On one Mag? Temptation and decision

I'm with you Paul, as far as saying the answer is not 100% clear. The
monday morning quarterbacks have all the easy answers. Mechanical troubles
away from home can create real dilemmas.

If it's only 40 miles, VFR, and there's an interstate highway to follow, I
might do it if there was some disastrous consequence to not making it back
on time. A 150 can be landed almost anywhere, even in an empty Wal Mart
parking lot. But the original poster's own mechanic could also easily drive
over with a new mag for not much additional expense, or the local mechanic
could easily put one in or troubleshoot the bad one. I've had mag troubles
away from my home field a couple times, and it's always been easily and
quickly fixed. One time, it was that the points were burned after the
capacitor wire had severed, and new points and a capacitor were all that
were needed and on hand at the shop. A one hour delay.

"Paul Mennen" wrote in message
m...
I would have also left the plane.
No reason to kill yourself over a minor inconvenience.

More than inconvenience. A dead mag means the airplane is not legally
airworthy, and flying it that way presents a whole range of threats,
from a second mag failure through to insurance invalidation and to the
loss of your license.

Ok, I'm setting myself to get totally jumped on, but hey this
thread is far too one sided to make a legitimate newsgroup thread.
So I feel compelled to offer another perspective.

First with regard to the "loss of your license" comment above,
If you crashed as a result of your second magneto failing, I doubt
you would admit to the FAA inspector or your insurance agent that
the first mag failed before takeoff. (After all, if the first mag
just failed on the previous flight, it would be just about as likely
that it failed after takeoff of the flight in question.)

Second, I think the "kill yourself" comment above is overly dramatic.
You were trained what to do when an engine fails weren't you? And
you do practice this I assume when you enter a traffic pattern that
is totally devoid of other traffic or other complications prohibiting
a power off landing? I've actually had to land without power once
thru no fault of my own. It was even in Colorado, not exactly the
most hospitable terrain in the country for forced landings, yet my
plane and its occupants were just fine. If I was unlucky enough my
plane would have been damaged, even totaled perhaps, yet I believe
I could walk away from such an incident no matter when the engine
decided to give up the ghost. (At night, my confidence is that would
be dramatically reduced.)

This little bit of flying bravado doesn't mean I seek out the situations
demanding such skill. (The old expression about the superior pilot
comes to mind. In fact the failed mag thing happened to me once.
I had the whole family loaded up ready to fly to Tahoe. During the
run-up, one mag was completely dead. For one, I was planning on flying
over some pretty rugged mountains. And then their would have been the
same problem on the return. Also I had a perfectly functional car parked
right there at the airport (although it did take us about 5 times
longer to drive). However in other circumstances I might do it.
For instance if I had to make it only 40 miles back to home base, and
the terrain in between was hospitable, and the wx was good vfr, and
of course it was daytime. I would take extra precautions - such as
circling the field while climbing to give me an early out. I would
try to choose a route and fly high enough to remain within gliding
distance of an airport for as much of the flight as possible. (Actually
after my return from Tahoe, I had no hesitation about flying it to
my mechanics airport. It was only 15 miles away with two large
airports directly enroute.)

One has to be careful about the "no reason to take unnecessary risks"
idea espoused by posters in this thread. The rub is in defining
unnecessary. Some of my non-flying friends question my sanity for
taking unnecessary risks for going out airport hopping on a perfectly
fine windless CAVU day just after my most experienced and nitpicky
mechanic has gone over everything with a fine tooth comb and pronounced
the plane airworthy. Some of my heavy metal flying friends question
my sanity for packing my family across the Sierras and the Rockies
in an airplane with only one engine. And then when I mention that I
also fly at night and in IFR wx, they say "with only one pilot, only
one alternator, only one vacuum source, no anti-ice equipment, what
are you nuts?" No I'm not nuts. Thousands of other pilots do it also.
Its all what you are used to and how you balance the risks and the
rewards. I always say that a pilot has to have the right mix of
desire and fear. Not enough desire and too much fear and the pilot
will not get experience because he will never go anywhere. Not enough
fear and too much desire and he will not get experienced either since
he will kill himself first.

So to all those "certainly leave it on the ground" responders,
don't you occasionally go biking even if those brakes are a
little bit worn. And surely an errant truck driver could wipe you
off the road with barely a 1 second mistake. And what about those
pilots of the 1920's. Are you saying if you were born say a
century ago, you wouldn't have been among that fun loving
pilot crowd. If I remember right, they only had one magneto
even when everything was working. Heck I don't think they even
had the luxury of a throttle. (Of course their engines failed
so often, for so many different reasons, that the extra safety
from having two magnetos would have been insignificant
My point is we all take risks. We just have to evaluate each
one as objectively as possible taking in all the statistics we
know and the relative rewards for taking the risk.

And saying "and it's against the FARs" is a cop out too.
I feel that the FARs are pretty much irrelevant in the decision
making process. Certainly one should ponder why the FAA made this
decision, yet as I tried to point out, everyone's risk/reward system
is different. There are many things the FARs allow me to do that I
will not. (One of many examples is that I'm allowed to take off in
zero-zero conditions, which I feel is not worth the risk. Some fellow
pilots will do this, but I do not denigrate their decision, since
their piloting skills are different as well as their risk perceptions.)
There are other things prohibited by the FARs that I feel perfectly
comfortable with. I've taken off many times with equipment not working
that was required by the type certificate (even the airspeed indicator
once). Before I get the flood of irate responses from those of you
who claim that you always fly legally, let me point out that FAA
inspectors claim they can find something illegal with every aircraft
if they look closely enough, and usually they don't have to look very
close. I just hope too many FAA inspectors are not reading this
newsgroup

~Paul