My wife getting scared

On Oct 1, 11:20 am, Jay Honeck wrote:
Sadly, I have to admit that our fear of harming our engine has far
outweighed our fear of an engine-out landing. There is simply nothing
you can do to your engine (in normal use) that is worse than simulated
engine-out landings, so we do them very rarely.

We used to practice them regularly in rental birds...


Jay,
If you did practice emergency engine-out landing regularly in
rental birds, you must have believed that it was something useful, so
why doing it very rarely in your own bird?
I have stated it in a previous post (when you mentioned that you
did not practice short field landings in your bird either) that IMHO,
no amount of money is worth life or my limbs ;-). We spent $15K
overhauling our engine few years ago; the total cost including labor
was over $20K. I fly my Cardinal the same way as I flew training
school planes. We practiced emergency procedures and short field
landings regularly. Last month, we learned a great way to fly from an
instructor who specialized in Cardinal flying. One of the maneuvers
we learned was the spiral emergency descent. I could not believe how
we could do steep spiral 2000' over the number, dropped like a 'coke
machine', executed a super slip, kicked it out the last few seconds
and landed as soft as a butterfly right over the number. I had only
done it once on my own after the training but plan to do it more
often. I don't believe in shock cooling and seriously doubt that such
maneuver can harm my engine. Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time. I may never need to use the skill for real
but knowing that I am ready to do it in any situation boosts my
confidence tremendously. Besides, it is sheer exhilaration practicing
the maneuver. Definitely worth the price of the engine overhaul ;-)

Hai Longworth

"Longworth" wrote

Last month, we learned a great way to fly from an
instructor who specialized in Cardinal flying. One of the maneuvers
we learned was the spiral emergency descent. I could not believe how
we could do steep spiral 2000' over the number, dropped like a 'coke
machine', executed a super slip, kicked it out the last few seconds
and landed as soft as a butterfly right over the number.

Sounds like it would be more fun than the best roller coaster ride!

I had only
done it once on my own after the training but plan to do it more
often. I don't believe in shock cooling and seriously doubt that such
maneuver can harm my engine. Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time. I may never need to use the skill for real
but knowing that I am ready to do it in any situation boosts my
confidence tremendously. Besides, it is sheer exhilaration practicing
the maneuver. Definitely worth the price of the engine overhaul ;-)

It sounds like you do have your priorities in line, with the right
compromises of possible engine life sacrifice (a matter not clearly
established) and skills maintenance.

Doing a chop and drop when your engine isn't as hot as a firecracker should
not be harmful, in the least bit. Considerations of the towplane engine
long life is a good example, and one that is hard to argue with. They are
no doubt pretty hot when they start their rapid descent to pick up another
tow.

If one were to start the rapid drop (engine failure simulations) after
letting the engine cool a bit (by reducing power settings, or richening the
mixture, or both) and stabilize for a few minutes, the amount of additional
cooling from that power level, even in a worst case scenario, should not
cause a measurable increase in wear. It is mainly the hot piston cooling
more slowly than the cylinder bore, cutting down on the clearances, that can
increase wear. The stabilizing should eliminate that problem, all together.

The concern of hitting the throttle for a go around may be a concern,
although it is hard to see why that is any harder on the engine as the
takeoff full power applications. If that go around full power is what
concerns you, (or Jay) don't do a go around, except for the occasional
practice, (or real go-around) then just do the full stop, taxi back and
takeoff after everything is nicely cooled down.

I agree with the people that are saying that the practice of emergency
engine failures would have to be a good thing to practice. Doing it
carefully as to not damage your engine would seem to be prudent. Not doing
them may be not prudent.
--
Jim in NC

Last month, we learned a great way to fly from an
instructor who specialized in Cardinal flying. One of the maneuvers
we learned was the spiral emergency descent. I could not believe how
we could do steep spiral 2000' over the number, dropped like a 'coke
machine', executed a super slip, kicked it out the last few seconds
and landed as soft as a butterfly right over the number.

I've done that a few times, with and without an instructor, and it's
REALLY fun! Not something you want to do at a busy field full of
NORDO planes, however.

I don't believe in shock cooling and seriously doubt that such
maneuver can harm my engine.

I don't think the maneuver you describe will harm your engine, as it
only includes cutting the power to idle. I have no statistics to back
this up, but I think it's the application of full power from idle (as
in a go-round, touch and go, or engine out emergency landing practice)
that causes the most wear and tear.

Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time. I may never need to use the skill for real
but knowing that I am ready to do it in any situation boosts my
confidence tremendously. Besides, it is sheer exhilaration practicing
the maneuver. Definitely worth the price of the engine overhaul ;-)

I'm not putting myself, my engine, or my plane at increased risk
because it's exhilarating. The maneuver you describe, while not
aerobatic, is a relatively high-risk maneuver in that it takes place
directly over the airport, and involves a completely non-standard
approach to landing. Almost all mid-airs occur near an airport, and
this maneuver can end badly if not executed properly.

Which brings up another interesting line of thought. How many actual
accidents occur whilst practicing these kinds of maneuvers? When
does practicing engine out (for example) landings cause more problems
than it fixes?

For example, spin training was eliminated from the Private training
because it was determined that more pilots were being killed by
teaching it than could be saved by teaching it. The debate about this
decision still rages on today, but it can be extended to many parts of
flight training.

Another example, not quite so cut & dry: There is no doubt that touch
& goes are more risky than full-stop landings, and there has been some
debate about eliminating them from training. The added cost (in
hours) to the student is really the sole reason for keeping them in
the syllabus, and (as a result) a small-but-real number of students
die each year doing them.

So I must ask: When does the risk outweigh the benefit?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

snip

Another example, not quite so cut & dry: There is no doubt that touch
& goes are more risky than full-stop landings, and there has been some
debate about eliminating them from training. The added cost (in
hours) to the student is really the sole reason for keeping them in
the syllabus, and (as a result) a small-but-real number of students
die each year doing them.

Oh, I'm not sure of that.

How about touch & goes on a 172 on a 10,000 X 200 runway with 1,000
foot overrun at each end?

However I don't do touch & goes.

I come to a full stop, clean up the airplane, then critique the
last landing and ponder what I need to do next time to make it
better while taxiing back.

I see lots of people doing touch & goes repeating the exact same,
less than optimal (to put it mildly) thing each and every time.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Jay,
I did put a smiley behind my comment about practicing emergency
spiral landing being fun and worth the cost of my engine overhaul.
It is clear that our main objective for obtaining the training and
frequent practice is safety. I would never jeopardize my life or harm
my bird just to have fun!

I have over 700hrs with thousands of takeoffs/landings. We average
about 250hrs a year and fly pretty much every week year around. Aside
from several long cross country trips a year, most of our hours are
practice flights either on our own or with instructors. We try to mix
instrument practices with visual flight maneuvers. Safety is always
our utmost concern. We don't do any non-traditional patternworks
without asking for tower permission or making clear and frequent
announcement at uncontrolled fields. We also don't do unsual
patternworks at busy airports or during busy time. One of our
favorite practice spot is Sullivan County airport (MSV) with 6300x150'
runway. At its busiest time, there are usually no more than 2 or 3
planes in the pattern. We always learn something new from a new
instructors, always find room for improvements in our flying skills,
and never feel that we are good enough that no practices are needed.

I fully expect that the pilots who go out for their practices
would take the same kind of precaution and they do so for safety and
not for thrill seeking.

I don't know the accident statistics of training or practice
flights but at the start of my flight training in 2001, I spent many
hours reading NTSB reports. As I recall, I would not go flying at a
new airport without checking the reports. Anyway, I recalled there
was only a handful of accidents occurred during flight training or
practices. Lack of skills, lack of preparation etc. were the major
contribution factors.

Hai Longworth

Jay Honeck wrote:
Last month, we learned a great way to fly from an
instructor who specialized in Cardinal flying. One of the maneuvers
we learned was the spiral emergency descent. I could not believe how
we could do steep spiral 2000' over the number, dropped like a 'coke
machine', executed a super slip, kicked it out the last few seconds
and landed as soft as a butterfly right over the number.

I've done that a few times, with and without an instructor, and it's
REALLY fun! Not something you want to do at a busy field full of
NORDO planes, however.

I don't believe in shock cooling and seriously doubt that such
maneuver can harm my engine.

I don't think the maneuver you describe will harm your engine, as it
only includes cutting the power to idle. I have no statistics to back
this up, but I think it's the application of full power from idle (as
in a go-round, touch and go, or engine out emergency landing practice)
that causes the most wear and tear.

But unless you're SO confident in your ability that you know it's ALWAYS
going to turn out right -- and of course that's what we all strive for
and usually accomplish -- you can't guarantee that it's *only* going to
include cutting power to idle. If you misjudge something and/or it
doesn't turn out as planned, you execute a go-round, don't you? So now
it includes full power from idle. I'm not saying you shouldn't be aware
of or concerned about wear and tear, but doesn't there need to be some
reasonable exchange of wear and tear for competency assurance?

Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time.

(don't remember whose quote this was)
When exactly are you certain that you can execute it flawlessly *all*
the time? after 2 in a row? after 5 in a row? And once that's
accomplished in the present, do you assume you'll always maintain that
level of competency if you never practice it again?

I'm sure I'm probably over-doing it here, and I apologize if I sound
over the top. I guess I'm just not comfortable with assumptions even
though sometimes that's all we have.

On Oct 3, 1:56 pm, Shirl wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote:
Last month, we learned a great way to fly from an
instructor who specialized in Cardinal flying. One of the maneuvers
we learned was the spiral emergency descent. I could not believe how
we could do steep spiral 2000' over the number, dropped like a 'coke
machine', executed a super slip, kicked it out the last few seconds
and landed as soft as a butterfly right over the number.

I've done that a few times, with and without an instructor, and it's
REALLY fun! Not something you want to do at a busy field full of
NORDO planes, however.

I don't believe in shock cooling and seriously doubt that such
maneuver can harm my engine.

I don't think the maneuver you describe will harm your engine, as it
only includes cutting the power to idle. I have no statistics to back
this up, but I think it's the application of full power from idle (as
in a go-round, touch and go, or engine out emergency landing practice)
that causes the most wear and tear.

But unless you're SO confident in your ability that you know it's ALWAYS
going to turn out right -- and of course that's what we all strive for
and usually accomplish -- you can't guarantee that it's *only* going to
include cutting power to idle. If you misjudge something and/or it
doesn't turn out as planned, you execute a go-round, don't you? So now
it includes full power from idle. I'm not saying you shouldn't be aware
of or concerned about wear and tear, but doesn't there need to be some
reasonable exchange of wear and tear for competency assurance?

Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time.

(don't remember whose quote this was)
When exactly are you certain that you can execute it flawlessly *all*
the time? after 2 in a row? after 5 in a row? And once that's
accomplished in the present, do you assume you'll always maintain that
level of competency if you never practice it again?

I'm sure I'm probably over-doing it here, and I apologize if I sound
over the top. I guess I'm just not comfortable with assumptions even
though sometimes that's all we have.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Shirl,
It is my statement.
Regarding your question "when exactly are you certain that you can
execute it flawlessly *all* the time?", the answer can be found in my
followup post: "We always learn something new from a new instructors,
always find room for improvements in our flying skills, and never feel
that we are good enough that no practices are needed."

Hai Longworth

Even if it does shorten the life of my
engine, I will continue to practice it until I can execute it
flawlessly all the time.

(don't remember whose quote this was)
When exactly are you certain that you can execute it flawlessly *all*
the time? after 2 in a row? after 5 in a row? And once that's
accomplished in the present, do you assume you'll always maintain that
level of competency if you never practice it again?

I'm sure I'm probably over-doing it here, and I apologize if I sound
over the top. I guess I'm just not comfortable with assumptions even
though sometimes that's all we have.

Longworth wrote:

It is my statement.
Regarding your question "when exactly are you certain that you can
execute it flawlessly *all* the time?", the answer can be found in my
followup post: "We always learn something new from a new instructors,
always find room for improvements in our flying skills, and never feel
that we are good enough that no practices are needed."

Yeah, it was a rhetorical question. I realize the point you were making
when you said that you would continue to practice it until you could
execute it flawlessly all the time was that you would never stop
practicing it on occasion. I just wanted to emphasize that our
competency levels fluctuate and may not be the same three months in the
future as they are today. I know no one here needs to be told that.
Shirl

Shirl wrote:

I just wanted to emphasize that our
competency levels fluctuate and may not be the same three months in the
future as they are today. I know no one here needs to be told that.
Shirl

Actually, your competence level can fluctuate from flight to flight,
even within a specific flight.
This is a subject of much concern in the air show community, and carries
over as well to all pilots.
--
Dudley Henriques

Shirl:
I just wanted to emphasize that our competency levels
fluctuate and may not be the same three months in the
future as they are today. I know no one here needs to be
told that.

Dudley Henriques wrote:
Actually, your competence level can fluctuate from flight to
flight, even within a specific flight. This is a subject of much
concern in the air show community, and carries over as well
to all pilots.

That was what I was trying to say, that competency doesn't just stay at
a high level all by itself. Isn't that the best reason for practicing
emergencies from time to time (not on *every* flight)? or for doing
occasional T&Gs or an intentional go-around every once in a while? In
teaching skating, *timing* was the first thing to go when competitors
had a gap in training or were having more "off" than "on" days, and the
source of the problem was often a very basic element in the maneuver,
and correcting it required a reiteration/brush-up on that element before
putting it all back together again. Sometimes if you train *too* much on
days when you're "off", whatever isn't going well can inadvertently be
reinforced and harder to undo. I've wondered if that happens w/air show
pilots?

Shirl