Engine Failure After Take-off
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bristol
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking from some age and experience, turnbacks are only feasible if your rate of acceleration on takeoff is high (which shows as speed or height in hand) and your rate of descent low after an engine failure. These conditions do not, in general, apply to piston aircraft, so the WWII and 50's mantra was "never turn back". Early jets could turnback successfully, provided you had passed a critical point in the takeoff, and from the later stages you could actualy carry out a circuit and land into wind. Not many people did this!
I know that turnbacks were taught and practised dual in JPs, but even then, with bang seats there was little point. If in doubt, get out, and if in trouble, go through the bubble, as we used to say.
I have no knowledge of big jets, but suspect that turnbacks would be feasible. But, again, what's the point, unless all 4 (or 2 or 3) go out together?
Just for an illustration, on a certain early jet, one of our squadron had engine failure after takeoff and turned back. He arrived at the runway going far too fast, shot right across the field and into a concrete blast pen at about 100kt. Following the inevitable crunching noise a small figure appeared flying through the air, his parachute deployed and the canopy still caught in the wreckage. He reached the end of his rigging lines, dropped 10ft to the ground, unlocked his harness and walked away. He then collected his car keys and ciggies from his locker, drove home and retired by post. We never saw him again.
My advice? In a small piston or low-powered turb do not expect to be able to turn back from early EFATOs. There will be some critical point beyond which a turnback may be possible (c.f. Bulldogs), but only if you know what you are doing.
Dick W.
I know that turnbacks were taught and practised dual in JPs, but even then, with bang seats there was little point. If in doubt, get out, and if in trouble, go through the bubble, as we used to say.
I have no knowledge of big jets, but suspect that turnbacks would be feasible. But, again, what's the point, unless all 4 (or 2 or 3) go out together?
Just for an illustration, on a certain early jet, one of our squadron had engine failure after takeoff and turned back. He arrived at the runway going far too fast, shot right across the field and into a concrete blast pen at about 100kt. Following the inevitable crunching noise a small figure appeared flying through the air, his parachute deployed and the canopy still caught in the wreckage. He reached the end of his rigging lines, dropped 10ft to the ground, unlocked his harness and walked away. He then collected his car keys and ciggies from his locker, drove home and retired by post. We never saw him again.
My advice? In a small piston or low-powered turb do not expect to be able to turn back from early EFATOs. There will be some critical point beyond which a turnback may be possible (c.f. Bulldogs), but only if you know what you are doing.
Dick W.
RFDS PC12 aircraft practice turn-backs at Adelaide in Australia. So do the RAAF in their PC9's. However, inquiries to the manufacturer of these aircraft (Pilatus) reveal that under no conditions is the turn-back a part of the certification or the endorsement process.
What has killed people in the past is the practicing of turnbacks - not the real thing. So the more you practice a turn back, the higher the chances of one day killing yourself and taking some unfortunate soul with you - either in the air or among the houses on the ground.
There have been six pilots killed in military aircraft in Australia practicing turnbacks. I should add that two were killed in a Vampire turn back following a turbine failure. The fields ahead were clear and the chances of a successful straight ahead forced landing were high. But the crew had been brought up on turn back practice and gave it a go this time. It wasn't their day. They smashed in on close base leg and that was the end of them.
The others were killed when the practice turn backs went horribly wrong. Both aircraft spun in during the turn back manoeuvre. Two were alive after the aircraft hit but were burnt to death because they were too dazed to escape.
Forget "practicing" turn backs. It is simply not worth the risk assumed.
What has killed people in the past is the practicing of turnbacks - not the real thing. So the more you practice a turn back, the higher the chances of one day killing yourself and taking some unfortunate soul with you - either in the air or among the houses on the ground.
There have been six pilots killed in military aircraft in Australia practicing turnbacks. I should add that two were killed in a Vampire turn back following a turbine failure. The fields ahead were clear and the chances of a successful straight ahead forced landing were high. But the crew had been brought up on turn back practice and gave it a go this time. It wasn't their day. They smashed in on close base leg and that was the end of them.
The others were killed when the practice turn backs went horribly wrong. Both aircraft spun in during the turn back manoeuvre. Two were alive after the aircraft hit but were burnt to death because they were too dazed to escape.
Forget "practicing" turn backs. It is simply not worth the risk assumed.
On EFATO, I advise my students of light single engine training aircraft to land straight ahead (+/- 30 degrees of extended runway centreline, with bias towards the wind) - UNLESS they are already established on crosswind and at the normal height for that position in the circuit, say 500 ft and climbing, when the engine gives up. Then they should turn towards the field to land back on, being partly turned towards it already anyway. Given reasonable luck, they should then make it back to the field, especially if they had taken off into a stiff breeze originally.
Caveat : landing straight ahead towards industrial/housing estate or further out over the sea is not a bright option, I submit.
Turning back towards an aviation environment with fire cover is IMHO a better option on occasion. Even if you do not make the runway you might put it down in a clear area on the airfield and the rescue services will have a sporting chance of being able to find you there
However, do watch your speed ... and any incoming traffic landing on the reciprocal runway !
Caveat : landing straight ahead towards industrial/housing estate or further out over the sea is not a bright option, I submit.
Turning back towards an aviation environment with fire cover is IMHO a better option on occasion. Even if you do not make the runway you might put it down in a clear area on the airfield and the rescue services will have a sporting chance of being able to find you there
However, do watch your speed ... and any incoming traffic landing on the reciprocal runway !
