What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Engine out patterns.

sailvi767

Well Known Member
I have finally reached the point where I feel like I can land a tail dragger at least 2 out of 3 times in a normal pattern!! Today I tried a couple of practice engine out approaches. I left the prop at 2700 RPM and simply pulled the throttle to idle.
I used a 270 degree navy flameout approach with High Key at 2200 feet agl and low key at 1200 feet agl. Seemed to work out well. High key was about 1/3 down the runway 90 degrees out to the runway heading. This seemed to work well and both approaches were easy and controllable. I am wondering what type of patterns others use for engine out work and if I decide to pull the mixture and try one with the engine off what considerations I should keep in mind.

George
 
I haven't tried the overhead pattern myself yet but have thought about it. I will add that if you need a bit more distance...try pulling that prop all the way out. You'd be amazed at how much drag you will lose, enabling a further glide.

Of course this should be practiced up at altitude the first few times. :)
 
I try to make all my patterns "engine out" patterns.

Meaning, that If I have to add power to make it over the trees at Goose Creek, I've messed up.

Abeam the numbers I pull the power all the way back (FP, so not much I can do with the prop.), put in all the flaps, trim for 65 mph (60 knots), and keep the pattern tight.

That way each flight ends in engine out practice.
 
I figure that if I'm at the point where I'm about to turn left base at about 800 feet AGL, I'm in good shape. So I try to give myself plenty of margin to that point and attempt to pick a field such that there's no doubt that I can get to that point.

I do favor close-in base legs. My Cessna 180 has a fairly steep glide ratio, perhaps similar to the RVs.

Dave
 
I do just what Bill does - try to be below 100 mph abeam numbers, pull power completely, drop full flaps, and expect to make the numbers. Sometimes I will do a break entry at 1000' agl, pull power 1/3 down the runway and just spiral in (dropping flaps when I get below Vfe).

greg
 
I try to make all my patterns "engine out" patterns.

Meaning, that If I have to add power to make it over the trees at Goose Creek, I've messed up.

Abeam the numbers I pull the power all the way back (FP, so not much I can do with the prop.), put in all the flaps, trim for 65 mph (60 knots), and keep the pattern tight.

That way each flight ends in engine out practice.

I sure wish modern flight training generally reflected this practice. Most new pilots I see that are a product of a flight school would have real trouble landing a Cherokee on a 3000' runway if their engine quit right over the airport.
 
When I was in flight training with the military we did a 360 degree recovery with a High Key, Low Key and Final Key. High Key was 5000' ,runway heading. Over the numbers you would start your turn to Low Key, which was abeam the numbers. Final Key was as you were turning final for landing. I haven't tried this in an RV yet (I'm only at the empennage stage :) ) but this is going to be my preferred method of recovery (apart from the Overhead Break). I'll have to adjust the altitudes, speeds, and configuration for the RV as I learned this in a Texan 2 (pretty much a Pilatus PC-9)

Cheers

Chris
 
Ditto on the 360 recovery and adjusting altitudes...if you find yourself at 5000ft high-key in an RV you'll be making at least 2 probably 3 circles :)
 
Great practice

I think it's really great practice to be able to pull the power on the down wind an land the airplane. Everyone should be quite adept at that. Remember also side and forward slips are your friends when you're "high and tight". Generally when I practice power out patterns, I head directly for the numbers and adjust altitude by slipping as required.

My problem is that my home base is a very busy airport (KTTN), and I'm always being asked to extend my down wind, or do a 360 on down wind for separation etc.. Proficiency with power management in the pattern is also important.
 
We were up today with light traffic and made 5 simulated forced landings. Great practice so see the effects of flaps and slipping and from how far out you can make it. Gives you a good chance to go through emergency procedure motions, throwing the right switches, checking mixture, switching tanks etc.

Highly recommended that you practice this stuff a least once a month. Won't be such a shock if it happens for real.
 
Remember also side and forward slips are your friends when you're "high and tight".

I'd love to see these useless, confusing, and annoying distinctions eradicated from the aviation lexicon. :rolleyes: BTW, what's the difference between the two if you're high? What kind of slip are you doing if you're losing altitude AND aligning for x-wind touchdown? Actually, don't answer that. :) Do you do a "side-turn" or a "forward-turn" when you establish a crab angle in a x-wind? :) End micro rant...
 
Thanks for the posts. I do try and fly a tight pattern but on the aircraft I purchased you have to carry some power to prevent popping on the engine. I know it does not hurt anything buts its annoying. The aircraft has very short exhaust stacks for speed so you have to crack the engine just off idle just a bit to quiet things down. I also prefer knowing I can make the runway if needed should the engine take a vacation! The high key type pattern is more for a enroute engine failure.
The other issue of course is that in flying the regular pattern I like in the RV you have to be solo in the pattern. I can get 2 or 3 times as many landings alone in the pattern as I can with a single 172 sharing. The size of patterns being taught in training today certainly seem larger then I remember. I have no idea why you need a 1 to 3 mile final in a Cessna! You could take a nap on the long final! Lets not even get into the fuel costs per landing.
I am doing the engine out work so I have a good frame of reference if its ever needed for real. I considered a 360 degree pattern some mention using and also used that in the Navy. The 270 option appeals to me just a bit more because I feel I can scan the landing area better in the RV6 checking wind ect.. In RV8 the 360 might be preferred. Both patterns are used by Naval aircraft depending on the aircraft type. High key in a A-4 was 7000 feet AGL for the 270 degree option!!!
Still wondering how much different the glide ratio would be with the engine shut down verses idle with the prop at 2700 RPM. The aircraft really does give great control between the flaps and slipping so might not be that much of a issue. Next week if I can get a empty pattern I might bump things up 1000 feet and pull the mixture making a simulated approach with everything bumped up a 1000. If that goes well I will try a couple with the mixture pulled to a landing. I know there are varied opinions on if this is a good idea to actually pull the mixture in training but I will pick a long runway and perfect conditions.
Are there any engine considerations in pulling the mixture. I will off course insure its been properly cooled first. I know these might sound like basic questions but my piston engine experience is limited at best and I want to insure nothing I do can harm the engine. Any issues with restarts to be aware of when the mixture is pushed back in? Any lubrication issues with a engine windmilling but shut down? Oil pressure should be fine but there may be things I am not considering. I read another thread that advocated true engine out practice but can't find it with the search engine now. Thanks for all the help!!

George
 
George,

Don't let the "popping" influence how you fly the airplane... That's just what piston engines do.

Generally, (i.e. for this discussion) windmilling an engine will not hurt anything.

The same can be said for the decision to "pull the mixture" - 99.9% of the time it will restart as soon as the mixture goes back in. That said, simply be prepared to take her all the way to the ground if you do pull the red knob.

Before you take that step, you should try the SFO with the prop pulled all the way out (windmilling). It will be a dramatic difference from what you know now.
 
if I decide to pull the mixture and try one with the engine off what considerations I should keep in mind.
You'll almost certainly need higher key altitudes with mixture pulled than you do at idle. The place to figure this out is at altitude, not close to the ground. Do several patterns at altitude, with engine at idle, and the same airspeeds and bank angles as you used at the airport. Note the altitude loss from high key until you are on final. Now try again with the mixture pulled, and note how much more altitude is lost. Adjust key altitudes as required.
 
George,

Take it to Statesville, not 14A. Set your touchdown point as the middle of the runway. That way, if you are short, you won't have to restart. Same thing if you are long, you will still have plenty of room.

The wind can be a problem coming over the trees at 14A. Not to mention the issue of landing up or down hill.
 
A different approach.....

Some years ago, I undertook an 'Advanced Flight Safety (Low Level) course with a CFI here in AUSTRALIA called Graeme Boatman. He taught a simple and what was for me a most effective way to get into any paddock, ALA or if your lucky enough a main road etc. Once you've completed all your checks etc, confirmed engine is dead, with landing area identified, approach into it directly all the while sitting on the final approach side.

The trick is to use 'S' turns to delay arrival, coupled with side slipping etc to establish an appropriate approach, all the time basically remaining on what would normally be your Final Approach. You can descend most aircraft pretty quickly when you need to even if your holding a couple of thousand feet above the field to begin with using the above technique. Doing a circuit using the old high key, low key etc, is just more prone to miss judgement for almost all pilots. Once your height is 'visually' judged to be right for final, the landing area is commited to though you have had a bunch more time to judge headwind, look for powerpoles, wires etc all the time basically staying over the same point until it is looking correct in your field of view. Having learnt and used both ways, I use the simpler approach all the time now with confidence. Here in Australia we certainly don't have the number of built-up areas that you guys do over there, however the technique works what every options your luck ends up giving you.

Main thing, learn how to fly your plane slow, to best L/D and also know how it flies, 'drops' once you get below this.:)

Cheers, Greg
 
George,

Take it to Statesville, not 14A. Set your touchdown point as the middle of the runway. That way, if you are short, you won't have to restart. Same thing if you are long, you will still have plenty of room.

The wind can be a problem coming over the trees at 14A. Not to mention the issue of landing up or down hill.


Bill, I agree, I don't do any training at 14A. They also don't want the noise there.

George
 
Some years ago, I undertook an 'Advanced Flight Safety (Low Level) course with a CFI here in AUSTRALIA called Graeme Boatman. He taught a simple and what was for me a most effective way to get into any paddock, ALA or if your lucky enough a main road etc. Once you've completed all your checks etc, confirmed engine is dead, with landing area identified, approach into it directly all the while sitting on the final approach side.

The trick is to use 'S' turns to delay arrival, coupled with side slipping etc to establish an appropriate approach, all the time basically remaining on what would normally be your Final Approach. You can descend most aircraft pretty quickly when you need to even if your holding a couple of thousand feet above the field to begin with using the above technique. Doing a circuit using the old high key, low key etc, is just more prone to miss judgement for almost all pilots. Once your height is 'visually' judged to be right for final, the landing area is commited to though you have had a bunch more time to judge headwind, look for powerpoles, wires etc all the time basically staying over the same point until it is looking correct in your field of view. Having learnt and used both ways, I use the simpler approach all the time now with confidence. Here in Australia we certainly don't have the number of built-up areas that you guys do over there, however the technique works what every options your luck ends up giving you.

Main thing, learn how to fly your plane slow, to best L/D and also know how it flies, 'drops' once you get below this.:)

Cheers, Greg


I absolutely agree with this approach which is what we use and practice. The high key approach is too sterilized and perhaps unrealistic in the real world when an engine can fail at any time. Certainly in my real engine out situation a few years back setting up a conventional approach was not realistic and I too think there is far more room for miscalculation.

With a direct head to approach, it is easy to see if you'll make the field as you can tell if the field is slipping up or down in the windshield. Getting rid of altitude is easy, getting it back is impossible. We can come down at 2500 fpm with full flaps and lots of sideslip if need be. We use slips to modulate altitude until making the field is certain, then use flaps if we need to lose more or check speed.
 
For those of us not familiar with the military terminology, please explain the "High Key" , "Low Key" stuff....

Glenn Wilkinson
 
As a civilian trained pilot, my understanding of the high key process is that is is used when you arrive at the landing airport with "plenty" of altitude, and then spiral down to the high key position. If you manage to arrive exactly "at" the airport and your high key position at the same time, you are extremely lucky and/or really pushing your luck.

JMO, but if you have the altitude to spare, then the high key process has considerable merit. If you are trying desperately to stretch your glide to a distant cornfield however, then I think you just do the best you can with a straight in.
 
High Key and Low Key are simply checkpoints to determine how your approach is going. Normally in a 270 degree pattern High key is 1/3 down the runway crossing it at at 90 degree angle. Low Key is usually abeam the intended touchdown point or basically your normal abeam the numbers point. There is a lot of merit in a straight in approach however if I have the altitude I have a personal preference for the High key entry. The spiral approach allows for a tremendous change in touchdown point with a simple bank angle change. If your to low its easily correctable. It also gives you a excellent view of the intended landing area if off airport to check for obstacles ect.
If your doing a straight in once you are to low with the aircraft in best glide configuration you have no ability to make a correction to reach the runway. A well thought out straight in approach would off course mitigate this by insuring you stay high until the runway is made and then use slipping, S turns and flaps to hit your intended touchdown point. Personally I intend to practice both since each has merits and one or the other may be a better option depending on circumstances.

George
 
For those of us not familiar with the military terminology, please explain the "High Key" , "Low Key" stuff....

Glenn,

The idea is that there are several "key" altitudes in the engine-out pattern that, if achieved, will determine if you can continue as planned -- or if you'll have to either extend/shorten the pattern, or delay/expedite configuring, or slip. Here's a basic diagram:

http://stm.laartcc.org/Special+Military+Procedures

In the military, High Key is often directly over the touchdown point (which is a point 1/3 to 1/2 of the way down the runway), on the runway heading. Low Key is abeam the touchdown point on a tight downwind.

The key points could also be at any number of any other locations around a field, depending on how you are approaching it. You can mentally "unroll" the pattern to point in any direction, and still use key altitudes to help you judge your energy state.

For instance, if you find yourself low at the High key, you could plan to turn base earlier, thus "cutting the corner." You could also delay flap extension (or delay gear extension in some airplanes).

Or, if you're high at Low key, you could delay the base turn slightly, slip the plane, perform an S-turn, or put the flaps down slightly earlier.

The idea is to have a standard engine-out pattern "overlay" in your mind, which you compare to what you are actually seeing, and make corrections based on factual altitudes and positions, not feelings or guesses.

The key altitudes are based on the gliding capabilities of each specific aircraft type, at a very specific airspeed, using a standard bank angle for all turns, and a standard wind condition (say, 10 knots down the runway). If conditions are very different from whatever standards are used, then some corrections must be made.

The best way to derive the all the factors for your airplane is to do some repetitive testing yourself. (You can get the numbers from someone else who's already done it, of course, but it's fun to test your own airplane and it's great practice.)
 
Last edited:
Standard forced landing patterns with key altitudes work great when you know the altitude of the ground. If you are on a cross country flight in something other than flat land, you might not know the altitude of your chosen field accurately enough to make good use of key altitudes. So, no matter what your approach to forced landing patterns is, you should do lots of practice without staring too closely at the altimeter.
 
Reading this highly educational thread has reminded me that I haven't really done any simulated engine-out work since I started renting an Archer a couple months ago. Tomorrow I will be remedying that situation.

:)
 
Back
Top