ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags airplane incidents

Reply
Old 20th May 2020, 02:00 PM   #1
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 4,609
Beechcraft lands on Interstate 470

FAA investigating after plane lands on eastbound I-470 Tuesday afternoon

Quote:
"At approx. 2 p.m., a pilot was making his final approach to land at the Lee’s Summit airport when he experienced sudden engine failure in one of two engines," the MSHP said on Twitter. "The pilot landed on the nearby roadway of I-470 between Douglas and Colburn. No one was injured."

The FAA said the plane was a twin-engine Beechcraft BE50.

"A twin-engine Beechcraft BE50 made an emergency landing this afternoon on Interstate 470 near Lee’s Summit, Mo., after the pilot reported a loss of engine power," a statement from the FAA said. "No injuries were immediately reported on the ground nor by the pilot. The FAA will investigate."
Airport data and layout can be seen here:
https://www.airnav.com/airport/KLXT

Wind conditions were something like ENE 6mph.

Landed in eastbound lanes here, with Douglas exit behind them, Colbern ahead. Airport is just to the North. Seems like runway 11 or 36 were options (about the same amount of mild crosswind).

I'm not an air crash investigator, but despite all the accolades for pulling off a crazy landing, I suspect someone is about to lose their license.

Not even sure I respect the landing all that much either, they barely caught paved surface with the undercarriage. The more I've dug, the less I think this is remarkable nerves and skill, more and more to sheer luck.

I'm glad nobody got hurt.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 20th May 2020 at 02:03 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 02:42 PM   #2
Jim_MDP
Philosopher
 
Jim_MDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 7,089
Do we know it wasn't Harrison out on a test flight?

(he had another "oopsie" a couple weeks ago)

__________________
----------------------
Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.
Jim_MDP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 03:48 PM   #3
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 25,168
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Landed in eastbound lanes here, with Douglas exit behind them, Colbern ahead. Airport is just to the North. Seems like runway 11 or 36 were options (about the same amount of mild crosswind).

I'm not an air crash investigator, but despite all the accolades for pulling off a crazy landing, I suspect someone is about to lose their license.

Not even sure I respect the landing all that much either, they barely caught paved surface with the undercarriage. The more I've dug, the less I think this is remarkable nerves and skill, more and more to sheer luck.
Meh. Disagreed on the first count - the pilot will not lose their license over an engine failure on final. When that happens you don't really have options, you just pick the first acceptable-looking spot in your immediate field of view that is within your glideslope and do your best to keep the wings level until the ground comes up to meet you. If that's a highway - well the FAA doesn't regulate highways so they literally don't care. (The state highway patrol might, but the most they could do is fine. They can't revoke a pilot license.)

I agree that the landing was sheer luck, but I don't think that's a bad look for the pilot. He was on final approach, meaning he was less than 1,000 feet above the ground and descending in a low-power condition when one of his engines quit, leading to sudden asymmetric thrust and lift in an already high-drag configuration with zero time to recover; it would take some kind of legendary ace to pull a graceful landing with a hand like that.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 20th May 2020 at 03:50 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 04:21 PM   #4
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 4,609
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Meh. Disagreed on the first count - the pilot will not lose their license over an engine failure on final. When that happens you don't really have options, you just pick the first acceptable-looking spot in your immediate field of view that is within your glideslope and do your best to keep the wings level until the ground comes up to meet you. If that's a highway - well the FAA doesn't regulate highways so they literally don't care. (The state highway patrol might, but the most they could do is fine. They can't revoke a pilot license.)

I agree that the landing was sheer luck, but I don't think that's a bad look for the pilot. He was on final approach, meaning he was less than 1,000 feet above the ground and descending in a low-power condition when one of his engines quit, leading to sudden asymmetric thrust and lift in an already high-drag configuration with zero time to recover; it would take some kind of legendary ace to pull a graceful landing with a hand like that.
My emergency situation while on leisure time doesn't mean I get to put other people's lives in danger to minimize my chances of getting hurt.

Neither of us can say what options were available or not, so let's not jump out ahead of the data.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 05:48 PM   #5
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 25,168
Fair enough; keep track and let us know if he loses his license. I'm going to make a wild guess that he will not.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 08:15 PM   #6
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
FAA investigating after plane lands on eastbound I-470 Tuesday afternoon



Airport data and layout can be seen here:
https://www.airnav.com/airport/KLXT

Wind conditions were something like ENE 6mph.

Landed in eastbound lanes here, with Douglas exit behind them, Colbern ahead. Airport is just to the North. Seems like runway 11 or 36 were options (about the same amount of mild crosswind).

I'm not an air crash investigator, but despite all the accolades for pulling off a crazy landing, I suspect someone is about to lose their license.

Not even sure I respect the landing all that much either, they barely caught paved surface with the undercarriage. The more I've dug, the less I think this is remarkable nerves and skill, more and more to sheer luck.

I'm glad nobody got hurt.
Here is a YT video of the one you posted about...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fgqg7LuAi4

It happens a LOT more than you'd expect!

Several examples here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MErqutGZ8S0

And some more...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iilYT-4svY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIR0OBuBewQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T03OquL3sIs
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 08:20 PM   #7
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,150
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
My emergency situation while on leisure time doesn't mean I get to put other people's lives in danger to minimize my chances of getting hurt.

Neither of us can say what options were available or not, so let's not jump out ahead of the data.
On looking at the satellite view in Google Maps there does appear to some open land but I can't see what the surface is like. Otherwise, there do seem to be a couple of car dealerships or churches as not so comfy options. I would not want to be in the position of making the landing decision or otherwise second guessing it.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2020, 08:24 PM   #8
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
I agree that the landing was sheer luck, but I don't think that's a bad look for the pilot. He was on final approach, meaning he was less than 1,000 feet above the ground and descending in a low-power condition when one of his engines quit, leading to sudden asymmetric thrust and lift in an already high-drag configuration with zero time to recover; it would take some kind of legendary ace to pull a graceful landing with a hand like that.
This is the thing that people who don't understand anything about aviation get wrong. There is an adage that when you have power failure, you try to turn altitude into airspeed. The problem is that on approach to landing, you are already low and slow so power failure leaves you nowhere to go but down, and quickly. ANY kind of turn will cause more loss of airspeed and more loss of altitude - the pilot will have mere seconds to decide where he's going to land - there is NO time to do anythng but pick a spot and nail the landing.

So long as the engine failure was due to a mechanical failure and not down to pilot error, e.g. poor fuel management, or an error in the cockpit, this incident will have zero implications for the pilot's licence.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 20th May 2020 at 08:27 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 12:15 AM   #9
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,086
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
This is the thing that people who don't understand anything about aviation get wrong. There is an adage that when you have power failure, you try to turn altitude into airspeed. The problem is that on approach to landing, you are already low and slow so power failure leaves you nowhere to go but down, and quickly. ANY kind of turn will cause more loss of airspeed and more loss of altitude - the pilot will have mere seconds to decide where he's going to land - there is NO time to do anythng but pick a spot and nail the landing.

So long as the engine failure was due to a mechanical failure and not down to pilot error, e.g. poor fuel management, or an error in the cockpit, this incident will have zero implications for the pilot's licence.
For a non-pilot why can you not just increase thrust from the remaining engine abort the landing go round and make a new approach on a single engine? I thought most twin engined aircraft could fly on a single engine? To be clear my knowledge of aviation is based on Biggles books and I am sure that he would have managed a graceful landing (usually in a field on the wrong side of the lines if memory serves).
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 01:23 AM   #10
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
For a non-pilot why can you not just increase thrust from the remaining engine abort the landing go round and make a new approach on a single engine? I thought most twin engined aircraft could fly on a single engine? To be clear my knowledge of aviation is based on Biggles books and I am sure that he would have managed a graceful landing (usually in a field on the wrong side of the lines if memory serves).
Without looking up the specs on this aircraft type, I can't give you a full technical answer, but I can give you some general ideas.

Just because a twin-engined aircraft can "fly" with one engine does not mean it can undertake the full range of its flight envelope. Sure, at cruise speed and altitude with an appropriate flight cruise power setting, twin engined aircraft can generally maintain that altitude and speed for some time, or at least maintain a very slow descent.

However, where the game changes is at low altitude and airspeed. A twin-engined aircraft generally cannot climb effectively on only one engine - any attempt to apply the kind of power needed for those types of manoeuvres will almost certainly result in severe asymmetric thrust (all the thrust coming from one side) that could lead to a loss of control. There are procedures that a pilot must learn when there is an engine failure either during take off roll, or immediately after V1 (decision speed, the point at which the pilot must commit to taking off). On take off roll, the pilot aborts the take-off on the runaway, but after V1, the pilot must take-off and reduce the engine power from the good engine, gain as much altitude as possible (turn airspeed into altitude) without stalling or losing control, and getting the aircraft back on the ground as quickly as possible. Many factors such as aircraft weight, wind conditions and barometric pressure go into how difficult this will be to achieve.

On approach to landing, it can be even more difficult, because the aircraft is sinking and flying slowly - depending on the aircraft type - perhaps only 15 to 20 kias (knots indicated airspeed) above stalling. The pilot is caught between a rock and a hard place - any attempt to climb without applying power is going to drop his speed dangerously close to stalling; any attempt to apply power is going to cause asymmetric thrust, and he risks suffering loss of control. Even applying a low to moderate power setting will cause sufficient asymmetric thrust to limit his turning ability - he will only be able to turn in the direction away from the good engine.

Looking at the video of this guy's landing, I can tell that this pilot knew exactly what he was doing. He approached along the grass median to the left of the traffic lane, keeping very lower power setting knowing that his aircraft would always want to turn left away from the road. He kept himself out of the way of the cars so he wouldn't crash into them if he got it wrong, and slid his aircraft sideways into the gap the drivers made for him. For mine, that was one outstanding piece of airmanship.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 21st May 2020 at 01:29 AM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 02:47 AM   #11
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 20,264
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Without looking up the specs on this aircraft type, I can't give you a full technical answer, but I can give you some general ideas.

Just because a twin-engined aircraft can "fly" with one engine does not mean it can undertake the full range of its flight envelope. Sure, at cruise speed and altitude with an appropriate flight cruise power setting, twin engined aircraft can generally maintain that altitude and speed for some time, or at least maintain a very slow descent.

However, where the game changes is at low altitude and airspeed. A twin-engined aircraft generally cannot climb effectively on only one engine - any attempt to apply the kind of power needed for those types of manoeuvres will almost certainly result in severe asymmetric thrust (all the thrust coming from one side) that could lead to a loss of control. There are procedures that a pilot must learn when there is an engine failure either during take off roll, or immediately after V1 (decision speed, the point at which the pilot must commit to taking off). On take off roll, the pilot aborts the take-off on the runaway, but after V1, the pilot must take-off and reduce the engine power from the good engine, gain as much altitude as possible (turn airspeed into altitude) without stalling or losing control, and getting the aircraft back on the ground as quickly as possible. Many factors such as aircraft weight, wind conditions and barometric pressure go into how difficult this will be to achieve.

On approach to landing, it can be even more difficult, because the aircraft is sinking and flying slowly - depending on the aircraft type - perhaps only 15 to 20 kias (knots indicated airspeed) above stalling. The pilot is caught between a rock and a hard place - any attempt to climb without applying power is going to drop his speed dangerously close to stalling; any attempt to apply power is going to cause asymmetric thrust, and he risks suffering loss of control. Even applying a low to moderate power setting will cause sufficient asymmetric thrust to limit his turning ability - he will only be able to turn in the direction away from the good engine.

Looking at the video of this guy's landing, I can tell that this pilot knew exactly what he was doing. He approached along the grass median to the left of the traffic lane, keeping very lower power setting knowing that his aircraft would always want to turn left away from the road. He kept himself out of the way of the cars so he wouldn't crash into them if he got it wrong, and slid his aircraft sideways into the gap the drivers made for him. For mine, that was one outstanding piece of airmanship.
Asymmetric thrust has cause many fatal air crashes. TAROM 371 springs to mind. Ordinarily, the flight crew could have dealt with one engine out, but the pilot had a heart attack and died on the spot. The co-pilot, trying to deal with that situation took no action to correct until too late.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 05:59 AM   #12
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,321
A competent pilot should be able to land a twin on one engine. The problem is often that pilots don't have the skills to fly a twin. If they can't take off or land with an engine out they shouldn't be up there in the first place. All twin engine planes are certified to be capable of taking off with an engine failure on takeoff.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 06:31 AM   #13
Flanh Flah
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
A competent pilot should be able to land a twin on one engine. The problem is often that pilots don't have the skills to fly a twin. If they can't take off or land with an engine out they shouldn't be up there in the first place. All twin engine planes are certified to be capable of taking off with an engine failure on takeoff.
How many hours in twins have you logged?
Flanh Flah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 08:05 AM   #14
Metullus
Forum ¾-Wit Pro Tem
 
Metullus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,112
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
A competent pilot should be able to land a twin on one engine. The problem is often that pilots don't have the skills to fly a twin. If they can't take off or land with an engine out they shouldn't be up there in the first place. All twin engine planes are certified to be capable of taking off with an engine failure on takeoff.
He did, in fact, land safely. From what I saw he did a good job, too. The thing about engine failure is that does not always afford the pilot the opportunity to select an optimal landing site. One lands where one can.

And I did not see any brown stains on his trousers in the video, either...
__________________
I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 - I'll miss Tim.

Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy

Last edited by Metullus; 21st May 2020 at 08:08 AM.
Metullus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 08:33 AM   #15
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,295
Originally Posted by Flanh Flah View Post
How many hours in twins have you logged?
What makes you think he's flown any?

I've flown a lot of hours but I'm only certified for single engine VFR, so that's all I fly. You need a separate certification for just about everything else - IFR, multiple engines, tail draggers, seaplanes, lighter than air, etc.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 09:05 AM   #16
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 25,168
There is an important factual correction that needs to be made. I have found more articles about this incident (example) and they report that the engine failure occurred while the plane was taking off from the nearby airport (KLXT), not while on final approach. The FlightAware path supports this. The plane was in the air for a grand total of three minutes from takeoff to touchdown.

According to other sources when the power failure occurred, the bad engine would not feather properly. For those who don't know, when an engine on a multi-engine plane fails, it is supposed to be able to "feather", i.e. the propeller blades turn edge-on to the wind so as to create as little drag as possible. Allegedly this failed to happen in the dead engine on this airplane, meaning that not only was there the normal asymmetric thrust problem, but the dead engine was producing even more drag it was ideally supposed to be, and the pilot needed to reduce the power to the good engine even more to counteract the adverse yaw (which is what he should have done, as smartcooky describes above). The sources with this information are apocryphal, though (people who claim to have talked with the pilot and/or police), so I'm not going to link them as definitive evidence; but what they allege is important if true.

The FlightAware data suggests that once the failure occurred, the pilot more or less immediately picked the Interstate for emergency landing and committed to it. This was a very good idea. The instinctual temptation in this scenario is to try to turn around and "make it back" to the airport you took off from, a procedure that often tends to result in a fiery hole in the ground - often enough that it's called "the Impossible Turn" for that reason.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 09:17 AM   #17
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 30,725
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
According to other sources when the power failure occurred, the bad engine would not feather properly.
Jeez. I know very little about flying, but enough to strongly suspect that anyone getting out of that alive probably wears his underpants outside his trousers.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 09:53 AM   #18
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 16,899
I am not a pilot. But I’ve read a lot about private aviation piloting and the mistakes and most frequent accidents that can occur. From that admittedly limited knowledge base I would say that this pilot did a fabulous job. Losing an engine on climb out, particularly if the prop could not be feathered, produces a very asymmetrical force on the plane. Any attempt to fly around to land at the airport after power failure, even in a single engine plane, is almost a guaranteed way to die. This pilot performed a near textbook recovery from a very dangerous situation.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 11:05 AM   #19
Flanh Flah
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
What makes you think he's flown any?

I've flown a lot of hours but I'm only certified for single engine VFR, so that's all I fly. You need a separate certification for just about everything else - IFR, multiple engines, tail draggers, seaplanes, lighter than air, etc.
It was a way to express that the poster's comment was idiotic, worthless rubbish.
Flanh Flah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 11:13 AM   #20
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 26,981
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
A competent pilot should be able to land a twin on one engine. The problem is often that pilots don't have the skills to fly a twin. If they can't take off or land with an engine out they shouldn't be up there in the first place. All twin engine planes are certified to be capable of taking off with an engine failure on takeoff.
Commercial airliners are. But according to a Boeing co-worker of mine who was also an instrument-rated, twin-rated flight instructor, GA aircraft are not. Among other things, they lack the rudder authority to fully compensate for the asymmetric thrust. He considered twins more dangerous than singles.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 11:27 AM   #21
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,086
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Without looking up the specs on this aircraft type, I can't give you a full technical answer, but I can give you some general ideas.

Just because a twin-engined aircraft can "fly" with one engine does not mean it can undertake the full range of its flight envelope. Sure, at cruise speed and altitude with an appropriate flight cruise power setting, twin engined aircraft can generally maintain that altitude and speed for some time, or at least maintain a very slow descent.

However, where the game changes is at low altitude and airspeed. A twin-engined aircraft generally cannot climb effectively on only one engine - any attempt to apply the kind of power needed for those types of manoeuvres will almost certainly result in severe asymmetric thrust (all the thrust coming from one side) that could lead to a loss of control. There are procedures that a pilot must learn when there is an engine failure either during take off roll, or immediately after V1 (decision speed, the point at which the pilot must commit to taking off). On take off roll, the pilot aborts the take-off on the runaway, but after V1, the pilot must take-off and reduce the engine power from the good engine, gain as much altitude as possible (turn airspeed into altitude) without stalling or losing control, and getting the aircraft back on the ground as quickly as possible. Many factors such as aircraft weight, wind conditions and barometric pressure go into how difficult this will be to achieve.

On approach to landing, it can be even more difficult, because the aircraft is sinking and flying slowly - depending on the aircraft type - perhaps only 15 to 20 kias (knots indicated airspeed) above stalling. The pilot is caught between a rock and a hard place - any attempt to climb without applying power is going to drop his speed dangerously close to stalling; any attempt to apply power is going to cause asymmetric thrust, and he risks suffering loss of control. Even applying a low to moderate power setting will cause sufficient asymmetric thrust to limit his turning ability - he will only be able to turn in the direction away from the good engine.

Looking at the video of this guy's landing, I can tell that this pilot knew exactly what he was doing. He approached along the grass median to the left of the traffic lane, keeping very lower power setting knowing that his aircraft would always want to turn left away from the road. He kept himself out of the way of the cars so he wouldn't crash into them if he got it wrong, and slid his aircraft sideways into the gap the drivers made for him. For mine, that was one outstanding piece of airmanship.
Thank you very clear explanation for a non-pilot. Pretty much like losing a mast on a ketch you end up with an unbalanced rig that tends to turn you into or away from the wind so you have to reduce sail, keep your rudder over but try and maintain enough seaway to maintain helm control.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 01:10 PM   #22
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
There is an important factual correction that needs to be made. I have found more articles about this incident (example) and they report that the engine failure occurred while the plane was taking off from the nearby airport (KLXT), not while on final approach. The FlightAware path supports this. The plane was in the air for a grand total of three minutes from takeoff to touchdown.

According to other sources when the power failure occurred, the bad engine would not feather properly. For those who don't know, when an engine on a multi-engine plane fails, it is supposed to be able to "feather", i.e. the propeller blades turn edge-on to the wind so as to create as little drag as possible. Allegedly this failed to happen in the dead engine on this airplane, meaning that not only was there the normal asymmetric thrust problem, but the dead engine was producing even more drag it was ideally supposed to be, and the pilot needed to reduce the power to the good engine even more to counteract the adverse yaw (which is what he should have done, as smartcooky describes above). The sources with this information are apocryphal, though (people who claim to have talked with the pilot and/or police), so I'm not going to link them as definitive evidence; but what they allege is important if true.

The FlightAware data suggests that once the failure occurred, the pilot more or less immediately picked the Interstate for emergency landing and committed to it. This was a very good idea. The instinctual temptation in this scenario is to try to turn around and "make it back" to the airport you took off from, a procedure that often tends to result in a fiery hole in the ground - often enough that it's called "the Impossible Turn" for that reason.
As I said earlier, the weather conditions factor into where the pilot with an engine failure on take off can land, especially wind direction. If he is taking off with a crosswind, for example, and the engine on the leeward side is the one that failed, that pretty much stuffs him for making the impossible turn - his airspeed is likely to fall quickly and his sink rate will increase too much to be able to make it back to the airport. The earlier the engine failure is in climbout, the worse it is for him.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 01:26 PM   #23
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
A competent pilot should be able to land a twin on one engine. The problem is often that pilots don't have the skills to fly a twin. If they can't take off or land with an engine out they shouldn't be up there in the first place. All twin engine planes are certified to be capable of taking off with an engine failure on takeoff.
Pilots have to be trained and certified to fly a twin. You have to already have a pilot's licence to apply for a twin rating. I logged over 1200 hours in a PA-28 Cherokee Archer before I applied for a twin rating, which I did in a PA-30 Comanche - it took me 11 hours (typical is about 10) including the check-ride and solo. I have about 150 hours logged in the Comanche
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 02:20 PM   #24
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,754
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
However, where the game changes is at low altitude and airspeed. A twin-engined aircraft generally cannot climb effectively on only one engine - any attempt to apply the kind of power needed for those types of manoeuvres will almost certainly result in severe asymmetric thrust (all the thrust coming from one side) that could lead to a loss of control.
That sounds a little dramatic. The first thing you do upon a single-engine failure is apply full power on the remaining engine. Then you feather the dead engine. I've certainly never experienced any difficulty controlling the plane with full power on one engine before or after feathering the dead engine, including during simulated engine failure on takeoff.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 02:50 PM   #25
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 4,609
The landing version I frowned on due to being familiar with that part of town and the direction of landing, there are long, uniformly graded fields he could have chosen. Perhaps riskier for the pilot, I acknowledge. But it's their hobby, they chose the risk.

If the failure was on takeoff, I'd have to know more about what runway they took off from to make any judgments about the decision where to land. A South facing takeoff, miles of suburbia in front? OK, terrible choices, probably made the best of it. West takeoff circling around? Same options as the landing version.


With ENE winds and where then plane came down, I'm guessing North takeoff. Same issue again, looking East, there's fields parallel to the highway for a stretch between the exits.

East takeoff I can't see how the plane even ends up there.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 21st May 2020 at 02:55 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 03:37 PM   #26
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
That sounds a little dramatic. The first thing you do upon a single-engine failure is apply full power on the remaining engine.
You absolutely do NOT apply full power on the good engine on a light aircraft twin like a Beech Baron or Piper Pa-30. These aircraft have nowhere near enough rudder authority compensate for the asymmetric thrust that will result. Doing what you suggest will almost certainly result in loss of control.

Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
Then you feather the dead engine.
In this instance the failed engine would not feather properly, so applying full power would make the asymmetric flight dynamics even worse - full power on one side, and a dirty great spinning air-brake on the other side.

The other thing that needs to be taken into account is that on Beech Baron, the left engine (the one that failed in this case) is the critical engine. The Baron's propellers rotate clockwise, so the loss of the left engine causes a significantly greater yawing moment, which adds to the asymmetric thrust problem.

This is the sort of result you are likely to end up with

WARNING: This video could disturb some...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


This is left engine failure, full power followed by a left wing stall due to asymmetric thrust.


IMO, the guy who landed on I-470, with the engine failure being on the left, and the propeller not feathering properly, had absolutely everything stacked against him. Great job getting it down with no-one hurt.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 21st May 2020 at 04:12 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 04:20 PM   #27
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,754
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
You absolutely do NOT apply full power on the good engine on a light aircraft twin like a Beech Baron or Piper Pa-30. These aircraft have nowhere near enough rudder authority compensate for the asymmetric thrust that will result. Doing what you suggest will almost certainly result in loss of control.

In this instance the failed engine would not feather properly, so applying full power would make the asymmetric flight dynamics even worse - full power on
So it's different in the Beech Baron. I checked the manual. You feather first. I double checked for the Cessna 310, and you do apply full power immediately, and only then identify the failed engine and feather.

Last edited by jt512; 21st May 2020 at 04:33 PM.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 04:25 PM   #28
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,321
From the number of fatalities an engine out in a twin causes I can't see how that much training would be adequate.

In this case though, if he couldn't feather the prop, he was very capable to get it down in one piece and stay alive. I have read some of the cases of engine failure on take off and there are very specific procedures to be followed for many of them. One wrong move and you will fail.

I wonder about some of them even being allowed to fly. There is one plane that if you are climbing safely on one engine and put the wheels up too early it will crash.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 05:39 PM   #29
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,321
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
The landing version I frowned on due to being familiar with that part of town and the direction of landing, there are long, uniformly graded fields he could have chosen. Perhaps riskier for the pilot, I acknowledge. But it's their hobby, they chose the risk.

If the failure was on takeoff, I'd have to know more about what runway they took off from to make any judgments about the decision where to land. A South facing takeoff, miles of suburbia in front? OK, terrible choices, probably made the best of it. West takeoff circling around? Same options as the landing version.


With ENE winds and where then plane came down, I'm guessing North takeoff. Same issue again, looking East, there's fields parallel to the highway for a stretch between the exits.

East takeoff I can't see how the plane even ends up there.
The problem is putting those other people at risk so he doesn't damage the plane.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 06:04 PM   #30
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 25,168
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
I wonder about some of them even being allowed to fly. There is one plane that if you are climbing safely on one engine and put the wheels up too early it will crash.
A lot of these kinds of planes are still flying because they're vintage planes and were grandfathered in after newer and better airworthiness regulations were imposed. Take the plane in this case: it's a Twin Bonanza. The last one of these planes rolled off the assembly line in 1963 meaning this plane is at least 57 years old, and it could be as old as 70. It's perhaps not a direct comparison but consider that auto clubs in the US and Europe consider an automobile that is over 50 years old an antique.

And there are lots of these very old airplanes still flying around in the GA community, and they're being operated as the GA equivalent of "daily drivers", not "special" vintage planes.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 06:07 PM   #31
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
So it's different in the Beech Baron. I checked the manual. You feather first. I double checked for the Cessna 310, and you do apply full power immediately, and only then identify the failed engine and feather.

Here is the procedure from my PA-30 Pilot's Manual
The engine out minimum control speed demonstration required for the FAA flight test for the multi-engine rating approaches an uncontrolled flight condition with power reduced on one engine. The demonstration should not be performed at an altitude less than 3500 feet above the ground. APPROACH VMC WITH CAUTION. Initiate recovery during the demonstration by immediately reducing power on the operating engine and promptly lowering the nose of the airplane.

If engine failure occurs during the climb out after take-off, maintain directional control with rudder and ailerons, and establish the best single engine rate of climb airspeed (105 mph [91 KIAS] at sea level). Speeds below or above the best rate of climb speed optimum will result in lower than optimum rate of climb.

Rudder and ailerons used together will result in a bank of approximately 2° of bank towards the operative engine...The result is zero sideslip and maximum climb performance. Any attitude other than zero sideslip increases drag, decreasing performance.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 06:53 PM   #32
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 25,168
According to the FlightAware data track the first recorded heading of the three-minute-long flight was 291, and halfway through the track it turns very close to direct north.

Overlaid on a chart, it really looks like the plane may have taken off from either a defunct airport just northwest of Pleasant Hill or a small private grass field just west of the Harrisonville City Lake, both of whose runways are roughly lined up with that heading (the track origin is between these two airports, suggesting a small position error). I'm guessing likely the former, because shifting the entire track north just enough to line the beginning of the track up with that airport puts the ending of the track just short of I-470.

Looking at the track in this light, it seems like the pilot had initially decided to try to make runway 36 at KLXT and had to land on the interstate just short of it when it ran out of glide.

Looking at the area on satellite map I don't see anything better than the interstate to land where the plane was. There are NO open fields even close to long enough for that airplane to land on there.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 07:57 PM   #33
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
According to the FlightAware data track the first recorded heading of the three-minute-long flight was 291, and halfway through the track it turns very close to direct north.

Overlaid on a chart, it really looks like the plane may have taken off from either a defunct airport just northwest of Pleasant Hill or a small private grass field just west of the Harrisonville City Lake, both of whose runways are roughly lined up with that heading (the track origin is between these two airports, suggesting a small position error). I'm guessing likely the former, because shifting the entire track north just enough to line the beginning of the track up with that airport puts the ending of the track just short of I-470.

Looking at the track in this light, it seems like the pilot had initially decided to try to make runway 36 at KLXT and had to land on the interstate just short of it when it ran out of glide.

Looking at the area on satellite map I don't see anything better than the interstate to land where the plane was. There are NO open fields even close to long enough for that airplane to land on there.
When you are flying low and slow in an emergency situation, you generally only have time to run through the memory items and to fly the plane. You don't have many options, and what option you do have run out fast - very fast.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 08:07 PM   #34
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,321
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
So it's different in the Beech Baron. I checked the manual. You feather first. I double checked for the Cessna 310, and you do apply full power immediately, and only then identify the failed engine and feather.



Quote:
https://generalaviationnews.com/2017...doctor-killer/


While the Beechcraft Bonanza has a loyal following, it also has an infamous moniker: The Doctor Killer.
It gained that name decades ago following a spate of high-profile crashes, with many of the pilots doctors.
In fact, that spate of accidents was part of the reason for the creation of the Beechcraft Pilot Proficiency Program (BPPP) in 1983 by the American Bonanza Society.
The BPPP offers a variety of online training, as well as flight instruction. BPPP is designed to make Beechcraft owners safer and more accomplished pilots, according to ABS officials.
But what led to that spate of accidents and what has changed?
When the Bonanza was first introduced in 1947, most pilots transitioning into the Bonanza were flying an Aeronca Champ or Cessna 140, or something similar, explained Thomas P. Turner, executive director of the American Bonanza Society Air Safety Foundation.


.....




“Exactly the same thing happened in a number of different airplanes,” he continued. “The Cessna 310 had a very high initial accident rate. People were coming out of single-engine airplanes into something like a 310 when they were new. At the very best, they might have flown an Apache or something like that.
“And in its first years of operation, the Cessna 310 had a horrible accident rate. Eventually, the industry figured out how to teach people to fly these things.”

or this


https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...10-dead-2.html


I just wonder how many pilots on twins are going to be capable of handling an engine out on takeoff. Not because they are bad pilots, but because the twins get very hard to handle and you need pilots that are better than average.



Cessna actually stopped making twin engine planes altogether. Part of the reason was apparently the threat of lawsuits.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 08:26 PM   #35
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Southern hemisphere
Posts: 7,189
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
When you are flying low and slow in an emergency situation, you generally only have time to run through the memory items and to fly the plane. You don't have many options, and what option you do have run out fast - very fast.
Cactus 1549.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 09:20 PM   #36
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Cactus 1549.
Indeed, and if you watch the movie or the ACI doco, both of which portray a VERY accurate, blow-by-blow depiction of what happened after the bird strike at 15:27:11, you see graphically those options, La Guardia & Teterboro, disappear one after the other so that 59 seconds after the bird strike at 15:28:10, the Hudson was all he had left.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 21st May 2020 at 09:21 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 11:40 PM   #37
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,754
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Pilots have to be trained and certified to fly a twin. You have to already have a pilot's licence to apply for a twin rating.
Actually, no. You can get a private pilot multi-engine land license without already having a single-engine land license. Which would mean that you were licensed to fly multi- but not single-engine planes, which would be weird. I don't know anyone who has done that, but it's possible. Maybe in some countries where airline pilots are trained ab initio it is done.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2020, 11:54 PM   #38
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,754
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
I just wonder how many pilots on twins are going to be capable of handling an engine out on takeoff. Not because they are bad pilots, but because the twins get very hard to handle and you need pilots that are better than average.
Well, that's a good question. When I owned a twin, I was obsessed with single-engine-failure-on-takeoff proficiency and booked time every month with an instructor to practice. In my plane, if you did everything just right, you could eke out 300 feet/min climb on one engine after cleaning up the gear and flaps and feathering the dead engine, which meant just barely clearing the obstacles off the departure end of the runway at my home field.

I flew my plane several times a week every week and thus maintained proficiency. The stereotypical doctor, with his Twin Beech and more money than proficiency, not so much.

Last edited by jt512; 22nd May 2020 at 01:47 AM.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2020, 01:08 AM   #39
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 14,273
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
Actually, no. You can get a private pilot multi-engine land license without already having a single-engine land license. Which would mean that you were licensed to fly multi- but not single-engine planes, which would be weird. I don't know anyone who has done that, but it's possible. Maybe in some countries where airline pilots are trained ab initio it is done.
OK, might be differert where you are, but here, you must have a pilots licence already, and be current. A CPL is recommended but not mandatory.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2020, 01:30 AM   #40
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,754
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
OK, might be differert where you are, but here, you must have a pilots licence already, and be current. A CPL is recommended but not mandatory.
Ah, I see you're in New Zealand. Yeah, in the US you can get an MEL license without a SEL license, but it certainly isn't common to do so.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.