How often do SE IMC pilots practice limited panel/engine failure/PFL procedures?

Peter,

I agree that a BFR “syllabus” could well be the subject of another thread, but our disagreement about gliding in a Warrior just highlights the diversity of GA.

Some of us just want to do aeros, some use our airplanes like farm bikes or to visit friends and go to the beach for a quick dip, and some like to travel at high speed above the clouds. Some of us like to do all three and more besides. Likewise, each of us will have different idea of which emergencies to prepare for, and how to do it. In the “keys” case, I’d go as far as agreeing that it ought to have been covered, and if necessary objected to, in the instructor’s pre-flight brief.

I am totally in favour of PFLs but not switching off the ignition, even without pulling out the key. It is

• bad risk management (switch failure, etc)
• risk of shock cooling (the bill for cracked cylinders will appear much later so “it’s OK” because it will never come back to “you”)
• can be adequately simulated by setting the engine to slightly above idle
• likely to make the “student” sh*t himself (I have 2k hrs and it would make me sh* myself for sure; I would demand the key goes right back instantly and would never get into the same plane with that person) so nullifying the educational value… only a timid (or intimidated) student would accept this situation and proceed with the forced landing
• something I would do as a PIC if I had a gun to my head with a request to crash into some building
• likely to damage or even blow right up the exhaust (most instructors won’t know about the unburnt mixture issue) so there is a risk of an in-flight fire especially if there is a fuel or oil leak under the cowling somewhere (think a “30 year old rental plane” as usually found)
• while – as this thread illustrates – opinions vary, the person pulling out the key risks alienating a lot of people because this is way outside any normal procedure

Of the last five Cirrus CAPS releases, four were about engine failures (three fuel related) … and except loss of control (see NTSB statistics) engine failure is always among the most likely reasons for emergency landings.

While there’s a lot of things to practice and learn – and engine failure stays the most scary and dangerous scenario, and i think there is very good reason to practice exactly that.

For obvious reasons we don’t practice them in the Cirrus, but in the Piper, and in the Cessna, we always do them. And we do them in a realistic way to below 500 ft AGL. And before anybody wants to prosecute me (;-)) – i get a waiver for that from the local CAA branch office.

Of the last five Cirrus CAPS releases, four were about engine failures (three fuel related)

So, only one was an engine failure.

What actually happened?

Flyer59 wrote:

Ok, without the key part :-).

But that’s the important point.

I don’t think it is necessarily reckless to stop the engine of a SEP when doing a PFL. But taking the key out of the lock is another thing – it doesn’t add any educational value and will greatly increase the risk of not getting the engine started again.

Peter wrote:

Then look at notams. Most PPLs here don’t check notams. I was never taught (2000-2001) anything about notams. Admittedly that was pre-internet, but I am a “young pilot” compared to most of the flying community.

Ah, the good old days (80’s, 90’s) when you got the bulk of NOTAMs by mail every week. Then you had to call the ARO by phone to get any additional NOTAMs that had appeared since the last mailing.

I have 2k hrs and it would make me sh* myself for sure

You contradict yourself. If you “sh* yourself” with the engine turned off but not with the engine pulled to idle, then the latter is by definition not an adequate simulation of an engine failure.

Also, if you’re so worried about your ignition switch you must have a fairly crappy plane and should probably better stay on the ground…

I don’t see the big risk, but you are right, Airborne. I don’t do that anymore. Personally i find many things pilots do much riskier (like flying through icing conditions without proper anti/deicing equipment)

(A CRI can not only do class ratings, but BFRs aswell, and teach the ratings he has himself, except IFR, of course.

In the context of an emergency landings all scenarios in which the engine stops (especially at low altitudes) are “engine failures”.

Only two are completely clear at this moment, both ran one tank dry …

You contradict yourself. If you “sh* yourself” with the engine turned off but not with the engine pulled to idle, then the latter is by definition not an adequate simulation of an engine failure.

It’s a matter of

• instantly implementing standard measures (alt air + fuel pump)
• instantly implementing a glide to somewhere (that takes longer than one might expect especially if you have conflicting instrument indications)
• determining whether what happened is probably “final”

Once you know it’s final, you can focus on a landing, and accept the plane may be wrecked. I have no intention of wrecking my plane on a 2-yearly check flight.

both ran one tank dry …

You mean they pulled the chute, instead of switching tanks?