View Single Post
  #5  
Old June 1st 05, 04:54 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sorry, I find it difficult to believe that anyone with an ATP or even multi
would say what you attributed to him. Perhaps he was exaggerating? It is
true that an engine loss at *full* power and *low* airspeed requires a lot
of rudder but it is not true that retaining control requires lightning fast
reflexes or that the airplane will become a lawn dart in the "blink of an
eye". It takes most pilots less than 10hrs including the checkride to get a
multi rating so clearly it isn't that difficult or challenging. Naturally,
like anything else there are ways to screw it up. The FAA only certifies
airplanes that can be flown by pilots of "average skill".

As othere have mentioned, losing an engine on approach should be a non
event. There is minimal yaw because the power is set low.

Mike
MU-2
ATP


"Mike 'Flyin'8'" wrote in message
...
He has multi and ATP.... If you know more then explain... No need for
the negativity without explaination...

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 00:04:01 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
My understanding is that the aircraft will tend to roll due to the side
with the failed engine having less lift. My CFI was explaining this to
me
some time ago.

Engine failure would require immediate and extreme rudder input and
feathering the props on the failed engine to reduce the drag. He said
something about "Lawn Dart" and that it can happen in a blink of the
eye.

I'm a ASEL primary student. What's the skinny on multi-engine control
issues when one engine fails on approach?

--
Mike Flyin'8
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
http://flying.4alexanders.com


Maybe someday your CFI will get a multi engine rating and know what he is
talking about.

Mike
MU-2



Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com