News Small plane engine failure

Status
Not open for further replies.

TSPenguin

The Seeker
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Someone send me this link: http://www.break.com/index/small-plane-engine-failure-1950217

Besides this being an awesome emergency landing, the video raises some questions.
First of all, when, where and what (plane)?
What happened that the engine restarted several times?
Shouldn't he have radioed the ATC?
It seemed he was flying rather low, what are the regulations regarding flight level in populated areas?

And last but not least, doesn't this look a little bit fake? *trollface*
 

Grover

Saturn V Misfire
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Ascension Island
he may have been flying that low, maybe he was on a pattern circle.

and if he was close to a small airstrip using a UNICOM frequency, he may have had no ATCer to talk to

and besides that, if he was that low, you wouldnt be thinking about that would you? youd pay more attention to where you could land in your VERY short glide range.

and as for the problem, maybe a coolant issue that cut the engine, on the last one i noticed the co-pilot touch the mixture control, which would cut the engine, but maybe an engine gauge was warning him that he had to (superheated manifold/Internal temp maybe?)

not a bad landing though, but "Watch the wing" was good advice when you have no control of speed ;P
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,861
Reaction score
1,528
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
Very fake. The engine always failed when somebody turned it off. And it restarted without problems afterwards. Does not look like a really bad problem...
 

Grover

Saturn V Misfire
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Ascension Island
im no expert on flight, i only watched the engine controls on the 3rd attempt (after the 2nd restart)

it does look fake, ill admit, im just not very quick to accuse.

in which case he should have his licence revoked
 

Hielor

Defender of Truth
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
5,580
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Someone send me this link: http://www.break.com/index/small-plane-engine-failure-1950217

Besides this being an awesome emergency landing, the video raises some questions.
First of all, when, where and what (plane)?
Florida, April 2009, a Sky Ranger.
Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/23/earlyshow/main4963914.shtml
(watch the interview there for more info).

Video showing a bit more at the start:

Using that information, I've been able to determine that they'd just taken off from Winter Haven's Gilbert Airport (KGIF). It looks like they'd just turned left after taking off from runway 22, and were paralleling 21st St NW when the engine quit, at which point they turned and landed on Havendale Blvd NW:
http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=28...ty=h&where1=Winter Havens Gilbert Airport, FL

And here's the parking lot that they turned into at the end:
http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=np...ty=b&where1=Winter Havens Gilbert Airport, FL

What happened that the engine restarted several times?
When an engine fails, you go through a procedure that attempts to restart the engine. They were doing that, and it apparently worked temporarily. In the end, though, they made the right decision--better to land on the highway, when you know you can make it, than to get the engine to start and then have it fail on you when you're over a forest or a lake.

Shouldn't he have radioed the ATC?
No--he was taking off from an airport without a control tower. The nearest ATC facility would probably have been the tower at Bartow, several miles to the south, and he wasn't already on their frequency, so contacting them would've required tuning to the frequency, waiting to ensure the frequency was clear, then contacting them and telling them where you are and what was going on. All of that for...what purpose? He already knows that he's going down in a fairly well-populated area, so he's not worried about being found in the event he can't walk away from the plane, and he's not worried about not being able to reach help.

In general when you're flying, you do things in the order Aviate, Navigate, Communicate--first and foremost, fly the plane. If you need all of your attention to fly the plane and make a landing on a highway, don't waste time talking to people who won't be able to do anything for you anyway.

It seemed he was flying rather low, what are the regulations regarding flight level in populated areas?
Being low is perfectly acceptable when you're taking off :)

And last but not least, doesn't this look a little bit fake? *trollface*
Not at all.

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:26 ----------

and as for the problem, maybe a coolant issue that cut the engine, on the last one i noticed the co-pilot touch the mixture control, which would cut the engine, but maybe an engine gauge was warning him that he had to (superheated manifold/Internal temp maybe?
I suspect the mixture control is on the pilot's left (not in view), and when your engine is off you don't tend to overheat.

not a bad landing though, but "Watch the wing" was good advice when you have no control of speed ;P
Brakes.


Very fake. The engine always failed when somebody turned it off. And it restarted without problems afterwards. Does not look like a really bad problem...
...what are you talking about?

im no expert on flight, i only watched the engine controls on the 3rd attempt (after the 2nd restart)
The primary engine controls are probably on the pilot's left, since the stick is in his right hand.

it does look fake, ill admit, im just not very quick to accuse.

in which case he should have his licence revoked
How does it look fake?
 

Grover

Saturn V Misfire
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Ascension Island
as far as i know, engine controls are ALWAYS in the center, so both pilot and copilot can access them in case of emergency, but i dont know which aircraft that is, if it is on the left, then the pilot could easily cut the mixture without us being able to see.

and a coolant malfunction could cause an overheat whenever the engine ran too long, it got its heat when it took off (full power, coolant usually does quite a bit of work) then as they restarted, they kept pushing the temperature above the thermal limit of teh engine.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,861
Reaction score
1,528
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
...what are you talking about?

The correlation between right guy touching a control (switch or button) and the engine turning off. The engine did not fail by itself, it was deactivated.
 

FordPrefect

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
401
Reaction score
37
Points
28
The correlation between right guy touching a control (switch or button) and the engine turning off. The engine did not fail by itself, it was deactivated.

Hm, I highly doubt there's any engine control related switches on the outer right edge of the main panel. He's merely reaching for a handhold or grip on the right. IMHO.

One thing though, I would not have clapped my hands as early as the GOTR (guy on the right) started doing. I mean, the moment they touched down on the road, they were still going pretty fast. Lots of ugly stuff could still have happened. Turned out good though. Nice airmanship!

And as Hielor mentioned, always remember "aviate, navigate, communicate".
 

Grover

Saturn V Misfire
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Ascension Island
ive got a better philosophy for aviation:

"dont crash, or there'll be nobody around to say how good a pilot you were"
 

Hielor

Defender of Truth
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
5,580
Reaction score
2
Points
0
as far as i know, engine controls are ALWAYS in the center, so both pilot and copilot can access them in case of emergency, but i dont know which aircraft that is, if it is on the left, then the pilot could easily cut the mixture without us being able to see.
:facepalm:
A lot of small planes, particularly homebuilts, aren't designed for easy operation from both seats. Certificated planes, too: look at early Bonanzas, with their single throw-over yoke.

Engine controls are located to allow you to operate them with the hand that isn't controlling the stick or yoke, so you can do both at the same time. In the case where the stick is between the pilot's legs or between the pilots and is intended to be used with the right hand, the throttle will be situated to be actuated with the pilot's left hand, so they can do both at the same time. In the case of the Skyranger, this means that there are two throttle controls (the levers with the white knobs), one for each seat.

You may also notice that there are no mixture knobs. The SkyRanger uses either the Jabiru 2200 or the Rotax 912--neither of which have mixture controls. So much for your "he cut the mixture" theory.

and a coolant malfunction could cause an overheat whenever the engine ran too long, it got its heat when it took off (full power, coolant usually does quite a bit of work) then as they restarted, they kept pushing the temperature above the thermal limit of teh engine.
Light airplane engines don't have coolant, and if the engine was in fact overheating, I don't see how that makes this video any less "real."

The correlation between right guy touching a control (switch or button) and the engine turning off. The engine did not fail by itself, it was deactivated.
:facepalm:
Are you watching the same video I am? Using TSP's original link (I've named them Orangeshirt, left, and Yellowshirt, right, for convenience):
0:03 Engine cuts out. Yellowshirt's hands are in his lap holding his camera.
0:24 Engine starts as a result of Orangeshirt cranking the starter in the middle of the panel.
0:41 Engine quits again. Neither Orangeshirt nor Yellowshirt have their hands anywhere near the panel.
0:47 Orangeshirt begins cranking the engine again. You can see the prop turn over, but the engine doesn't fire.
0:49 Yellowshirt moves his hand to the starter to take over, since Orangeshirt has to cross his left arm across his body in order to do it.
0:50 Engine restarts, Yellowshirt removes his hand.
0:53 You can hear the engine start dying again. Yellowshirt's hand doesn't reach the panel until the engine is pretty much dead.

At this point he stops trying to restart the engine--as he said in the interview I linked to at about 1:25: "He picked a place to land, he said we're goin' for the highway, it was clear, and uh, I stopped trying to restart the plane, I didn't want to screw with his landing..."

At no point does he touch any controls immediately before the engine dies.
 

TSPenguin

The Seeker
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Thank you Hielor for providing pretty much complete coverage and explanations on the topic.

The one question that I've not seen answered is what actually caused the engine out. I am also wondering if there are any official investigation procedures for a harmless civil incident like this. From the interview it sounds like they just put the plane on a truck and handed it back to the owner.
 

Wolfer

Miniature Giant Space Hamster
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
139
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Québec/Mont-Tremblant
Last summer I was at the flight school where this happened. They told me the problem was with a faulty fuel line. The pilot was really lucky though, usually that highway is crammed with cars.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,861
Reaction score
1,528
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
:facepalm:

Are you watching the same video I am? Using TSP's original link (I've named them Orangeshirt, left, and Yellowshirt, right, for convenience):

Looks like the same video, but every time, before the engine did cut, Yellowshirt manipulated something in the center panel - just watch propeller and hand movement. I don't trust sound much, since Youtube ruins even the best sound in a video.
 

Hielor

Defender of Truth
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
5,580
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Looks like the same video, but every time, before the engine did cut, Yellowshirt manipulated something in the center panel - just watch propeller and hand movement. I don't trust sound much, since Youtube ruins even the best sound in a video.
You get an army of facepalm smilies. Seriously. Why don't *you* go watch "propeller and hand movement" instead of spouting the same incorrect nonsense repeatedly?
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

The original video that TSP posted isn't *on* youtube. Nor is the CBS video I linked to. Moreover, there's no reason to distrust the sound synchronization, since all of the places where the engine *starts* are reasonably synchronized (and, if anything, the sound is lagging behind the video).

Let's ignore sound then and look just at the moment of propeller stoppage (in TSP's video)...only once (of three stops) is his hand anywhere near the center console:

0:03 Propeller stops.
0:42 Propeller stops *again.* Note that yellowshirt's hand is still nowhere near the center console.
0:54 Yellowshirt's hand moves to the center console in response to the sound of the engine dying. Propeller stops shortly thereafter, far too quickly for his actions to have been the cause.

You seem to be under the assumption that the propeller can stop spinning immediately. I'm not sure how many objects spinning at several thousand RPMs you deal with on a daily basis, but they don't stop instantly. In the 152s and 172s I fly, if I intentionally stop the engine, it takes several seconds for it to come to a complete stop from 1000rpm--given that the engine in this thing runs at a much higher rate, and they were probably at higher than 1000rpm, I have no reason to doubt the sound of the engine winding down starting several seconds before the propeller actually stops.

I can't exactly stop conspiracy theorists from refusing to believe mountains of evidence thrown at them. All I can do is bury you in the mountains of evidence.
 

Keatah

Active member
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
2,218
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Last summer I was at the flight school where this happened. They told me the problem was with a faulty fuel line. The pilot was really lucky though, usually that highway is crammed with cars.

Well, the left side of the highway had cars. The right side had none.
 

computerex

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
1,282
Reaction score
17
Points
0
Location
Florida
The original video that TSP posted isn't *on* youtube. Nor is the CBS video I linked to.

He may be referring to the video you linked in your first post, located on youtube that "shows a bit more at the start".

edit:
As far as the video being fake - This would be a very stupid thing to fake. You see cars running to the left, so they landed in a residential area. Faking something like this would have legal consequences.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,861
Reaction score
1,528
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
As far as the video being fake - This would be a very stupid thing to fake. You see cars running to the left, so they landed in a residential area. Faking something like this would have legal consequences.

You can face legal consequences, even if you have a stuttering engine, with or without manipulating the mixture, but a bit more show for having witnesses ("The engines did fail, me and my cousin Frank did really hear it get silent") can make people close one or two eyes on the situation, compared to: "We just wanted to film how it looks like if you land on the road as it happened somebody else during an engine failure".

I don't know how you see it, but having a camera installed in the wing that watches the engine is a tiny bit strange. It did not point at the door, as it would be if you use this camera for filming parachuters leave your plane. Also this plane is pretty much the wrong type for parachuting.

How do you want to explain this? This "engine check camera" is standard feature on planes of this type? So you can see that something is wrong on your plane since you can't hear the engine fail because of the loud engine noise in the cabin?
 

Wolfer

Miniature Giant Space Hamster
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
139
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Québec/Mont-Tremblant
I think it's fair to say that the camera was not aimed specifically at the engine. From the looks of it it's just appears to be in it's field of view. Since these cameras are usually placed on the gear strut, that is quite close the fuselage, unless you turned the camera away it's always going to see the engine.

Also, I don't think you realize how dire the consequences for a flight school faking an accident would be. They would most probably loose their license if the word ever got out.
 

Hielor

Defender of Truth
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
5,580
Reaction score
2
Points
0
You can face legal consequences, even if you have a stuttering engine, with or without manipulating the mixture, but a bit more show for having witnesses ("The engines did fail, me and my cousin Frank did really hear it get silent") can make people close one or two eyes on the situation, compared to: "We just wanted to film how it looks like if you land on the road as it happened somebody else during an engine failure".
There will be no legal consequences for a pilot who makes a forced landing on a roadway, at least in the US. FAR 91.3(b) gives the pilot in command of an aircraft the authority to break any rule they need to in an emergency.

I don't know how you see it, but having a camera installed in the wing that watches the engine is a tiny bit strange. It did not point at the door, as it would be if you use this camera for filming parachuters leave your plane. Also this plane is pretty much the wrong type for parachuting.
The camera is far from "watching the engine." It's pointing pretty much straight ahead, and the engine happens to be in its (rather wide) field of view.

How do you want to explain this? This "engine check camera" is standard feature on planes of this type?
If you would do less baseless conspiracy theorizing and more research you would have that answer. In the CBS interview I linked to, @3:31:
"Oh, and why was there a camera in the back of that..."
"We were on our way to Sun N' Fun, we were moving the plane there, and I figured it would be really fun to film our arrival into Lakeland Airport, because it's...*laughs* who knew?"

The external camera, I imagine, is a similar situation. It might also be permanently mounted. It's certainly not uncommon for kitbuilders to integrate cameras into the airplane. In any case, it's pretty evidently not an "engine check camera."

So you can see that something is wrong on your plane since you can't hear the engine fail because of the loud engine noise in the cabin?
Now I'm inclined to think you're trolling. If the engine fails, you can hear it failing, as is quite evident in that video.

Also, I don't think you realize how dire the consequences for a flight school faking an accident would be. They would most probably loose their license if the word ever got out.
I don't think that this was a flight school plane, given that it's not legal to give instruction in an experimental-homebuilt airplane, unless the person receiving the instruction is the owner. It would be nice if we could figure out what specific plane this is and maybe find some pictures of it, but I haven't found any details to that regard.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,861
Reaction score
1,528
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
The camera is far from "watching the engine." It's pointing pretty much straight ahead, and the engine happens to be in its (rather wide) field of view.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the center of the camera FOV is not straight ahead, it is also too far angled to be just misaligned.

The question is not, if there could be a complicated, hypothetical reason why this camera is there. Or why a camera was filming the crew at the same time. They are there. As they are, they are positioned for filming the action. There are countless reasons why they could be there, but only one that has no "hypothetical entities":

What about the whole stunt being done for a movie or TV production? Thought of it? ;) Ok, the name of the production would still be a hypothetical entity. But the available pieces fit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top