Flight Test & Engine out
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine off for training.
Way back in 1978 I (as an 18-year old) did my PPL at the West London Aero Club on PA-140's. The then CFI (DS) gave me a practical demonstration of shutting down the engine and doing an air-start both by using the starter motor and by a steep dive.
We were at a safe height and had Greenham Common below with a mile and more of runway to land on if the engine didn't start.
I must say the biggest thing I took away was a major boost in confidence. The aeroplane still flew, the vital actions to get the engine going work, and there was no need to scream, panic or freeze.
I never have had an engine failure for real but think that I would have been better able to deal with one if I did have one. In 1981 I had to shut down a dreaded Astazou XVI in a Jetstream as a precaution but that was in the cruise and a non-event.
Properly done I can't see the harm in demos of this kind in training, but do not advocate them being done in a test situation with an examiner.....
MB
Way back in 1978 I (as an 18-year old) did my PPL at the West London Aero Club on PA-140's. The then CFI (DS) gave me a practical demonstration of shutting down the engine and doing an air-start both by using the starter motor and by a steep dive.
We were at a safe height and had Greenham Common below with a mile and more of runway to land on if the engine didn't start.
I must say the biggest thing I took away was a major boost in confidence. The aeroplane still flew, the vital actions to get the engine going work, and there was no need to scream, panic or freeze.
I never have had an engine failure for real but think that I would have been better able to deal with one if I did have one. In 1981 I had to shut down a dreaded Astazou XVI in a Jetstream as a precaution but that was in the cruise and a non-event.
Properly done I can't see the harm in demos of this kind in training, but do not advocate them being done in a test situation with an examiner.....
MB
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: overhere
Age: 27
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank all you for your comments, feedback and the kind compliments Pace & Ridger 
I have always felt I received the best possible training from my instructors who I (and my parents) feel did an outstanding job of training me to be a safe, confident pilot. They're "old school" instructors who believe in solid stick & rudder skills. When my school was training in strong, gusting & swinging x-winds, the other aircraft at the field had been put away.
Not sure how many pilots are trained by their school to do s-turns, slips, hover taxi / strip run just above stall 2 or 3 feet above the strip for most of the length of the runway (it's tough
), flying without instruments and glide approaches on every landing they ever performed.
I'll see if I can find a video of my strip run training. Below is a video of my shortfield / crosswind / no instruments training. I do prefer my check ride short field landing though...
I have always felt I received the best possible training from my instructors who I (and my parents) feel did an outstanding job of training me to be a safe, confident pilot. They're "old school" instructors who believe in solid stick & rudder skills. When my school was training in strong, gusting & swinging x-winds, the other aircraft at the field had been put away.
Not sure how many pilots are trained by their school to do s-turns, slips, hover taxi / strip run just above stall 2 or 3 feet above the strip for most of the length of the runway (it's tough
), flying without instruments and glide approaches on every landing they ever performed. I'll see if I can find a video of my strip run training. Below is a video of my shortfield / crosswind / no instruments training. I do prefer my check ride short field landing though...
Good vid! It's a well worn adage but some people are taught to fly, and some people, like you, are taught to aviate. It is refreshing to see you being taught judgement and control feel rather than just numbers. I liked your instructors opening gambit too - wise words.
However, I'm afraid to say there is a major design flaw with your machine. It has a nosewheel! This is only acceptable when gas turbines are involved. I jest of course, but strongly recommend you take your skills forward onto the next stage and get into a Pitts!
However, I'm afraid to say there is a major design flaw with your machine. It has a nosewheel! This is only acceptable when gas turbines are involved. I jest of course, but strongly recommend you take your skills forward onto the next stage and get into a Pitts!
Taildraggers......
I fly one because it's a better aircraft for the sort of flying I like to do, and because when I was in the market to buy it was, well, cheap.
I don't think makes me better at anything except takeoffs, landings, and ground handling. All the rest is just flying, same whatever sort of undercarriage the aircraft has. It is entirely possible to learn to fly properly in ANY aircraft, from opening the hangar doors to closing them at the end of the day. It is the student and instructor that matter, and their hard work and inability to accept "good enough".
I learned to fly on a C150, because that was cheapest. It cost me £28 per hour, at a time when I was earning £25 a week in my day job. If I had waited to be sure to have the money to continue after the licence i probably wouldn't have got my PPL. I had just enough saved to do the first 20 hours of my licence, which I completed in the then 40 hour minimum, spread over two years as I took on odd jobs here and there to pay the rest, borrowing the books and all home study. So, yes, often it was a struggle to keep flying, but I managed, and converted to a cub with ease. A fair bit of gliding kept me going post PPL, until my finances improved and I and my other half bought a cheap tatty cub. We've been flying it for thirty years now. It isn't tatty now. Apparently it's a collector's aeroplane.
Oh, yes, and we use it for touring. 75kts is fast enough to get there, eventually.
I fly one because it's a better aircraft for the sort of flying I like to do, and because when I was in the market to buy it was, well, cheap.
I don't think makes me better at anything except takeoffs, landings, and ground handling. All the rest is just flying, same whatever sort of undercarriage the aircraft has. It is entirely possible to learn to fly properly in ANY aircraft, from opening the hangar doors to closing them at the end of the day. It is the student and instructor that matter, and their hard work and inability to accept "good enough".
I learned to fly on a C150, because that was cheapest. It cost me £28 per hour, at a time when I was earning £25 a week in my day job. If I had waited to be sure to have the money to continue after the licence i probably wouldn't have got my PPL. I had just enough saved to do the first 20 hours of my licence, which I completed in the then 40 hour minimum, spread over two years as I took on odd jobs here and there to pay the rest, borrowing the books and all home study. So, yes, often it was a struggle to keep flying, but I managed, and converted to a cub with ease. A fair bit of gliding kept me going post PPL, until my finances improved and I and my other half bought a cheap tatty cub. We've been flying it for thirty years now. It isn't tatty now. Apparently it's a collector's aeroplane.
Oh, yes, and we use it for touring. 75kts is fast enough to get there, eventually.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sab444 ref the last video:
Good job! That's the kind of training that will give you an advantage throughout your entire career as a professional pilot, should you decide to pursue that avenue.
Good job! That's the kind of training that will give you an advantage throughout your entire career as a professional pilot, should you decide to pursue that avenue.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Kingston, Surrey, UK
Age: 74
Posts: 91
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CE500, I was also doing a Multi rating in a Duchess around 1998. The examiner pulled the RH engine mixture to idle/cut-off on approach while I was under the hood at about 2000 feet. Took it down to about 300 agl feet (I had just dropped the gear, what a lot of drag) then he said go-around, missed approach, and kept his hand on the fuel valve. Once I cleaned her up we did climb, and anyway Florida is flat and sea level - just so long as you miss the beach front hotels. Restarted about 1000 ft AGL and continued flight test. What did I learn? If you followed the book even an old beat up Duchess will climb out on one at sea level, just. Oh and yes, I did pass. I had been pre - warned he might do this - seems it was his party piece, some students got it, others didn't. I guess it depended on the side of bed he got out of that day.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is absolutely no excuse for this. It happened to me once in a 172. The Instructor distracted me and turned the fuel off. The engine stopped without any spluttering but the prop continued to windmill. I looked down and turned it back on again. What did I learn? Nothing. If an Instructor did this and the engine refused to restart, followed by an emergency landing resulting in injury or worse. Who would you blame? Don't listen to those who say that it makes better pilots rather than aeroplane 'drivers' because that it nonsense. Fly safe.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
makes better pilots rather than aeroplane 'drivers' because that it nonsense. Fly safe.
I have always felt I received the best possible training from my instructors who I (and my parents) feel did an outstanding job of training me to be a safe, confident pilot. They're "old school" instructors who believe in solid stick & rudder skills. When my school was training in strong, gusting & swinging x-winds, the other aircraft at the field had been put away
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 9th Jan 2014 at 20:45.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tr_no 688
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eah something smells fishy here.
Unless you were super slow on descent the prop would have to be feathered for it to stop windmilling.
Unless you were super slow on descent the prop would have to be feathered for it to stop windmilling.
Ive had an instructor do exactly the same as shown in this video on a check flight, Its an important skill to have and maintain
P.S. I am quite certain the instructor had pre scanned the area and had a field planned for the eventuality that it would not re-start
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace, we're talking about an Instructor turning the fuel off. How does that make me a better pilot exactly? I know what you're getting at and it's absolutely right to have to experience things outside the norm in order to be prepared.
By the way, resorting to insults does you no credit at all.
By the way, resorting to insults does you no credit at all.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
makes better pilots rather than aeroplane 'drivers' because that it nonsense. Fly safe.
Your comment above referring to my post as nonsense ? And I am hurling insults ? Ok apologies to you
Pace
In gliders, pulling the tow release is equivalent to shutting off the fuel -- done it hundreds of times
The glider flies just fine, but is always going downhill unless you find air going up faster than the glider is going down.
Yes a 100 fpm sink rate does give a bit more time to sort things out, but there has been the odd time I came down as fast as the towplane
The glider flies just fine, but is always going downhill unless you find air going up faster than the glider is going down.
Yes a 100 fpm sink rate does give a bit more time to sort things out, but there has been the odd time I came down as fast as the towplane
In gliders, pulling the tow release is equivalent to shutting off the fuel -- done it hundreds of times
The glider flies just fine, but is always going downhill unless you find air going up faster than the glider is going down.
Yes a 100 fpm sink rate does give a bit more time to sort things out, but there has been the odd time I came down as fast as the towplane
The glider flies just fine, but is always going downhill unless you find air going up faster than the glider is going down.
Yes a 100 fpm sink rate does give a bit more time to sort things out, but there has been the odd time I came down as fast as the towplane
How many times have you done that ?
I'm with Pace on this one. It's not the engine stopping that will teach you anything, it is what you do to deal with it. Light singles will land very nicely with the prop stopped. I may be biased here as a glider pilot as well as power, but I do get to fly with a lot of people with an unhealthy dependence on the engine, in particular by flying circuits more akin to a major cross country, and a final approach which in the event of an engine failure would ensure a crash.
We are not teaching people to fly but to drive, and do them no favours at all, if we teach utter reliance 100% of the time on the engine.
Forgotten techniques? Height can be lost very easily but it's rather hard to claw it back on approach. Let's try to find some more time to teach sideslipping and s turns, pilot navigation with map and watch, forced landings with power that result in an undamaged aeroplane, short field and soft field techniques, flapless landings, flying without instruments, care of passengers, and above all some feel for what the aircraft is doing.
Maybe we could find this time by losing the big aeroplane mentality, the 747 circuits, the faffing around on the radio, and in general the implication that all students will go on to fly airliners. They won't. Anyone training for that can learn the appropriate techniques when they transition to large aircraft. The rest of us will benefit from handling a light aircraft as just that, eyes outside and fly the attitude.
We are not teaching people to fly but to drive, and do them no favours at all, if we teach utter reliance 100% of the time on the engine.
Forgotten techniques? Height can be lost very easily but it's rather hard to claw it back on approach. Let's try to find some more time to teach sideslipping and s turns, pilot navigation with map and watch, forced landings with power that result in an undamaged aeroplane, short field and soft field techniques, flapless landings, flying without instruments, care of passengers, and above all some feel for what the aircraft is doing.
Maybe we could find this time by losing the big aeroplane mentality, the 747 circuits, the faffing around on the radio, and in general the implication that all students will go on to fly airliners. They won't. Anyone training for that can learn the appropriate techniques when they transition to large aircraft. The rest of us will benefit from handling a light aircraft as just that, eyes outside and fly the attitude.
How many times have you done that ?
Piper.Classique - couldn't agree more. Particularly ref 747 circuits. A mate of mine crunched into a field because the engine quit downwind and he couldn't make the airfield. He's excellent at mini circuits now.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with Pace on this one.
My comment was a broader one than just specific to this thread and shutting this particular engine down. Obviously anything done for real will carry more risk and if you look at my original post it did add (if you survive)
But then if anything happens for real later in your flying it will carry more risk than if you have never experienced it before.
The biggest fear of all is fear of the unknown and if pilot are taught and left with a big dollop of unknown they are not confident pilots and this goes for full stalls spins strong winds, shear, icing etc etc etc i.e. all the things we will probably deal with later on our own.
nut yes if you are going to teach something with an element of risk take all precautions to minimise that risk.
Pace
But then if anything happens for real later in your flying it will carry more risk than if you have never experienced it before.
The biggest fear of all is fear of the unknown and if pilot are taught and left with a big dollop of unknown they are not confident pilots and this goes for full stalls spins strong winds, shear, icing etc etc etc i.e. all the things we will probably deal with later on our own.
The biggest fear of all is fear of the unknown and if pilot are taught and left with a big dollop of unknown they are not confident pilots and this goes for full stalls spins strong winds, shear, icing etc etc etc i.e. all the things we will probably deal with later on our own.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Silicon Hills
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I used to instruct, years ago, I almost always did this to my primary students at least once. Note, I always had a suitable landing field in range, we never stopped the prop, and we never actually continued the exercise to landing in that condition. The point of the exercise was to see if the student remembered their training, and found the offending fuel selector in the OFF position, or if they just sat there imitating a goldfish, (mouth moving and no sound.) Most often, I got the goldfish reaction! 
I do think it was a worthwhile exercise, it drove home the point to follow your training and procedures, and to FLY the airplane. Any actual practice forced landings were done with the engine idling and my hand on or near the throttle. I also never had an engine so much as sputter momentarily when the fuel was turned back on. (These were all carbureted, simple engines.)
My first ME lesson was in an old Apache, and toward the end of the lesson, the old instructor slapped the right engine mixture back to simulate a failure. All went well until we tried to re-start same, it refused to do so. After an uneventful SE landing at nearest airport, some 10 miles away, we found the mixture control cable broken off at the carb. So my first ME lesson was quite a learning experience.
I do think it was a worthwhile exercise, it drove home the point to follow your training and procedures, and to FLY the airplane. Any actual practice forced landings were done with the engine idling and my hand on or near the throttle. I also never had an engine so much as sputter momentarily when the fuel was turned back on. (These were all carbureted, simple engines.)My first ME lesson was in an old Apache, and toward the end of the lesson, the old instructor slapped the right engine mixture back to simulate a failure. All went well until we tried to re-start same, it refused to do so. After an uneventful SE landing at nearest airport, some 10 miles away, we found the mixture control cable broken off at the carb. So my first ME lesson was quite a learning experience.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, let's remember that the OP was talking about an Instructor turning the fuel off. I am still struggling to understand why that would teach me anything (other than the instructor has poor judgement).
Regarding flying in bad weather/strong winds and experiencing spins etc, I can tell you that nearly all the GA pilots I know go for 60 mins max when the weather is reasonably ok (I work at an aero club). And why shouldn't they? Unless you are very well off, it is reasonable to wait for good weather so you (and your passengers) can enjoy the flight.
Nothing wrong with that.
Regarding flying in bad weather/strong winds and experiencing spins etc, I can tell you that nearly all the GA pilots I know go for 60 mins max when the weather is reasonably ok (I work at an aero club). And why shouldn't they? Unless you are very well off, it is reasonable to wait for good weather so you (and your passengers) can enjoy the flight.
Nothing wrong with that.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DeeCee
my apologies for the comments earlier We had a thread a while ago from a training pilot who was scared stiff of stalling and when he was told flying solo to practice a few stalls was still scared stiff.
it transpired that he was scared stiff because all his training revolved around recovery at the incipient and he was worried sick of what happened if he went beyond the incipient or even into a spin by accident.
He jumped at the suggestion of going with an aerobatic instructor in an aerobatic certified aircraft so he could see and experience what lay beyond and experience the worst that could happen.
even with a spin I ask should a pilot get into such a situation how would they identify whether they were in a spin or spiral dive?
There were a couple of fatal very tragic accidents in PC12s where loss of control at altitude resulted in failure of the pilots to recover and I wonder whether this was partially due to too much emphasis on systems and the automatics and not enough on good old handling techniques.
it also like simulating engine failure in a twin! you cannot beat shutting down an engine for real and also identify why the engine has failed fuel is one.
I agree in a single you have to be very cautious about when and where you do such a thing and over a very long runway would be ideal.
Pace
my apologies for the comments earlier
We had a thread a while ago from a training pilot who was scared stiff of stalling and when he was told flying solo to practice a few stalls was still scared stiff.it transpired that he was scared stiff because all his training revolved around recovery at the incipient and he was worried sick of what happened if he went beyond the incipient or even into a spin by accident.
He jumped at the suggestion of going with an aerobatic instructor in an aerobatic certified aircraft so he could see and experience what lay beyond and experience the worst that could happen.
even with a spin I ask should a pilot get into such a situation how would they identify whether they were in a spin or spiral dive?
There were a couple of fatal very tragic accidents in PC12s where loss of control at altitude resulted in failure of the pilots to recover and I wonder whether this was partially due to too much emphasis on systems and the automatics and not enough on good old handling techniques.
it also like simulating engine failure in a twin! you cannot beat shutting down an engine for real and also identify why the engine has failed fuel is one.
I agree in a single you have to be very cautious about when and where you do such a thing and over a very long runway would be ideal.
Pace