Engine failure on final

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:41:39 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
::

As I was taught, the point of flying safely is to always have a
viable option. So, I fly tight patterns and make power-off landings
as a rule. If I make it to the pattern, I can make it to a runway,
engine or no.

Truly? So when you're #5 in the pattern (which necessitates a
looooong, extended downwind leg) you just fly the pattern at 2,000'
then?

Of course not, one has to use common sense, for example, fly the pattern
slower rather than lower or hold altitude on that "looooong, extended
downwind leg" rather than descend after crossing the usual abeam point and
turn base within gliding range. If you don't guarantee that you can make
the runway, who will? ;-)

Neil

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:31:46 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
::

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:41:39 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
::

As I was taught, the point of flying safely is to always have a
viable option. So, I fly tight patterns and make power-off landings
as a rule. If I make it to the pattern, I can make it to a runway,
engine or no.

Truly? So when you're #5 in the pattern (which necessitates a
looooong, extended downwind leg) you just fly the pattern at 2,000'
then?

Of course not, one has to use common sense, for example, fly the pattern
slower rather than lower

So your aircraft is slow enough to permit you to remain within gliding
distance of the threshold at normal pattern altitude while four other
aircraft head cross country several miles from the runway? Doubtful.

or hold altitude on that "looooong, extended downwind leg" rather than
descend after crossing the usual abeam point and
turn base within gliding range.

See above.

If you don't guarantee that you can make the runway, who will? ;-)

The power developed by your engine.

At John Wayne airport (a Class C facility) it is not unusual to find
yourself on downwind well outside the surface area during "rush hour"
operations. It's not feasible to remain within power off gliding
distance of the runway threshold at these times. An instrument
approach imposes similar difficulty in maintaining power off gliding
distance to the runway. I can understand how it can reduce exposure
to landing short, but I don't find it often possible except at times
of low traffic density.

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:31:46 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in

As I was taught, the point of flying safely is to always have a
viable option. So, I fly tight patterns and make power-off landings
as a rule. If I make it to the pattern, I can make it to a runway,
engine or no.

Truly? So when you're #5 in the pattern (which necessitates a
looooong, extended downwind leg) you just fly the pattern at 2,000'
then?

Of course not, one has to use common sense, for example, fly the
pattern slower rather than lower

So your aircraft is slow enough to permit you to remain within gliding
distance of the threshold at normal pattern altitude while four other
aircraft head cross country several miles from the runway? Doubtful.

Larry... be reasonable! Few are likely to assess the situation and insist
that they fly the pattern in an irresponsible manner (although, I've been
in the pattern with some of those "few", as well). There are times when I
find myself behind some folks in a Cessna flying a base leg 2 or 3 miles
out, and in such a situation, I don't cut them off. ;-) I'm only
pointing out that there are usually other options than just flying long
downwind patterns and relying on engine power to save your bacon, and
being practiced with those options is a Good Thing. And, I realize that if
you're flying into busy air space, you don't have the option to practice.
;-)

Neil

And I have done many flight reviews with students that reduce power
abeam the numbers and then desend to about 300 feet while extending
there downwind to landing traffic. Then the fly the base and long
final at 300 feet.

A much better technique is to fly the extending downwind, base and
maybe even part of final at a 1000' AGL. Once within gliding range,
then reduce power. At least at 1000' feet you should have 20-30 seconds
to consider you options of where you are going to land should the
engine fail. At 300' your going to hit what ever is directly in front
of you.

Brian

On 24 Jan 2005 06:02:38 -0800, "Brian" wrote:

A much better technique is to fly the extending downwind, base and
maybe even part of final at a 1000' AGL. Once within gliding range,
then reduce power. At least at 1000' feet you should have 20-30 seconds
to consider you options of where you are going to land should the
engine fail. At 300' your going to hit what ever is directly in front
of you.

Well, that puts you at a different altitude than everyone else in the
pattern (especially at 7B3 where p.a. is 800 ft AGL . And if I read
the second sentence correctly, you're not within gliding range until
you're on final, so if your engine quits you will go plop.

Why look around in search of a landing place when you've got an
airport in sight? Why not fly the pattern so that you can glide to the
runway from downwind or base?

(As posted, if I knew how to fly a 45 within gliding distance, I'd do
that too! The only things around 7B3 are houses, trees, and a
one-track railroad bed.)





-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

A much better technique is to fly the extending downwind, base and
maybe even part of final at a 1000' AGL. Once within gliding range,
then reduce power....

But you WERE withing gliding range when you were abeam at the 180, if
you flew a proper downwind leg. Unless circumstances *force* you to
extend the downwind, it is poor practice to do so.

vince norris

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:56:22 -0800, Ron Garret
wrote:

The discussion about cutting power on final reminded me of something
I've been puzzled about for some time now.

If you fly final with some amount of power (which I gather most people
do -- I always have) that seems to guarantee that if you lose your
engine on final you will land short, and there's pretty much nothing you
can do about it. Is that true? Or have I missed something? What
should you do if you lose your engine just after turning base to final?

rg

Can anyone cite an instance when a pilot lost his engine while on
final and landed short because of it?

Thanks, Corky Scott

In article ,
Corky Scott wrote:


Can anyone cite an instance when a pilot lost his engine while on
final and landed short because of it?


Anchorage Int'l in the 80's. Piper low-wing, ran out of gas on final to
6L..ditched in the inlet, minor injury. I don't remember the exact date
but do remember the incident since I'm one of the fireman that plucked
her off the beach with a helicopter.

I can remember a couple more occuring at Merrill Field.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 09:54:38 -0500, Corky Scott
wrote in
::

Can anyone cite an instance when a pilot lost his engine while on
final and landed short because of it?

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...08X08676&key=1

Corky,
I wish I had more information but back in the late eighties I worked in
a building with several different companies in it. You get to know many
of the faces over time. I bumped into a guy at PNE that worked in the
building but I didn't know. It turns out that he was working on his
instrument rating. He mentioned that there was another pilot in his
office. I knew exactly who he was talking about because the guy walked
with a limp. The story I got, and I've got no reason to doubt it, is
that this gentleman had crashed short of an airport he was landing at
because he lost his engine on final. I was always taught to fly a
pattern so that you can make the runway if your engine quits from any
point in the pattern. In fact, I can remeber my instructors routinely
chopping power in the pattern. This was in Warriors when I started my
training and then in Cubs and 152 where I finished my trainging. When
I did my exam for my private, the examiner cut the throttle way out on
downwind and made me glide to a landing.

In my citabria, I like to cut the power when I'm abeam the numbers on
downwind and fly a tight pattern.

Dave
68 7ECA

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:56:22 -0800, Ron Garret
wrote:


The discussion about cutting power on final reminded me of something
I've been puzzled about for some time now.

If you fly final with some amount of power (which I gather most people
do -- I always have) that seems to guarantee that if you lose your
engine on final you will land short, and there's pretty much nothing you
can do about it. Is that true? Or have I missed something? What
should you do if you lose your engine just after turning base to final?

rg


Can anyone cite an instance when a pilot lost his engine while on
final and landed short because of it?

Thanks, Corky Scott