teaching engine failure on takeoff

b7474ever

b7474ever

Well-Known Member
How do you teach simulated engine failure on take off to a student pilot?

I remember during my checkride, the examiner quickly pulled the mixture out on the right engine and putting it right back in as soon as i cut the throttles and applied the brakes. it was so unexpected where it happaned few seconds after we started the ground roll. Of course this was done on a multi engine airplane. Since it was a fairly long runway he told me to go full power and continue the takeoff.

I would like some insight and opinions from you guys.
Is it possible to pull the mixture out after being airborne on a loong runway in a single engine airplane and practice simulated engine out on takeoffs?

Also, this random but has anyone ever used the old FAA flight instructor handbook. I find it reeally good.
http://www.rodmachado.com/become_sport_pilot/FAA_Private_Pilot_Syllabus_1971.php.
 
IMO, pulling the mixture like that in a single is inducing a legit emergency. Practice it at altitude, and knock your students hand off the throttle, no warning. But dont do it at low altitude. A Cirrus went in a while back at Fox Field practicing it.
 
It depends on what you mean by "engine failure on take off." There are two very different maneuvers. One is the aborted takeoff and the other is after lift-off. In the commercial PTS they are Tasks B and C in Area of Operation X.

First note that the PTS has speed and altitudes that are critical for safe operation.

Here is the quote from the PTS regarding engine failure after lift-off:

PTS said:
On multiengine practical tests where the failure of the most critical engine after lift off is required, the examiner must give consideration to local atmospheric conditions, terrain, and type of aircraft used. However the failure of an engine shall not be simulated until attaining at least VSSE/VYSE and at an altitude not lower than 400 feet AGL.
Click to expand...

Here is the quote from the PTS regarding engine failure before lift-off:

PTS said:
Engine failure (simulated) shall be accomplished before reaching 50 percent of the calculated VMC.
Click to expand...

Note also the word "simulated." Pulling a mixture is not a simulation.

So, to put those thoughts together, there is a period of time where the fates may create a real emergency, but the examiner (and instructor) should not. That is the period of time between 50% Vmc and when the airplane is at least 400' AGL and at or above Vsse/Vyse.

Like so many things in aviation training, start on the very conservative end. Make the first failures below 15 Knots. Then as the student show proficiency, go to higher speeds. On the other end, don't make that first "surprise" simulated engine failure right at 400' AGL. Perhaps simulate a takeoff (in takeoff configuration) at 3,000' AGL and then introduce that first event.

I tend to be rather conservative. So, during checks, I will say "simulated, oil pressure on number one just went to zero, simulated." At that point I expect the PF to abort the takeoff straight ahead. Even then, someone once surprised me by pulling back one throttle and leaving the other one at full power. In later questioning, he told me his instructor had taught him that the CFI would pull back one throttle and it was his job to pull back the other one. Obviously, something got lost in the practical interpretation of that instructional explanation.

One precaution you can take is to use the widest runway in your area to introduce and train this maneuver.

There is a lengthy section on the subject in Chapter 12 of the Airplane Flying Handbook. One line that is too often missed is this one:

Airplane Flying Handbook said:
The landing gear should remain selected down as long as there is usable runway or overrun available to land on.
Click to expand...
 
The way I teach engine failures on takeoff (I only instruct single engine) is we talk through it all so they clearly understand the procedures at various stages and I then I tell them to expect it at any time for the rest of their time flying with me. When I want to simulate it I explain that I will be operating power and they get to "play airline captain" and call for power. I then apply full power for a couple circuits with no changes, then I might also just pull power during takeoff roll, might pull power at rotation, might pull power at 50-100' on longer runways. Sometimes I'll apply partial power and see if they catch it during their takeoff roll scan and abort. Sometimes I'll also just reach over and grab their hand and pull it out and say "engine failure"... so they cannot assume that the only time it happens is when they get to call for power.

I dont really have a problem with people pulling mixture or fuel valves off at altitude, but I think it's foolish on takeoff roll.
 
Your post is about multi-engine simulated engine failure on take-off.
You should be aware that the sudden failure of one engine on a light twin during the take-off roll is the number one killer in light twins. Actual sudden real failures can cause such a rapid and surprising yaw that the average light twin pilot does not react in time to stop the swerve, and roll-over if just becoming airborne.
For this reason alone, the main point of training in a multi is to learn an automatic response to a sudden engine out at 3 specific critical areas; (1) just below lift-off speed, (2) right after lift off with landing runway available, and (3) after lift-off with no runway available.
Pulling the mixture creates the realistic effect of the sudden sharp yaw and is the most effective way of simulating this killer maneuver.

Keep in mind that a flight test is not administered the same as training. A flight test has many safety features to protect the examiner who does not know what your response may be.
A flight instructor can train in incremental steps and should be able to get you to a proficient level without compromising safety.

I will repeat that: PTS standards are not flight training standards. A flight test is not dual. The examiner is not an instructor and is not required to teach anything, only test.

Since the introduction of the PTS, flight training standards have somehow become equated to testing standards: "teach the test".

I learned in the old school, and I still would want to get proficient at realistic engine failures, since that is where the little twin is gonna bite me.

Find an instructor, if you can, who is proficient at mixture pulling in the most critical areas. We used to do it all the time. Safely.
 
V1 or Vr in this case, cuts in a real airplane are fing stupid. I mean real cuts to, like you said with the mixture. Doing it with the throttle is much safer. I'll go do it all day in the sim, but don't intentionally put yourself in the most dangerous situation possible. 400AGL and above Vmc, ok. At or just after rotation... no.
 
The key to teaching this is in a single (since you didn't specify) is not necessarily practicing it, but having them do a thorough takeoff briefing from day one. The briefing should include an emergency plan and you should question them on the plan after takeoff ( foe example, at 500' ask thenm where they would go). Imo, this method get's them in the right frame of mind for every departure.
 
A150K said:
The key to teaching this is in a single...having them do a thorough takeoff briefing from day one
Click to expand...

I agree on this. Some people who aren't familiar with it think it's overkill, but if you're in the habit (like using a checklist) it adds about 10 seconds and flows easily as we taxi up to the hold short line. I require them to verbally identify the runway, review relevant V speeds; their chosen climb speed; identify their abort point for the roll; review emergency glide speed; review emergency procedures for roll/rotation/climb; and review their "impossible turn" altitude to get in their mind that they are not turning back at low altitude. After they've done it several times they can do this efficiently just before taking the runway.
 
nosehair said:
snip
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but that's just plain dumb.

Inducing an actual emergency (because that's what a powerplant failure is) at rotation in an airplane that is not required to have any positive single engine performance, with a student at the flight controls, doing something YOU KNOW may result in loss of the aircraft, is reckless, and not in the Top Gun "you're dangerous" sense of the word.

Bunches of commuter and transport airplanes have been lost this way in training accidents - and some of them have autofeather/NTS/etc. along with performance guarantees and still were lost. A live "V1 cut" is a foolish idea from a "risk of life and property" standpoint.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
I'm sorry, but that's just plain dumb.

Inducing an actual emergency (because that's what a powerplant failure is) at rotation in an airplane that is not required to have any positive single engine performance, with a student at the flight controls, doing something YOU KNOW may result in loss of the aircraft, is reckless, and not in the Top Gun "you're dangerous" sense of the word.

Bunches of commuter and transport airplanes have been lost this way in training accidents - and some of them have autofeather/NTS/etc. along with performance guarantees and still were lost. A live "V1 cut" is a foolish idea from a "risk of life and property" standpoint.
Click to expand...
This. Honestly, there is already alot of plain stupid stuff done in ME training. Why make it any more dangerous? This is where incorperating simulators into training can be of great value.
 
A150K said:
This. Honestly, there is already alot of plain stupid stuff done in ME training. Why make it any more dangerous? This is where incorperating simulators into training can be of great value.
Click to expand...
I've had an instructor pull a mixture control right after I push up the throttles (about 30 knots), whee. But once flying speed is obtained, it just doesn't pass the "is this a good idea" test.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
I've had an instructor pull a mixture control right after I push up the throttles (about 30 knots), whee. But once flying speed is obtained, it just doesn't pass the "is this a good idea" test.
Click to expand...

Even 30kts is a bit high if you ask me. But, some instructors like to push it a little bit farther than others. As long as the instructor is comfortable with it I guess.
 
mshunter said:
Even 30kts is a bit high if you ask me. But, some instructors like to push it a little bit farther than others. As long as the instructor is comfortable with it I guess.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think that's pushing the 50% of Vmca limit on the Seminole. (too long ago, don't remember)
 
I don't simulate a failure after takeoff until 500 AGL and I only do it with throttle. No way would I pull the mixture that low. I do pull a mixture on takeoff roll, but only a couple of seconds after we start rolling, and I have my hand ready to pull the other mixture.
 
Here's what I use, and I believe it's either in the AFH or Richard Collin's Flying Light Twins (practically the same text):

  • Altitude < 3000' power cuts simulated with throttle ONLY. Anything higher, I use the fuel selectors (during steep turns esp. :D) which trains them to better scan the fuel pressure gauges.
  • Any simulated failures below this altitude are briefed, simulated and expected for the newer student.
Once they're ready for the checkride, the failures should be expected at any time, and the appropriate reaction for the given situation is automatic, and calm. The latter is unfortunately understated a lot of the time. True story - In our Seminole I pulled a throttle just after liftoff. This guy was "trained" (more like processed) at ATP by a 4 month zero to hero MEI where he busted his multi-private. His reaction was simply to say "holy sh*t" and start pulling back. So, in went the power, my controls, and I demonstrated how to do it on the next pass. Expect your test pilots to make the wrong choice every time, and be ready to take over.

Remember you're training a pilot to fly twins safely, not pass a checkride. The engines don't read the PTS, and they'll fail when they want. Train your student for these situations, but don't create real emergencies - i.e. pulling the mixtures at critical times of flight.
 
In reading the later comments, let me add one thought. Any of us can do almost anything to a student and have it come out okay. But, there will come a day when the student will take the worst possible course of action. Before you do anything, you have to evaluate if you simulate an emergency and the student takes the worst possible course of action, have you left enough room to take the controls and recover with a comfortable margin of safety.

Incidentally, as any old instructor will say, it's your really good student who is going to get you into the worst possible situation. Part of that is because you will come closer to the edge with a good student and you tend to let your guard down and not be as spring loaded to react as you would be with a poor student.
 
sounddoc said:
Here's what I use, and I believe it's either in the AFH or Richard Collin's Flying Light Twins (practically the same text):

  • Altitude < 3000' power cuts simulated with throttle ONLY. Anything higher, I use the fuel selectors (during steep turns esp. :D) which trains them to better scan the fuel pressure gauges.
  • Any simulated failures below this altitude are briefed, simulated and expected for the newer student.
Once they're ready for the checkride, the failures should be expected at any time, and the appropriate reaction for the given situation is automatic, and calm. The latter is unfortunately understated a lot of the time. True story - In our Seminole I pulled a throttle just after liftoff. This guy was "trained" (more like processed) at ATP by a 4 month zero to hero MEI where he busted his multi-private. His reaction was simply to say "holy sh*t" and start pulling back. So, in went the power, my controls, and I demonstrated how to do it on the next pass. Expect your test pilots to make the wrong choice every time, and be ready to take over.


Remember you're training a pilot to fly twins safely, not pass a checkride. The engines don't read the PTS, and they'll fail when they want. Train your student for these situations, but don't create real emergencies - i.e. pulling the mixtures at critical times of flight.
Click to expand...
And this right here is why I disagree with any program that takes you from nothing to teaching others in such little time...
 
A150K said:
And this right here is why I disagree with any program that takes you from nothing to teaching others in such little time...
Click to expand...

First time we did a single engine ILS, 2 miles out he says "OK, gear down and stabilized", puts the gear and two notches out. So we start going below glideslope at blue line. I asked if he had the runway made with enough potential energy. He said "yeah, by 400 feet, I should be gear down and stabilized." I asked him to point to the runway if he has it made. He says "but I'm still under the hood". Thanks, ATP!
 
sounddoc said:
First time we did a single engine ILS, 2 miles out he says "OK, gear down and stabilized", puts the gear and two notches out. So we start going below glideslope at blue line. I asked if he had the runway made with enough potential energy. He said "yeah, by 400 feet, I should be gear down and stabilized." I asked him to point to the runway if he has it made. He says "but I'm still under the hood". Thanks, ATP!
Click to expand...
Ouch....ok, enough stories about this guy! They make me want to start drinking and it's only 11:37.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top