On 20-Jul-2003, "markjen" wrote:

It is very likely that your engine would have continued to make reasonable
power for many, many minutes after the initial failure, perhaps
indefinitely. (There are lots of reports when folks have been over water,
had an engine drop an exhaust valve, and then flown for hours.) So my
advice would be to continue to fly the engine at whatever power it took
(or would make) to get to the nearest airport with a reasonable runway and
good weather. Then fly a normal approach and land, just as you always do.

IOW, keep things as normal as possible.


I generally agree with your advice, except for your last statement. In the
world of "as normal as possible" under VFR, one would typically approach the
destination airport at or near pattern altitude in order to blend in with
the traffic flow. In Mark's case, he had greatly reduced power, and it is
not clear that he could have maintained altitude in a traffic pattern. In
my opinion, he handled the landing portion just about right: arrive over the
nearest usable airport at as high an altitude as possible. From that point,
total power loss -- a very real possibility at any moment when the engine is
already running very rough with vibration -- becomes almost a non-event.
From that high perch, you can circle the field until you reach an altitude
from which a power-off approach is a "sure thing". Use flaps and/or slips
(as Mark did) to adjust glide path for a normal speed touchdown maybe 1/3 to
1/2 of the way down the runway. As Mark pointed out, going off the end of
the runway at relatively slow speed is vastly preferable to hitting the
trees short of the approach end.

Any time engine power is questionable in a single, the last thing you want
to do is voluntarily give up altitude until the landing is "made". The one
exception would be to avoid entering IMC.

-Elliott Drucker