Engine failure on final

Dan

Let me use your posting to hang some data on )

In the 'old' days pilots were taught to put throttle to idle opposite
the numbers on down wind. You then made a power off pattern to runway.
You of course cleared the engine a couple of times on base and turning
final.

In the 70's, while I was instructing, I was advised by an FAA rep that
the FAA had changed their recommended procedure for patterns.

You set medium low power on the engine and left it there until you
pulled to idle above over run. Their rational as explained to me was
that if the engine was running and you didn't change anything
(throttle) the statistics showed that engine had a very low
probability of quitting.

I didn't agree with them but followed their recommendations while
teaching.

Now for those who are #4 or$5 in an extended pattern. If you set a
throttle setting that will let you fly that extended patten and don't
screw with the throttle then you should have an engine unless you run
out of gas.

So there.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````````````
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:43:28 -0500, Cub Driver
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:56:22 -0800, Ron Garret
wrote:

If you fly final with some amount of power (which I gather most people
do -- I always have) that seems to guarantee that if you lose your
engine on final you will land short, and there's pretty much nothing you
can do about it. Is that true?

Yes, that's true, and it's why the Old Timers taught power-off
landings, and it's why I fly them routinely.

(To tell the truth, I also like the feeling of whooshing down without
that engine blatting away. Perhaps I was a glider pilot in another
life.)


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net