> >
> >NDB, yes. VOR, highly questionable.
>
> The fact that a GPS is handheld has little to do with its accuracy.
>
>
> Where the handheld lacks is reliability

Exactly. Moreover, some handhelds are much more reliable than others.

>
> Would I launch into IMC with known electrical problems - of course
> not.

Good for you. I suspect some others here would.

I'd sure like to know who survived a free fall from 20,000 feet without a
parachute.
Really, I'm curious.

MJC

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...

> Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a parachute
> at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think the
> way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld
radio
> is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can happen.
>

Quite a few here: http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/wreckage.html

The one I recalled without googling for it was the flight attendant.
Doesn't she hold a Guinness world record?

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:27:59 -0600, "MJC" > wrote:

>I'd sure like to know who survived a free fall from 20,000 feet without a
>parachute.
>Really, I'm curious.
>
>MJC
>
>"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a parachute
>> at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think the
>> way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld
>radio
>> is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can happen.
>>
>

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> Quite a few here: http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/wreckage.html
>

I was thinking more along the lines of these:

http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffallers.html

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Michael" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > C J Campbell wrote:
> > > This comes very close to the category of a non-critical emergency,
> > defined
> > > as an emergency where, no matter what you do, you are going to die.
> >
> > That's a hell of a defeatist attitude, and demonstrably wrong since
> > people HAVE survived exactly this situation.
> >
>
> Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a parachute
> at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think the
> way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld
radio
> is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can happen.

IOW, "Don't fly in IMC"? I can see having a handheld GPS for redundancy, but
what is the usable range of a handheld radio, 5 miles?


> In fact, self-flown business flights do not do this routinely, especially
in
> single engine piston aircraft. They are less dangerous than personal
flights
> because the pilots are better trained, the planes are better equipped, and
> they are not going to kill themselves with low level VFR maneuvers, which
is
> the biggest killer of GA pilots.

I think you're conflating "business flights" with "corporate aviation"
which is not a precise analogy.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Well, that's not what I had in mind with the original description. All
of those instances have one thing in common; that the people who survived
were ALL still inside some part of the airplane.
What I was looking for was a "naked" fall (not inside a part of an
aircraft) of 20,000 without anything to hang onto.

MJC

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> Quite a few here: http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/wreckage.html
>
> The one I recalled without googling for it was the flight attendant.
> Doesn't she hold a Guinness world record?
>
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:27:59 -0600, "MJC" > wrote:
>
> >I'd sure like to know who survived a free fall from 20,000 feet without a
> >parachute.
> >Really, I'm curious.
> >
> >MJC
> >
> >"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a
parachute
> >> at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think
the
> >> way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld
> >radio
> >> is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can
happen.
> >>
> >
>

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Michael" > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> > > C J Campbell wrote:
> > > > This comes very close to the category of a non-critical emergency,
> > > defined
> > > > as an emergency where, no matter what you do, you are going to die.
> > >
> > > That's a hell of a defeatist attitude, and demonstrably wrong since
> > > people HAVE survived exactly this situation.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, and people have survived jumping out of the plane without a
parachute
> > at 20,000 feet, too. But the odds are against it. Personally, I think
the
> > way you deal with an electrical failure in IMC with no GPS or handheld
> radio
> > is that you avoid putting yourself in a situation where that can happen.
>
> IOW, "Don't fly in IMC"? I can see having a handheld GPS for redundancy,
but
> what is the usable range of a handheld radio, 5 miles?
>

I would not go so far as to say that. I am saying do not fly in solid IMC.
Punching through a layer, popping in and out of clouds, etc., is reasonable.

>
> > In fact, self-flown business flights do not do this routinely,
especially
> in
> > single engine piston aircraft. They are less dangerous than personal
> flights
> > because the pilots are better trained, the planes are better equipped,
and
> > they are not going to kill themselves with low level VFR maneuvers,
which
> is
> > the biggest killer of GA pilots.
>
> I think you're conflating "business flights" with "corporate aviation"
> which is not a precise analogy.

Or at least Michael is.

>
>
> --
> Matt
> ---------------------
> Matthew W. Barrow
> Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> Montrose, CO
>
>

"MJC" > wrote in message
...
> Well, that's not what I had in mind with the original description. All
> of those instances have one thing in common; that the people who survived
> were ALL still inside some part of the airplane.
> What I was looking for was a "naked" fall (not inside a part of an
> aircraft) of 20,000 without anything to hang onto.
>
> MJC

So was I. However, that site lists some of those as "free fallers."

"David Rind" > wrote in message
...
> Roy Smith wrote:
> > Living near the coast (and a flat coastline too), I've often figured
> > in such a situation I'd dead-reckon out over the ocean, do a blind
> > letdown as low as I dared (500 MSL?) and hope I broke out. Then
> > scud-run back to land and hope I could find a coastal airport by
> > pilotage before I got run over by a jet. Or maybe land on the beach.
>
> That's always been my idea of a final backup plan as well. (Total
> electrical failure at the same time my handheld GPS fails seems pretty
> unlikely, but you never know.) Why stop at 500 MSL, though? This seems
> like pretty much your last out. Why not descend until you can see the
> water (which, if you are really unlucky yet a third time on this flight,
> will be when it hits your windshield). Unless you have some expectation
> that you can stay up until the clouds break, what other choice is there?

From what I've read, this was standard technique in the early days of the
trans-Atlantic flying boats. I can't recall the title but I remember one
such story that had them dropping down at night to under 100' and turning
the landing lights on so they could see the ocean, in a big 4-engine flying
boat no less. Now that's scud running.

-cwk.

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 06:26:58 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"MJC" > wrote in message
...
>> Well, that's not what I had in mind with the original description. All
>> of those instances have one thing in common; that the people who survived
>> were ALL still inside some part of the airplane.
>> What I was looking for was a "naked" fall (not inside a part of an
>> aircraft) of 20,000 without anything to hang onto.
>>
>> MJC
>
>So was I. However, that site lists some of those as "free fallers."

And as CJ pointed out, same site,
http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffallers.html has entries for two
falls from 20k and 22k, outside of the destroyed airframe, and
survived.

>>Have you ever read "Flying South" by Barbara Cushman Rowell? There's an
>>amazing story in there about flying up along the coast of Brazil at
>>100' MSL in the fog, a VFR pilot, trying to keep the coastline in sight
>>and find a place to land before she got lost in the fog.

this is an amazing book actually. It doesn't solely focus on flying
though. At the time they were flying "visually" but she and her
passenger/friend were both IFR pilots. I don't re-call the 100' MSL
though. I remember the next day or two when they took off again, in
the next harbor over, there were power lines up to 1000' or so.

Sadly, her and her husband (famous photographer Galen Rowell) died
in a Commander aircraft going from OAK to BIS a couple of years ago.

Gerald

>> Actually, it is DRAMATICALLY better than nothing. It is more
accurate,
>> more precise, and more reliable than any NDB and most VOR's.
>NDB, yes. VOR, highly questionable.

You're welcome to call it highly questionable, but realize that most
aviation handhelds do offer self-monitoring that is significantly more
robust and sophisticated than VOR (which merely shows the presence of a
signal). VOR signals do some fascinating things when reflections are
an issue.

>> That's because they lack vacuum
>Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have
dual
>vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.

What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric? I know the
Cirrus line has quite a bit of electrical redundancy, but it must,
being an all-electric airplane. I'm genuinely curious here - I don't
often fly anything built in this century.

>In fact, self-flown business flights do not do this routinely,
especially in
>single engine piston aircraft.

You know, when I fly IFR in my twin, there sure seem to be a lot of
Bonanzas and Centurions up there with me. Nobody I know cancels a
business trip in a Centurion or Bonanza because he will need to fly the
enroute portion in IMC, and I know quite a few people who use that kind
of airplane for business. That goes out the window if ice and/or
embedded T-storms are a factor, but there's really not much difference
between going on top vs through warm stratus. It's where the bases
are, and what is under them, that matters - especially in a single
engine airplane.

The real issues of IFR flight are widespread low IMC (especially in a
single - in a twin you can shoot an approach on one engine so it's not
so bad), T-storms, and ice. Differentiating between a flight where you
climb into the soup at 1200 ft, climb out at 2500, and fly the enroute
portion on top at 8000 vs one where you climb in at 1200 and fly in
solid soup at 8000 until you break out on the approach is, well,
amateur hour.

Being on top rather than in the soup doesn't actually help you in terms
of navigation, and nobody I know flies IMC in a plane where a single
point failure will take out all the gyros.

Michael

"Michael" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> >> That's because they lack vacuum
> >Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have
> dual
> >vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.
>
> What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric?

All of the Cessna G1000 airplanes.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:46:41 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Michael" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>> >> That's because they lack vacuum
>> >Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have
>> dual
>> >vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.
>>
>> What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric?
>
>All of the Cessna G1000 airplanes.

I'd have to go check my POH to be sure, but I'm pretty sure that the
G1000 Cessnas don't have 2 pumps. It has a single AI and a vac pump
as a backup to the glass system. As for the electrics, depends on
what you classify as "backup electric". If you're talking fully
redundant alternator and feed, it doesn't have that either - it has a
backup battery good for ~30min of reduced functionality (if memory
serves the PFD, 1 com, 1 nav, 1 GPS).

The 172SP has 2 vac pumps. Course, the plumbing goes through 1 T
connector before the firewall, but still. Fails the backup electric
test though.

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:46:41 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Michael" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >>
> >> >> That's because they lack vacuum
> >> >Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have
> >> dual
> >> >vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.
> >>
> >> What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric?
> >
> >All of the Cessna G1000 airplanes.
>
> As for the electrics, depends on
> what you classify as "backup electric". If you're talking fully
> redundant alternator and feed, it doesn't have that either - it has a
> backup battery good for ~30min of reduced functionality (if memory
> serves the PFD, 1 com, 1 nav, 1 GPS).

I had already pointed that out in the post that Michael was replying to.

Cessna's web site says the plane comes with a dual vacuum system.

Peter Clark wrote:
> >> What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric?
> >
> >All of the Cessna G1000 airplanes.
>
> I'd have to go check my POH to be sure, but I'm pretty sure that the
> G1000 Cessnas don't have 2 pumps. It has a single AI and a vac pump
> as a backup to the glass system.

OK, that makes more sense.

> As for the electrics, depends on
> what you classify as "backup electric". If you're talking fully
> redundant alternator and feed, it doesn't have that either - it has a
> backup battery good for ~30min of reduced functionality (if memory
> serves the PFD, 1 com, 1 nav, 1 GPS).

So no protection against bus fault, but at least it protects against
the loss of a master contactor or battery.

> The 172SP has 2 vac pumps. Course, the plumbing goes through 1 T
> connector before the firewall, but still. Fails the backup electric
> test though.

OK, so there are not actually any Cessnas that have dual vacuum and
backup electric.

That's what I thought.

Michael

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 07:11:40 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:46:41 -0800, "C J Campbell"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Michael" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >>
>> >> >> That's because they lack vacuum
>> >> >Nonsense. Most of them have backup vacuum instruments and even have
>> >> dual
>> >> >vacuum pumps, which older airplanes lack.
>> >>
>> >> What piston single has backup vacuum and backup electric?
>> >
>> >All of the Cessna G1000 airplanes.
>>
>> As for the electrics, depends on
>> what you classify as "backup electric". If you're talking fully
>> redundant alternator and feed, it doesn't have that either - it has a
>> backup battery good for ~30min of reduced functionality (if memory
>> serves the PFD, 1 com, 1 nav, 1 GPS).
>
>I had already pointed that out in the post that Michael was replying to.
>
>Cessna's web site says the plane comes with a dual vacuum system.

It would appear that their website is incorrect when referring to the
NAVIII (G1000) option. The 182T NAV III POH page 7-63, "VACUUM SYSTEM
AND INSTRUMENTS" states in part "The vacuum system (refer to Figure
7-9) provides the vacuum necessary to operate the standby attitude
indicator. The system consists of one engine-driven vacuum pump, a
vacuum regulator, the standby attitude indicator, a vacuum system air
filter, and a vacuum transducer."

There are two pumps in the NAV I and II aircraft, both C172 and C182.
I expect my G1000 172 will not have the backup pump like my current
172S NAVII does.

P

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Cessna's web site says the plane comes with a dual vacuum system.
>
> It would appear that their website is incorrect when referring to the
> NAVIII (G1000) option. The 182T NAV III POH page 7-63, "VACUUM SYSTEM
> AND INSTRUMENTS" states in part "The vacuum system (refer to Figure
> 7-9) provides the vacuum necessary to operate the standby attitude
> indicator. The system consists of one engine-driven vacuum pump, a
> vacuum regulator, the standby attitude indicator, a vacuum system air
> filter, and a vacuum transducer."
>
> There are two pumps in the NAV I and II aircraft, both C172 and C182.
> I expect my G1000 172 will not have the backup pump like my current
> 172S NAVII does.

Well then, thank you. I appreciate that.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:12:32 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
>> >
>> >Cessna's web site says the plane comes with a dual vacuum system.
>>
>> It would appear that their website is incorrect when referring to the
>> NAVIII (G1000) option. The 182T NAV III POH page 7-63, "VACUUM SYSTEM
>> AND INSTRUMENTS" states in part "The vacuum system (refer to Figure
>> 7-9) provides the vacuum necessary to operate the standby attitude
>> indicator. The system consists of one engine-driven vacuum pump, a
>> vacuum regulator, the standby attitude indicator, a vacuum system air
>> filter, and a vacuum transducer."
>>
>> There are two pumps in the NAV I and II aircraft, both C172 and C182.
>> I expect my G1000 172 will not have the backup pump like my current
>> 172S NAVII does.
>
>Well then, thank you. I appreciate that.

No problem, glad I could be of assistance.

Y'All,
I do believe my 'real' total electrical failure situation deserves mention.
Situation: Flew a 180 h.p. Yankee Trainer with a 14 gallon fuel tank
into Nut Tree, Vacaville CA. just as it got dark. Needed a ride to
CCR a distance of about 30 miles. While I tied down the Yankee
the other pilot got his Grumman Tiger preflighted nearby.

We took off and at about 600' we had a total electrical failure.
At that moment before I even had a chance to ask for his flashlight,
the pilot told me that the batteries had died during the preflight.

So I learned how to fly without any instruments at all. It was a clear
night so I had no difficulty returning to the airport with a good safe
landing judging speed and power by air and engine sounds alone.

Surprise of the night was that on clearing the runway I crossed right in
front of a taxiing twin heading out for takeoff. I have always wondered
just what was said in that cockpit.

Lessons learned:
---Bring your own flashlights.
---Learn to 'index' your power settings by feel and sound.
---Learn to 'index' your airport patterns for some standards
---Get Lucky if you want to be an old pilot.
---I was able to hitchhike a ride to CCR by telling my story.

Gene Whitt

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 06:26:58 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"MJC" > wrote in message
...
>>> Well, that's not what I had in mind with the original description.
>>> All
>>> of those instances have one thing in common; that the people who
>>> survived
>>> were ALL still inside some part of the airplane.
>>> What I was looking for was a "naked" fall (not inside a part of an
>>> aircraft) of 20,000 without anything to hang onto.
>>>
>>> MJC
>>
>>So was I. However, that site lists some of those as "free fallers."
>
> And as CJ pointed out, same site,
> http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffallers.html has entries for two
> falls from 20k and 22k, outside of the destroyed airframe, and
> survived.

Unfortunately, the site lacks any documentation for those claims. They
*might* be true, but all the site itself tells us is that someone somewhere
in the world says so on some unspecified basis.

--Gary

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:28:18 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
> wrote:

>"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 06:26:58 -0800, "C J Campbell"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"MJC" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Well, that's not what I had in mind with the original description.
>>>> All
>>>> of those instances have one thing in common; that the people who
>>>> survived
>>>> were ALL still inside some part of the airplane.
>>>> What I was looking for was a "naked" fall (not inside a part of an
>>>> aircraft) of 20,000 without anything to hang onto.
>>>>
>>>> MJC
>>>
>>>So was I. However, that site lists some of those as "free fallers."
>>
>> And as CJ pointed out, same site,
>> http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffallers.html has entries for two
>> falls from 20k and 22k, outside of the destroyed airframe, and
>> survived.
>
>Unfortunately, the site lacks any documentation for those claims. They
>*might* be true, but all the site itself tells us is that someone somewhere
>in the world says so on some unspecified basis.

Um, googling Alan Magee brings up an article in the Free Republic
reprinting (reposting?) an article from the Albuquerque Journal which
references a 1981 Smithsonian Magazine as the original source of the
story.

Even a perfunctory googling of the 1st name on the link I gave (Lt.
I.M. Chisov) brings up the same link
(http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1071076/posts) and references
Hecht, Eugene. Physics: Calculus. 2nd ed. p. 85 as their source. The
209<blah> link is the third one Google brings up...

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:28:18 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
> > wrote:
>
>>"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
>>> And as CJ pointed out, same site,
>>> http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffallers.html has entries for two
>>> falls from 20k and 22k, outside of the destroyed airframe, and
>>> survived.
>>
>>Unfortunately, the site lacks any documentation for those claims. They
>>*might* be true, but all the site itself tells us is that someone
>>somewhere
>>in the world says so on some unspecified basis.
>
> Um, googling Alan Magee brings up an article in the Free Republic
> reprinting (reposting?) an article from the Albuquerque Journal which
> references a 1981 Smithsonian Magazine as the original source of the
> story.
>
> Even a perfunctory googling of the 1st name on the link I gave (Lt.
> I.M. Chisov) brings up the same link
> (http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1071076/posts) and references
> Hecht, Eugene. Physics: Calculus. 2nd ed. p. 85 as their source. The
> 209<blah> link is the third one Google brings up...

I'd found the physics-text reference via Google, but that doesn't seem like
an authoritative source for a news story. The Smithsonian Magazine reference
looks more promising; thanks for the pointer.

--Gary