This is why we train (kind of long)

[SD]

Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
tell about it. As a lurker here for many years, I have come to enjoy
reading about people's experiences and try to learn from their
mistakes. So tonight I am posting my experience in hopes that someone
else can learn from me.

Today started out as just any ordinary day with a cross county flight
that was going to take about 4 hours there, drop someone off and then
come back home. I was in a Seneca II turbo and the weather was
looking mostly VFR with the occasional MVFR called for my route, but
was clearing. My flight to my destination was uneventful. It was the
return flight and about 9 minutes out from my final destination when
things went wrong.

It was around 2200 and I was on with center with flight following and
I turned to the ATIS to get weather for my destination. They were
advising of Snow and ceilings at 2500. But how could that be, this
stuff was not forcasted, I'm about 30miles out, flying at around 4500
agl and I have the city in site, but not the airport. I asked center
if my destination was IFR and they advised that they were not. The
center then handed me off to approach. I proceed to descend in
anticipation of lower clouds then BAM, the city went away. I was not
IMC at the moment but I could not see anything in front of me.

I thought to myself, no big deal, I will call for local IFR and shoot
the ILS in. I have shot this approach many times.... Well at least in
an aircraft with 2 nav radios and a GS. I have about 50ish hours in
this Seneca (mostly x-county time) and we had just gotten the MX20 and
CNX80 system put in about 3 weeks ago. I really haven't gotten use to
shooting approaches with this system yet but here we go. Approach
gave me vectors and altitude changes. Now I'm in IMC. There's a
little vertigo coming into play now (don't know what that was all
about) so on came the autopilot and let my head clear. Now I'm flying
straight and level and on course. I knew I had about 15 or so miles
to go before they would start turning me in to the ILS so now I'm
pulling up the approach plate on the mx20. I have the paper one in my
lap but I was going to use every tool to my advantage. It pulled up,
now I can see exactly where I am on the approach. Now for the final
vectors, I've got the ILS tuned into the nav portion on the CNX80, I'm
getting what appears to be the proper reading on the HSI. But the ILS
needle isn't moving. Next I hear from approach that I have blown thru
the localizer and that they were going to turn me back around for
resequencing. No big deal.

I looked at my configuration on my systems to try and figure out why I
never got the localizer. The frequency was correct, I confirmed it
with approach and they advised it was working correctly. Then I saw
that I did not push the CDI button. I hit it and it came alive. Now
just as they are turning me back for final vectors, I look down and
see that my right fuel gauge is showing 0 but my left is still around
20. I then intercepted the localizer and turned inbound. It was at
that time the right engine dies. I reached down and hit the cross
feed but nothing.

Now here I am, in IMC, flying a plane with avionics that I have very
little experience with, with my best friend (which this is the first
time he has ever flown with me) and now with one engine dead. With
all of this, you can say I got a little distracted and started getting
off course. I had already switched to tower freq by now, so I
declared priority due to fuel. The left was still showing almost 20
but we all know how fuel gauges are accurate. An American Airlines
had just landed in front of me and he advised that he broke out at
around 1500 agl and that it was +10 vis underneath. I was able to get
back on the ILS and intercept the GS. I then started my decent
leaving my gear and flaps up (I had plenty of power on one engine to
maintain blue line, but did not want to take a chance) Just as I was
about to secure the right engine, it started rumbling to life. I
don't know if it was the descent that shifted the fuel or fuel was
finally making it thru the cross feed, I was about 1500 agl and broke
thru the clouds. There was the runway. The most beautiful site I have
ever seen. Flaps came out; Gear came down, and I landed. I was
drenched with sweat and it was 12 degrees and snowing but I didn't
care. I opened my little window and let that cold air in... It felt
good. I was alive.

Now it has been about 3 hours since I landed and I can not sleep a
wink. I keep thinking to myself how foolish I was believing that I
could go IMC using equipment that I was not all that familiar with.
Another thing that I can kick myself in the butt for was to not paying
more attention to my fuel situation. There are low fuel lights on the
annunciator panel but they never came on. The bulbs work fine, I did
test them.

But without the proper training, I might have allowed all these things
to just come to a boil. There were some moments of panic ( especially
when that right fan quit) but I was able to use the basic training of
dealing with engine outs and flying on a single engine that I was able
to regain my composer and continue to fly the ILS on one engine.
Without having that, they would probably be looking for the wreckage
now.

Thanks for reading my long winded story but this was kind of therapy
for me. I think that I can now go and get some sleep.


Scott

[Ross Younger]

* SD <sdatverizondot.net@>:
>Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
>forget. [...]
>I was about 1500 agl and broke
>thru the clouds. There was the runway. The most beautiful site I have
>ever seen. [...]
>But without the proper training, I might have allowed all these things
>to just come to a boil.

Well done on coming through in one piece. Scary stuff, and lots of food
for thought. Thanks for posting this!


Ross

--
Ross Younger (if N fails, try N+1)

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 02:09:17 -0700, SD <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in
Message-Id: >:

>Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
>forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
>tell about it.

[Candid story of engine failure during unplanned instrument approach
due to fuel exhaustion snipped]

Thank you for sharing your experience. The only thing I might
question is the absence of the mention of a GUMPS check; that may have
prevented your engine out, but it sounds like the engine stopped
before you had reached the point where you would normally have run
GUMPS.

The final flight (VFR in an Aerostar) of a former Viet Nam F-4 pilot
friend occurred while turning to final at KVNY when he apparently lost
control while turning into the dead engine (story below). I'm happy
to hear your engine out occurred on final so that you didn't need to
make any turns.


================================================== ===========
Northridge Lawyer Handled Air-Crash Cases Dead Pilot Known as
Skilled, Careful Flier
Los Angeles, Calif.; Mar 8, 1985
PATRICIA WARD BIEDERMAN

Abstract:
[Lewis M. Brody] was an experienced, safety-conscious pilot who had
survived being shot down while an Air Force flier in Vietnam,
according to Jeffrey Matz, Brody's partner in the Encino law firm of
Matz, Brody & Albert.

In the past five years, Brody had handled 12 cases involving airplane
crashes, Matz said. He said the firm on Thursday retained such a
specialist who will study Brody's crash with an eye toward a lawsuit.

Matz said the Aerostar in which Brody died was owned by the law firm.
Brody flew it several times a week, always taking along the battered
khaki flight bag he had carried in Vietnam. Like his colleagues, he
referred to the plane, in aviators' jargon, by its registration
number-Triple Seven Papa Lima (777PL).


Full Text:

The pilot killed Wednesday night when his light plane crashed into a
San Fernando Valley residence was identified Thursday as Lewis M.
Brody of Northridge, a lawyer whose specialties included air-crash
litigation.

Brody, 41, died when his Piper Aerostar crashed into a residence at
9545 Ruffner Ave. in Sepulveda.

Ken Ashton, 38, the only occupant of the house, was watching
television in the living room. He escaped from the burning building
with minor injuries by diving through a blown-out window. No one else
was hurt. The house was reduced to rubble.

Brody went down at 6:58 p.m. as he was attempting to take his disabled
plane into Van Nuys Airport, Audrey Schutte, head of the National
Transportation Safety Board team investigating the crash, said
Thursday. The cause of the crash will probably not be known for
several weeks, she said.

On Thursday, Schutte supervised the removal of the wrecked plane from
the charred site. About two dozen spectators stood on the street and
sidewalk. A neighbor said Ashton had stood silently among the
onlookers for a while.

Called Safety-Conscious

Brody was an experienced, safety-conscious pilot who had survived
being shot down while an Air Force flier in Vietnam, according to
Jeffrey Matz, Brody's partner in the Encino law firm of Matz, Brody &
Albert.

In the past five years, Brody had handled 12 cases involving airplane
crashes, Matz said. He said the firm on Thursday retained such a
specialist who will study Brody's crash with an eye toward a lawsuit.

Matz said the Aerostar in which Brody died was owned by the law firm.
Brody flew it several times a week, always taking along the battered
khaki flight bag he had carried in Vietnam. Like his colleagues, he
referred to the plane, in aviators' jargon, by its registration
number-Triple Seven Papa Lima (777PL).

"Flying was his first love," Matz said. "He used to tell me if he
couldn't fly as part of his law practice he wouldn't practice law.
He'd be a professional flier instead."

Brody lived with his wife, Bonnie; a daughter, Lauren, 5, and a son,
Jason, 3.

Matz said Brody was flying back from Costa Mesa when the accident
occurred.

"He was covering a deposition in Orange County," Matz said. "He flew
down there in the middle of the day and started back about 6:15.

"He called our office just before leaving the airport, and he called
his wife to say he was on his way. It's about a 16-minute flight."

The NSTB's Schutte was asked for specifics of Brody's last flight.
"Some of these things I could never know unless I was in the cockpit
with him," she said. "And, thank God, I wasn't."

Matz tried to reconstruct the flight, based on his knowledge of the
route and a police officer's report of witnesses' accounts.

"He was flying from John Wayne Airport back to Van Nuys, where we kept
the plane," Matz said. "When he got over the Encino
Reservoir-according to witnesses, there were about 15 witnesses-he
called `Mayday' and said he was losing power in his right engine.

"The tower flew him around to the north end of the airport. As he was
making the U-turn to land, he had to bank the plane, and about that
time the right engine caught on fire. In order to get in faster, he
pushed the left engine to the firewall. That means pushing the
accelerator all the way to the floor. When he did that, the plane
stalled, and it just went straight into a house.

"He used to tell me, if you're going to lose an engine, you don't want
to do it on final approach because you're very close to the ground,
and you don't have much time or room to make a correction.

"He must have had 900 hours in on that plane. He's flown in bad
weather. He's flown in icing conditions. Everybody who had contact
with him in the aviation business always praised him for his
competence."

Engineering, Law Degrees

Brody had a degree in mechanical engineering from California State
University, Northridge, and a law degree from the University of San
Fernando. The affable redhead took an engineer's pleasure in keeping
the Aerostar in top-flight condition, Matz said.

"He was meticulous about that plane," Matz said. "He personally
supervised all the maintenance. He took pride in knowing how each and
every item on that airplane worked. Being an engineer, he was capable
of understanding all the devices on that plane. And he always did an
extremely thorough pre-flight check."

Matz said Brody's family members were frequent passengers on the
plane, as were his law partners.

"In fact, I was supposed to be on Wednesday's flight," he said. "I was
sick with the flu."

[Illustration]
PHOTO: Federal investigator Audrey Schutte at site of plane crash that
destroyed Sepulveda home and killed pilot.

[g n p]

"SD" <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message
...
> Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
> forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
> tell about it.
>.................................................. .........................
....................

Excellent story, good job of staying with the living!!

[Dennis O'Connor]

Ya did good when the brown stuff hit the fan , Scott... One attaboy...

Now, let's discuss your fuel... You never, never, never, N E V E R, go below
one hour of fuel in the tanks - period...
(I have thrown this exact tantrum on here before, so it's not your fault :)
I am fortunate that my current twin carries 6 hours of fuel, but the longest
leg I have ever flown is 4:40 - mid Michigan to Chattanoga against a
ferocious headwind... I have also landed just a bit over 20 minutes short
of my destination (another airplane) because I had hit bingo fuel - meaning
60 minutes left... The pilot/passsenger I had with me was incredulous... He
was more than that, he spent the entire time I was getting fuel telling me
what an idiot I was because he NEEDED to get back to the airport to meet his
wife for supper... He was never invited to go flying with me again, and he
later had a fuel incident that caused him to give up flying...

The final point I make here is that fuel is measured by your watch, NOT by
the fuel gauges... All the gauges are is a cross check against the watch...
The watch rules! Keep flying and play by my rules and you will never
have another story to tell us like that...

Denny
"SD" <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message
...
> Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
> forget.

[Maule Driver]

Good stuff. Congrats on getting thru it. Thanks for sharing and exposing
yourself to some flak.

Hope you sleep soundly.

[Gary Drescher]

"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
...
> The final point I make here is that fuel is measured by your watch, NOT by
> the fuel gauges... All the gauges are is a cross check against the
watch...
> The watch rules!

Rather than letting either kind of measurement rule, I always assume my fuel
is the LESSER of the time-calculated amount and the gauge-indicated amount.

[John T]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
news:sxfKb.750122$Tr4.2074796@attbi_s03
>
>> against the watch... The watch rules!
>
> Rather than letting either kind of measurement rule, I always assume
> my fuel is the LESSER of the time-calculated amount and the
> gauge-indicated amount.

Good point. One should consider the possibility of a fuel leak. :)

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
__________

[Ron Natalie]

"John T" > wrote in message ws.com...
> "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
> news:sxfKb.750122$Tr4.2074796@attbi_s03
> >
> >> against the watch... The watch rules!
> >
> > Rather than letting either kind of measurement rule, I always assume
> > my fuel is the LESSER of the time-calculated amount and the
> > gauge-indicated amount.
>
> Good point. One should consider the possibility of a fuel leak. :)

Or some problem with the carb, or the fact you forgot to lean, or whatever.
The accident reports are full of stories of people who went through fuel faster
than normal and "the fuel gauges were erratic, so I ignored them" (That was the
literal text from the crash report for a 172 now on sale on eBay...see another
thread).

We picked our plane up from annual one year. Margy had done the owner assist
along with the IA and another mechanic. They buttoned her up and I took the
non-IA A&P who was a student pilot at the time on the test flight. We flew around
for a few minutes, landed, and opened her up and saw no leaks or other signs of
abnormality.

The next morning Margy and I departed for Oshkosh. Margy was flying and
was busy trying to negotiate a class B clearance with Dulles. After about 15 mins
I notice the fuel gauge was now down to nearly a half tank. Now it's real easy
to misfuel a Navion (but it's not a mistake that I've made since shortly after I
bought the plane) and I point this out to Margy and I say I'll keep my eye
on it. Sure enough it's trending downward. We're halfway between two
airports and I can see Margy trying to decide. Leesburg I say and she informs
ATC (who had just given us our class B transition) we're diverting.

She lands and shuts down. I go off to hunt for a mechanic, by the time I return with
one, Margy has removed the lower cowling. (The mechanic asks how I get her
to do that, and I pointed out she had just finished doing the annual, I get to only
do the heavy stuff...pulling the prop etc...). Margy hops into the cockpit and
hits the boost pump and sure enough a stream of fuel emits from the engine driven
pump. The fitting is only finger tight, we apply a wrench to it and all is well.

I figure for the 20 minutes of flying, we were burning 60GPH. Fortunately we
were carrying 100 gallons at the time. As hot as it is in August in DC, the fuel
that had leaked had just pretty much vaporized by the time we shutdown and
opened her up.

[S Narayan]

"SD" <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message
...
> Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
> forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
> tell about it. As a lurker here for many years, I have come to enjoy
> reading about people's experiences and try to learn from their
> mistakes. So tonight I am posting my experience in hopes that someone
> else can learn from me.
>

Thanks, one of the things I have learnt is to never fly a plane whose
avionics you are not proficient with. There was a time when the primary
radio was on the Garmin 430 and I had a tough time with the squelch etc.
Spent half an hour on the ground before I could get it the way I wanted. GPS
equipment appears to be the worst in terms of distraction.

[C J Campbell]

I guessed what happened the moment I read that you had flown through the
localizer. This is becoming a real problem and I am beginning to think that
there is a fundamental design flaw in advanced avionics systems.

I have noticed a tendency for people to forget to switch on the CDI even
when they are very familiar with the GPS. I have done it myself, seen many
students make the same mistake, and heard from a lot of other pilots that
this is a problem. People are more likely to forget things like this when
they are already stressed. I think this should be emphasized when training
with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated -- dial
in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV. However, I
can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)

[C J Campbell]

"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
...
| Ya did good when the brown stuff hit the fan , Scott... One attaboy...
|
| Now, let's discuss your fuel... You never, never, never, N E V E R, go
below
| one hour of fuel in the tanks - period...

Easier said than done. When IMC, getting unexpected vectors and maybe a
hold, you cannot simply cancel and land at the nearest VFR airport for fuel.
Stuff happens -- you miss your approach, etc.

I have no objection to landing 20 minutes short of the destination simply to
top off your tanks, but that is not always an option.

Also, try getting a seaplane rating some time.

[Dave Katz]

"C J Campbell" > writes:

> with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated -- dial
> in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV. However, I
> can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)

The Garmin units do this if you select an ILS approach (which puts the
localizer frequency into the standby) and remember to flip the
frequency to active. You get GPS guidance through the procedure until
you're inbound and intercepting the final approach course.

Of course, then you have to remember to put it back into GPS mode if
you want missed approach guidance.

I believe this is configurable.

[Peter R.]

C J Campbell ) wrote:

> I have noticed a tendency for people to forget to switch on the CDI even
> when they are very familiar with the GPS. I have done it myself, seen many
> students make the same mistake, and heard from a lot of other pilots that
> this is a problem. People are more likely to forget things like this when
> they are already stressed. I think this should be emphasized when training
> with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated -- dial
> in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV. However, I
> can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)

The GPS could flash a message reminding the pilot to switch the CDI when
within 5 miles or so of the localizer, much like some do to remind the
pilot to go to OBS mode when outbound to a procedure turn.

Of course, I suppose the message might be overlooked by the pilot...

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

C J Campbell ) wrote:

> Easier said than done. When IMC, getting unexpected vectors and maybe a
> hold, you cannot simply cancel and land at the nearest VFR airport for fuel.
> Stuff happens -- you miss your approach, etc.

I was taught to use the phrase "minimum fuel" if it appeared that holds
and/or additional vectors might make me concerned about remaining fuel,
whether it be a set "bingo" reserve or some other amount.

Wouldn't this be preferable to simply accepting the vectors and holds?

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Dave S]

I have watched folks under the hood screw the pooch (figuratively) by
not being familiar with equipment and avionics.

I have to wonder.. how did you blow through your required fuel reserves
for IFR with only "one" missed/messed up approach? Were you stretching
it, not plan for winds or were your fuel numbers wrong some other way?

Glad you lived to talk about it.

Dave

SD wrote:
> Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
> forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
> tell about it. As a lurker here for many years, I have come to enjoy
> reading about people's experiences and try to learn from their
> mistakes. So tonight I am posting my experience in hopes that someone
> else can learn from me.
>
> Today started out as just any ordinary day with a cross county flight
> that was going to take about 4 hours there, drop someone off and then
> come back home. I was in a Seneca II turbo and the weather was
> looking mostly VFR with the occasional MVFR called for my route, but
> was clearing. My flight to my destination was uneventful. It was the
> return flight and about 9 minutes out from my final destination when
> things went wrong.
>
> It was around 2200 and I was on with center with flight following and
> I turned to the ATIS to get weather for my destination. They were
> advising of Snow and ceilings at 2500. But how could that be, this
> stuff was not forcasted, I'm about 30miles out, flying at around 4500
> agl and I have the city in site, but not the airport. I asked center
> if my destination was IFR and they advised that they were not. The
> center then handed me off to approach. I proceed to descend in
> anticipation of lower clouds then BAM, the city went away. I was not
> IMC at the moment but I could not see anything in front of me.
>
> I thought to myself, no big deal, I will call for local IFR and shoot
> the ILS in. I have shot this approach many times.... Well at least in
> an aircraft with 2 nav radios and a GS. I have about 50ish hours in
> this Seneca (mostly x-county time) and we had just gotten the MX20 and
> CNX80 system put in about 3 weeks ago. I really haven't gotten use to
> shooting approaches with this system yet but here we go. Approach
> gave me vectors and altitude changes. Now I'm in IMC. There's a
> little vertigo coming into play now (don't know what that was all
> about) so on came the autopilot and let my head clear. Now I'm flying
> straight and level and on course. I knew I had about 15 or so miles
> to go before they would start turning me in to the ILS so now I'm
> pulling up the approach plate on the mx20. I have the paper one in my
> lap but I was going to use every tool to my advantage. It pulled up,
> now I can see exactly where I am on the approach. Now for the final
> vectors, I've got the ILS tuned into the nav portion on the CNX80, I'm
> getting what appears to be the proper reading on the HSI. But the ILS
> needle isn't moving. Next I hear from approach that I have blown thru
> the localizer and that they were going to turn me back around for
> resequencing. No big deal.
>
> I looked at my configuration on my systems to try and figure out why I
> never got the localizer. The frequency was correct, I confirmed it
> with approach and they advised it was working correctly. Then I saw
> that I did not push the CDI button. I hit it and it came alive. Now
> just as they are turning me back for final vectors, I look down and
> see that my right fuel gauge is showing 0 but my left is still around
> 20. I then intercepted the localizer and turned inbound. It was at
> that time the right engine dies. I reached down and hit the cross
> feed but nothing.
>
> Now here I am, in IMC, flying a plane with avionics that I have very
> little experience with, with my best friend (which this is the first
> time he has ever flown with me) and now with one engine dead. With
> all of this, you can say I got a little distracted and started getting
> off course. I had already switched to tower freq by now, so I
> declared priority due to fuel. The left was still showing almost 20
> but we all know how fuel gauges are accurate. An American Airlines
> had just landed in front of me and he advised that he broke out at
> around 1500 agl and that it was +10 vis underneath. I was able to get
> back on the ILS and intercept the GS. I then started my decent
> leaving my gear and flaps up (I had plenty of power on one engine to
> maintain blue line, but did not want to take a chance) Just as I was
> about to secure the right engine, it started rumbling to life. I
> don't know if it was the descent that shifted the fuel or fuel was
> finally making it thru the cross feed, I was about 1500 agl and broke
> thru the clouds. There was the runway. The most beautiful site I have
> ever seen. Flaps came out; Gear came down, and I landed. I was
> drenched with sweat and it was 12 degrees and snowing but I didn't
> care. I opened my little window and let that cold air in... It felt
> good. I was alive.
>
> Now it has been about 3 hours since I landed and I can not sleep a
> wink. I keep thinking to myself how foolish I was believing that I
> could go IMC using equipment that I was not all that familiar with.
> Another thing that I can kick myself in the butt for was to not paying
> more attention to my fuel situation. There are low fuel lights on the
> annunciator panel but they never came on. The bulbs work fine, I did
> test them.
>
> But without the proper training, I might have allowed all these things
> to just come to a boil. There were some moments of panic ( especially
> when that right fan quit) but I was able to use the basic training of
> dealing with engine outs and flying on a single engine that I was able
> to regain my composer and continue to fly the ILS on one engine.
> Without having that, they would probably be looking for the wreckage
> now.
>
> Thanks for reading my long winded story but this was kind of therapy
> for me. I think that I can now go and get some sleep.
>
>
> Scott
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Dave Katz" > wrote in message
...
| "C J Campbell" > writes:
|
| > with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated --
dial
| > in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV.
However, I
| > can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)
|
| The Garmin units do this if you select an ILS approach (which puts the
| localizer frequency into the standby) and remember to flip the
| frequency to active. You get GPS guidance through the procedure until
| you're inbound and intercepting the final approach course.
|
| Of course, then you have to remember to put it back into GPS mode if
| you want missed approach guidance.
|
| I believe this is configurable.

Yeah, my GARMIN GNS 430 would do that. Instead of an external NAV/GPS switch
such as you see in most GPS installations, the GARMIN units have the switch
built into the panel. GARMIN can do this because their units are all-in-one
boxes, so it is a simple matter to switch program that in. Even though the
CNX-80 the OP used is also an all-in-one box, it appears that it must be
switched manually.

I have not yet seen a GARMIN 1000 installation, but I understand that it
works more like the GNS-430/-530 units.

[C J Campbell]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
| C J Campbell ) wrote:
|
| > I have noticed a tendency for people to forget to switch on the CDI even
| > when they are very familiar with the GPS. I have done it myself, seen
many
| > students make the same mistake, and heard from a lot of other pilots
that
| > this is a problem. People are more likely to forget things like this
when
| > they are already stressed. I think this should be emphasized when
training
| > with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated --
dial
| > in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV.
However, I
| > can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)
|
| The GPS could flash a message reminding the pilot to switch the CDI when
| within 5 miles or so of the localizer, much like some do to remind the
| pilot to go to OBS mode when outbound to a procedure turn.
|
| Of course, I suppose the message might be overlooked by the pilot...
|

Most of them flash the message when you select the approach procedure, which
IMHO is too early.

[C J Campbell]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
| C J Campbell ) wrote:
|
| > Easier said than done. When IMC, getting unexpected vectors and maybe a
| > hold, you cannot simply cancel and land at the nearest VFR airport for
fuel.
| > Stuff happens -- you miss your approach, etc.
|
| I was taught to use the phrase "minimum fuel" if it appeared that holds
| and/or additional vectors might make me concerned about remaining fuel,
| whether it be a set "bingo" reserve or some other amount.
|
| Wouldn't this be preferable to simply accepting the vectors and holds?
|

Even that is no guarantee that you will get priority handling. Other
aircraft emergencies, going missed and trying again, etc., will start to eat
into your fuel reserve. Turbulence can have unexpected consequences, too,
slowing your rate of progress and eating fuel as you change altitudes
looking for better conditions.

Some very popular aircraft, including twins, only hold about 1.5 hours
useable fuel when fully loaded with pax and bags. The Cessna 414 Chancellor
comes to mind. According to Aviation Consumer, that aircraft has the best
safety record (per 100,000 hours) of all piston twins, they are not exactly
falling out of the sky because of fuel exhaustion. It follows that if you
think the 414 is not safe enough because it does not hold enough fuel, then
all other piston twins are not safe enough for you, either, because their
accident rate is worse than that of the 414. Unless, of course, fuel is the
only safety issue that you are concerned about, in which case I wish you
well, but I will not fly with you.

One could avoid piston twins and float planes entirely. Some people do. But
then you have to ask yourself why you are avoiding those aircraft and not
those piston singles that have worse safety records than the 414. There are
plenty of those, including such stalwarts as the Navion, Mooney, and
Ercoupe. The only piston singles that have better safety records than the
414 are basically a handful of Cessnas and Pipers.

[Nathan Young]

SD <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message >...
> Well, tonight will go in my book as something that I will never
> forget. Tonight I learned a valuable lesson and was able to live to
> tell about it. As a lurker here for many years, I have come to enjoy
> reading about people's experiences and try to learn from their
> mistakes. So tonight I am posting my experience in hopes that someone
> else can learn from me.

Thanks, a good reminder that even though the plane is IFR equipped,
the pilot may not be ready to use those instruments. I guess there's
something to be said for the simplistic KX-155 :)

<snip>

> I looked at my configuration on my systems to try and figure out why I
> never got the localizer. The frequency was correct, I confirmed it
> with approach and they advised it was working correctly. Then I saw
> that I did not push the CDI button. I hit it and it came alive. Now
> just as they are turning me back for final vectors, I look down and
> see that my right fuel gauge is showing 0 but my left is still around
> 20.

Congrats on a safe landing when things weren't going well.

Did you find out why the left tank had 20Gal, but the right tank was
empty? I would assume they were originally filled to the same level
and that the engines were feeding from their respective tanks per
standard Seneca II ops (ie not crossfeeding).

I am curious - do you have the 93 or 123 gallon tanks?

-Nathan

[Maule Driver]

"Dave S" > >
> I have to wonder.. how did you blow through your required fuel reserves
> for IFR with only "one" missed/messed up approach? Were you stretching
> it, not plan for winds or were your fuel numbers wrong some other way?

I think he filed VFR and was surprised, after 3+ hours of flight, to
encounter IFR conditions. He requested a clearance to land... or am I
reading the wrong post?

How many of us of asked for and gotten a clearance to descend through a
layer with little or no thought to required IFR reserves?

[Andrew Gideon]

Nathan Young wrote:

> Thanks, a good reminder that even though the plane is IFR equipped,
> the pilot may not be ready to use those instruments. I guess there's
> something to be said for the simplistic KX-155 :)

It's not really simple vs. complex.

When I joined the club, I was switching from KLN-90 something-or-other to a
Garmin. I find both to be quite simple...but at the time, I'd never used a
Garmin. So I know I'd not fly IFR in a club plane until I'd read, watched
the video, and played a bit.

It just seems to be common sense.

- Andrew

[Maule Driver]

"Nathan Young" > >
> Thanks, a good reminder that even though the plane is IFR equipped,
> the pilot may not be ready to use those instruments. I guess there's
> something to be said for the simplistic KX-155 :)
>
Is there a broader question of whether any pilot is fully capable of
operating (GPS) equipment in any a/c other than the ones they have trained
in?

My experience is VERY limited. With little exception, I've trained and
flown IFR only in my owner operated a/c. It was very clear to me that the
button pushing idiosynchroncies of my particular unit (G 300XL) were
specific to not only that unit, but specific to the installation in my a/c.
I would feel confident of being able to operate another 300XL installation
but would be aware that installation options could change certain procedure
significantly.

The 400/500 series Garmins are pretty common and I assume that most pilots
fully trained on one would feel confident operating other 400/500
installations. But I know from the couple of training flights I did with a
430, I never caught up with it.

Ironically, while GPS has made accurate navigation bone simple, it seems to
make jumping from plane to plane more challenging. The moving map
practically eliminates loss of spatial awareness, but the button pushing
required can lead to brain freeze trying to figure out how to make it show
you what you want.

[Andrew Sarangan]

It was my impression that the pilot simply forgot to switch tanks, and
flew one tank dry while he had 20 gallons in the other tank. However,
what is the fuel burn rate in a Seneca II? Is 20 gallons worth 45mins?




Dave S > wrote in message et>...
> I have watched folks under the hood screw the pooch (figuratively) by
> not being familiar with equipment and avionics.
>
> I have to wonder.. how did you blow through your required fuel reserves
> for IFR with only "one" missed/messed up approach? Were you stretching
> it, not plan for winds or were your fuel numbers wrong some other way?
>
> Glad you lived to talk about it.
>
> Dave
>

[David Rind]

C J Campbell wrote:
> "Dave Katz" > wrote in message
> ...
> | "C J Campbell" > writes:
> |
> | > with advanced aircraft systems. Perhaps the task should be automated --
> dial
> | > in a localizer or ILS, and the CDI automatically switches to NAV.
> However, I
> | > can envision problems with this approach as well, so to speak. :-)
> |
> | The Garmin units do this if you select an ILS approach (which puts the
> | localizer frequency into the standby) and remember to flip the
> | frequency to active. You get GPS guidance through the procedure until
> | you're inbound and intercepting the final approach course.
> |
> | Of course, then you have to remember to put it back into GPS mode if
> | you want missed approach guidance.
> |
> | I believe this is configurable.
>
> Yeah, my GARMIN GNS 430 would do that. Instead of an external NAV/GPS switch
> such as you see in most GPS installations, the GARMIN units have the switch
> built into the panel. GARMIN can do this because their units are all-in-one
> boxes, so it is a simple matter to switch program that in. Even though the
> CNX-80 the OP used is also an all-in-one box, it appears that it must be
> switched manually.
>
> I have not yet seen a GARMIN 1000 installation, but I understand that it
> works more like the GNS-430/-530 units.
>
>

The opposite problem can also happen. The last time I was out
doing practice approaches, I failed to switch the CDI to GPS
mode on a GPS approach until the safety pilot pointed out the
error. The 530 I have always reminds me to switch the CDI
to LOC mode on an ILS approach, but has no reminder to get
it off LOC for a GPS approach when, of course, the CDI is reading
some random VOR or ILS you happen to be tuned to but aren't thinking
about. There are an amazing number of errors you can make with
a GPS, though the moving map is incredibly helpful for spatial
awareness.

--
David Rind

[C J Campbell]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
om...
| It was my impression that the pilot simply forgot to switch tanks, and
| flew one tank dry while he had 20 gallons in the other tank. However,
| what is the fuel burn rate in a Seneca II? Is 20 gallons worth 45mins?
|

It is a little more complex than that. Normally the Seneca burns fuel for
the left engine from the left tank and fuel from the right engine from the
right tank. It is possible to run out of fuel for one engine and not the
other. I don't remember which tank the aircraft heater draws fuel from, but
I think it is the left. There is a crossfeed valve that allows you to run
both engines from either tank. The engine failure checklist calls for
turning on this crossfeed valve, which he apparently did. However, the OP
could have opted to simply feather the stopped fan rather than attempt to
restart the engine while flying a tricky ILS approach where he was already
behind the airplane. The Seneca is easy to fly on one engine and continuing
the approach on one engine may well have well have been the better part of
valor. He would not have had the option of going around or making a missed
approach if anything went wrong, though, so he probably did the right thing
by restarting the engine.

The Seneca II burns between nine and twelve gallons per hour per engine in
normal use. The turboed version burns a little more. Nursing it a little
bit, he may have had over an hour of fuel left, especially since he was
descending anyway and had elected to keep his configuration clean.

Other things I think the pilot did right include turning on the autopilot
when he started getting a little vertigo, leaving gear and flaps up on the
descent (approaches in the Seneca usually are flown with one notch of flaps
and gear down), and declaring that he was low on fuel.

[K9 Lover]

> just as they are turning me back for final vectors, I look down and
> see that my right fuel gauge is showing 0 but my left is still around
> 20. I then intercepted the localizer and turned inbound. It was at
> that time the right engine dies. I reached down and hit the cross
> feed but nothing.

Another scary thought ...

With the aircraft flying unbalanced (ie banked 5 deg towards working donkey,
and compensating rudder applied), I doubt very much if anything close to the
full 20 gallons would be available.

Curious also as to why such an (apparant) imbalance between the tanks?

[G.R. Patterson III]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
> It was my impression that the pilot simply forgot to switch tanks, and
> flew one tank dry while he had 20 gallons in the other tank. However,
> what is the fuel burn rate in a Seneca II? Is 20 gallons worth 45mins?

With two 180 hp engines, 20 gallons should be good for at least 45 minutes.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Dennis O'Connor]

Depends on where the pickup is positioned in the tank... Ya gotta know your
airplane...

"K9 Lover" > wrote in > With the aircraft flying
unbalanced (ie banked 5 deg towards working donkey,
> and compensating rudder applied), I doubt very much if anything close to
the
> full 20 gallons would be available.

[Snowbird]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message >...
> I guessed what happened the moment I read that you had flown through the
> localizer. This is becoming a real problem and I am beginning to think that
> there is a fundamental design flaw in advanced avionics systems.

> I have noticed a tendency for people to forget to switch on the CDI even
> when they are very familiar with the GPS.

This is one reason we like our setup, which is a separate CDI dedicated
to the GPS. It's always GPS, the CDIs are always LOC/VOR.

One question for the original poster: is the GPS moving map in your scan?
Does it automatically, or is it configurable, to show the loc course?
I do this, and find it helpful.

If the CDI must be manually switched, it definately needs to be built
into one's approach checklist and as the original poster pointed out,
that's the reason it's needful to become familiar with each installed
avionics setup. If I moved into a plane (or a setup) that required
manual switching I'm sure it would bite me before I'd had time to
integrate the check into my procedures.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Snowbird]

"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message >...
> Ya did good when the brown stuff hit the fan , Scott... One attaboy...

> Now, let's discuss your fuel... You never, never, never, N E V E R, go below
> one hour of fuel in the tanks - period...

Doesn't the Seneca have 180 HP engines?

I woulda thought 20 gallons would be 1 hr of fuel for 2 180 HPs, maybe
a bit more if the plane is kept clean, throttled back and leaned out
a mite.

Now not being a twin driver I can't comment on nicities such how the
fuel should be distributed between tanks.

> The final point I make here is that fuel is measured by your watch, NOT by
> the fuel gauges... All the gauges are is a cross check against the watch...
> The watch rules! Keep flying and play by my rules and you will never
> have another story to tell us like that...

Um....with all respect, Dennis, your rule that "the watch rules" would
seem to leave you vulnerable to taking off with less fuel than you think,
and to in-flight fuel loss other than through the engine (has happened
to several here).

Seems to me that the rule ought to be "whichever indicates less fuel,
rules". If the fuel gauge indicates lower than it should, time to
land and investigate ASAP, not look at your watch and smile.

Cheers,
Sydney

[SD]

Thanks guys for being supportive. I think I am being harder on myself
then what I have received here, I really expected harsher criticism
which I feel is dully warranted. I just got back into town today off
of another flight so I was unable to respond to the responses
yesterday, so I will try to answer most of the questions in this one
post.

As for the configuration of the Seneca II Turbo, it has 2- 200hp
engines. The fuel consumption at cruise is at 24gph for both engines,
and I have the 123 gallon tanks. The left engine feeds from the left
tank and the right engine feeds from the right tank. The only thing
that I can figure out as far as the discrepancy between the two tanks
fuel levels is this. First the Janitrol heater draws off of the right
tank which for the flight should have only drawn around 2.5 gallons,
this was considered for the flight planning. Second is when I had the
tanks filled for my journey home, there may have been a 1-2 gallon
discrepancy in the fill (just a guess) between the two tanks. Third,
with leaning, I use the EGT gauge to lean so there could have been a
difference in fuel flow to the right engine, the fuel flow indicators
are always off a little but they are always approximate anyways.

When I got on the ground, I was curious as to how much fuel was in the
left tank so I had the line guy fill the plane (he wasn't really happy
about that because it was like 10 degrees nowand still snowing). I
had about 11 gallons left in the left tank. That was after I landed
and had to taxi (on both engines) about 1.3 miles due to taxi way
closers and having to land on the opposite side of the field from the
FBO.

As far as the fuel reserves were concerned, they were considered, FOR
VFR. But even after I landed I still had almost an hour of fuel in
the left tank, just not in the right. I spoke to the briefer before I
departed and looked on the WSI computer and there was nothing
forecasted for this IFR conditions and nothing on the satellite
imagery that would indicate this stuff would back up against the
mountains and cause this. This was just a freak thing that happened
because of the mountains and the moisture that was in the air. In
fact I was told it did the same thing last night here, just wasn't as
severe and now it is clear blue and 22.

With regards to restarting the engine, that was not a decision that I
had made. When the fan quit, I was in the middle of intercepting the
localizer and I had no time to really make that decision at that
moment, I was doing everything I could to intercept and turn inbound
because I knew things were getting critical. I had the plane under
control for the most part and I did not want to divert my scan to
something else for the moment, all I did at that time is hit the cross
feed. Once I got the plane semi stabilized on the localizer and I had
intercepted the GS and started my decent was when I diverted a little
attention to that situation. Things had calmed down just a smidge so
I was in the thought process of determining the best action. Just as
I was checking the mixture, prop, throttle and fuel settings for the
right engine is when I noticed the manifold pressure and RPM'S started
to come up and then a very noticeable yaw to the left because of more
power was being produced by the right engine. I then brought the power
down to match the left. CHT temps on the right engine was a little
cooler but with regards to the time frame it didn't have much time to
cool too much. Of course I really have no idea how much time the
engine had been down (looking at the clock for that was just not in my
mind) but given my approx location and the decent point I figured
probably around 3 minutes but that is a guess, it seemed like an
eternity to me.

With regards to the GPS and MFD it is in my scan. Those are
invaluable with regards to positional awareness especially near the
mountains. Just that the CDI indicator was overlooked. My stress
level from 1-10 was probably about a 15 and missing a little tiny
window on the bottom left side of the GPS is something that I did
overlook. I trusted my HSI which was indicating correctly in regards
to my position to the airport. Just that when I turned for final
vectors, the needle never moved which started this whole mess.

I have set aside some time in the next few days to go under the hood
and shoot multiple approaches and holds using this equipment. Not
that I have not done this already. I have shot about 5 approaches
with the new equipment when we first got it but the stress level was
not there as it was this time. I plan on having my safety pilot do
all kinds of things to try and get the blood pressure back to where it
was that night.


Again thanks for being supportive

Scott

[EDR]

In article >, SD
<sdatverizondot.net@> wrote:

> I have set aside some time in the next few days to go under the hood
> and shoot multiple approaches and holds using this equipment. Not
> that I have not done this already.

Power up the avionics and sit in the airplane and do a dry run through
all the procedures before you go out and fly. The best place to sort
things out is on the ground. If something is missing from a checklist,
add it.

[Jack Allison]

Thanks for being willing to share your story Scott and to admit to the
mistakes. Glad you made it through ok...though I'll bet that pair of
underwear will never be the same :-)

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

[Michael]

SD <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote
> Thanks guys for being supportive. I think I am being harder on myself
> then what I have received here, I really expected harsher criticism
> which I feel is dully warranted.

Which is why you didn't receive it. You know what you did wrong so no
point making an issue of it.

> The only thing
> that I can figure out as far as the discrepancy between the two tanks
> fuel levels is this. First the Janitrol heater draws off of the right
> tank which for the flight should have only drawn around 2.5 gallons,
> this was considered for the flight planning. Second is when I had the
> tanks filled for my journey home, there may have been a 1-2 gallon
> discrepancy in the fill (just a guess) between the two tanks. Third,
> with leaning, I use the EGT gauge to lean so there could have been a
> difference in fuel flow to the right engine, the fuel flow indicators
> are always off a little but they are always approximate anyways.

I don't really see how even all three factors in combination would
account for the discrepancy. 40 burned from the left, 60 from the
right. Just doesn't make sense.

I would look for fuel leaks, and don't forget that misfueling happens.

> When I got on the ground, I was curious as to how much fuel was in the
> left tank so I had the line guy fill the plane (he wasn't really happy
> about that because it was like 10 degrees nowand still snowing). I
> had about 11 gallons left in the left tank. That was after I landed
> and had to taxi (on both engines) about 1.3 miles due to taxi way
> closers and having to land on the opposite side of the field from the
> FBO.

Still seems a bit high. I'm thinking you're leaking fuel somewhere on
the right engine/fuel system.

> As far as the fuel reserves were concerned, they were considered, FOR
> VFR.

The fuel is a red herring. 20 gallons at the end of a trip in a plane
that burns only a little more than that at max cruise in an hour (and
can burn a lot less if you pull it back) is not an issue. The
question is why 20 gallons of fuel disappeared from the right tank.

> With regards to restarting the engine, that was not a decision that I
> had made. When the fan quit, I was in the middle of intercepting the
> localizer and I had no time to really make that decision at that
> moment, I was doing everything I could to intercept and turn inbound
> because I knew things were getting critical.

I think your priorities were dead on here. No matter how pathetic the
twin is (and the one you have is not pathetic) you really don't need
the engine once you've turned inbound unless you're going to miss.
Don't miss. Especially don't miss because you're screwing with the
engine.

> I had the plane under
> control for the most part and I did not want to divert my scan to
> something else for the moment, all I did at that time is hit the cross
> feed.

I don't know that I would even have done that much - or wanted to.
You now you can shoot a single engine approach. You don't know why
there is 20 gallons missing from the right side, but the first thing
to suspect is a leak. How bad is it? Maybe bad enough that 20
gallons won't be enough with both running?

20/20 hindsight, of course. Single engine approaches have their risks
too. What you did was reasonable, but not necessarily best IMO. I
think I would have just feathered it and called it good. But again -
that's a fine point. We're talking about relative risks that are
small and difficult to calculate, so no way was this wrong. Just
trying to present alternatives for next time.

Certainly not wanting to divert attention from a plane not fully under
control to mess with an engine you really didn't absolutely need makes
all kinds of sense.

> Once I got the plane semi stabilized on the localizer and I had
> intercepted the GS and started my decent was when I diverted a little
> attention to that situation. Things had calmed down just a smidge so
> I was in the thought process of determining the best action. Just as
> I was checking the mixture, prop, throttle and fuel settings for the
> right engine is when I noticed the manifold pressure and RPM'S started
> to come up and then a very noticeable yaw to the left because of more
> power was being produced by the right engine. I then brought the power
> down to match the left. CHT temps on the right engine was a little
> cooler but with regards to the time frame it didn't have much time to
> cool too much. Of course I really have no idea how much time the
> engine had been down (looking at the clock for that was just not in my
> mind) but given my approx location and the decent point I figured
> probably around 3 minutes but that is a guess, it seemed like an
> eternity to me.

No kidding. If you had enough cycles left over to be troubleshooting
the engine inside the marker, you were doing OK skillwise. The wisdom
of doing it, though, is another gray area. Personally, I doubt I
would divert the attention unless both needles were in the donut and I
wasn't working too hard to keep them there. Again - if you shoot a
good approach, you won't need the other engine. If you botch the
approach and don't get the engine back, you're hosed. Once again, not
a case of right or wrong - more like personal preference.

> I have set aside some time in the next few days to go under the hood
> and shoot multiple approaches and holds using this equipment. Not
> that I have not done this already. I have shot about 5 approaches
> with the new equipment when we first got it but the stress level was
> not there as it was this time. I plan on having my safety pilot do
> all kinds of things to try and get the blood pressure back to where it
> was that night.

I strongly recommend partial panel single engine full procedure night
circling NDB approaches to short runways. It's what I do for my
recurrent training, and I recommend it highly. If you can do that,
real life failures are quite anticlimactic.

Michael

[SD]

On 13 Jan 2004 11:01:12 -0800, (Michael) wrote:


>
>I don't really see how even all three factors in combination would
>account for the discrepancy. 40 burned from the left, 60 from the
>right. Just doesn't make sense.
>
Just a quick follow up. Your hunches were correct, I did have a fuel
leak so to speak in the right tank. About a week later, I took the
plane on a short X/C to deliever a passenger to another town about 30
mins away. About half way there, he spoke up and said, what is that
blue stuff coming out of the wing. I looked over at the right wing
and saw a stream of fuel coming out of the inspection cover on the
right tank. Once we landed, I took a screwdriver and was able to get
almost 1/4 turn on every screw. On the flight back it did not leak.

I did not see this after my leather sucking flight that night. The
only thing that I can think had happened was the moisture that I was
flying in had washed it away so the evidence was not all that clear.


Scott

[Michael]

SD <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote
> I looked over at the right wing
> and saw a stream of fuel coming out of the inspection cover on the
> right tank. Once we landed, I took a screwdriver and was able to get
> almost 1/4 turn on every screw. On the flight back it did not leak.

I agree that you have found the problem. I would not be so certain
that you have fixed it. An inspection cover of that sort is going to
have a gasket. I suspect your gasket is now compromised. If it were
my plane, I would think real hard about replacing that gasket.
Otherwise I think it's going to do it again.

> I did not see this after my leather sucking flight that night. The
> only thing that I can think had happened was the moisture that I was
> flying in had washed it away so the evidence was not all that clear.

That's quite likely. I once had a similar problem with the fuel cap
on my aux tank, and moisture made it go away.

This is why flying with inop fuel gauges is not acceptable. They
don't tell you much, but they do tell you when you have a fuel leak.

Michael

[gross_arrow]

SD <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message >...

[snip excellent narrative about engine out on twin]

i'm just now catching up to the threads after the holidays, but i also
had an engine out in a twin over the holidays.....

mine was in a cessna 310 -- going into little rock. i was imc at
9000, was given a descent to 4000. going through ~5k, i was
given a left turn to 040, vectors for the final approach course,
ils 22 right at lit. i reached the heading and the altitude about
the same time. brought the throttles up, and whoa! i'm getting
a strong yaw to the right. so: identify -- right foot dead, right
engine dead, verify -- pulling the right throttle didn't change
anything, and feather. before i feathered, i looked at all
the engine instruments, and there's something strange -- the
right is showing ~9 inches m.p. so it can't have quit, or it would
be showing ambient. oh, well, sort it out on the ground. went
ahead and feathered, informed atc, shot the s.e. ils and landing.
they rolled the equipment, and i got to experience the joys of
taxiing on one for the first time.

could have been a lot worse:

1. it was day ifr (could have been night)
2. i broke out ~1000 agl (could have been to mins)
3. i started out ~120 below gross, and had burned ~250 lbs fuel,
so was at ~4700 (could have been at gross -- 5100)
4. was an ils (could have been a non-precision approach)
5. was the right engine (could have been the left [critical] engine).

turns out the right throttle cable broke just as i was powering up.
had to leave the plane in lit for a week for repairs ~$1500.

i would choose exactly the same title -- that's why we train.

g_a

[Peter R.]

gross_arrow ) wrote:

> i'm just now catching up to the threads after the holidays, but i also
> had an engine out in a twin over the holidays.....

Wow... happy to read of such a positive outcome. With a less proficient
pilot, this could have easily been a holiday media feast and NTSB report.




--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---