Study of Reciprocating Engine Failures

Don't know if this well known already but
I hadn't seen it before.

http://www.aviation-safety-security....ive-study.html

It is a somewhat uncomplimentary (to the overseeing bodies)
review of aviation piston engine reliability.

On Apr 1, 7:08*am, wrote:
Don't know if this well known already but
I hadn't seen it before.

http://www.aviation-safety-security....ter/articles/c...

It is a somewhat uncomplimentary (to the overseeing bodies)
review of aviation piston engine reliability.

It is a 'publish or perish' piece yawn... It does not add anything
to what is known...

Yes, sudden, catastrophic, engine failures with no warning happen, but
they are the exception... The vast majority of sick engines complain
loud and long, and it is the dumb **** pilots who sit there - on their
brains - until the poor, gasping, struggling, engine finally comes
apart... Best you find something more likely to get all worked up
about - like getting hit by a meteor...

cheers eh wot

denny

On Apr 1, 7:52*am, Denny wrote:
It does not add anything to what is known...

Few reviews of existing information ever do.

Yes, sudden, catastrophic, engine failures with no warning happen, but
they are the exception... The vast majority of sick engines complain
loud and long, and it is the dumb **** pilots who sit there - on their
brains - until the poor, gasping, struggling, engine finally comes
apart...

I've heard that statement before - and it does not ring true. Mostly
I hear it from pilots who spend a lot of time banking on the engine -
flying single engine planes at night, in IMC, over water or rought
terrain, at low altitudes, etc. I suppose if you're going to do that,
you have to believe it or have a fairly cavalier attitude about
serious injury or death.

The reality is that the warning signs are often subtle or non-existent
until the last few minutes, the instrumentation for monitoring engine
health and performance is often inadequate, the potential for engine
damage by control misuse high in all but the smallest and least
powerful of the engines, and there are an awful lot of unexplained
failures out there. Most of the people I know who have more than 2000
hours in GA have had at least one engine failure.

In my experience, that 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 number the FAA
provides is right on. It squares with my experience and the
experience of my friends. Also, in my opinion as a practicing
engineer, most of those failures are primarily the result of designs
that are poorly thought out to begin with - perhaps state of the art
by 1940's standards and acceptable by 1960's standards, but now
woefully behind the times. In fact, I would say probably the biggest
factor keeping the failures common is the overly difficult and costly
process that the FAA imposes for adding new technology to these old
beasts.

Michael

In my experience, that 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 number the FAA
provides is right on. *It squares with my experience and the
experience of my friends.

My primary flight instructor: 4 engine failures in 4500 hours flying.

Dead stick each time. Twice in pattern. Once off airport landing, once
got lucky and managed to glide to a nearby airport.

those are interesting numbers. I went thru our log books. We never had
an engine shut down, but find in what we think is a well maintained
Mooney M20 an unplanned landing about once every 500 hours for some
form of failure. A bank of spark plugs fail, causing the engine to go
rough, a vacuum pump failure, an alternator, things like that. That's
in 3000 hours total time. This airplane is flown gently, though --
wait, maybe not: usually at low RPMs, well leaned, so those 3000 tach
hours understate actual time.

I hope others post their actual experience.



On Apr 1, 10:24*pm, wrote:
In my experience, that 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 number the FAA
provides is right on. *It squares with my experience and the
experience of my friends.

My primary flight instructor: 4 engine failures in 4500 hours flying.

Dead stick each time. Twice in pattern. Once off airport landing, once
got lucky and managed to glide to a nearby airport.

I must be the exception, in 3700 hours the worst mechanical failure i
have had is the retaining nut coming off of an intake valve
effectively killing one cylinder. Still flew back the airport for a
normal landing.

I don't count the time the throttle cable came disconnected on the
towplane the was pulling me. It didn't come off until after I
released.

Of course about 700 of those 3700 hours are in a gliders (non-self
launch), engine failures are extremely rare in them.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL