Quote:
Originally Posted by jynxyjoe  If it is a control surface failure you arn't gonna go far after V1. Typical brief is to mention that if you can't get it off the ground safely due to control malfunctions you won't go flying. It is a part of my brief every day anyhow.
Back to the engine failure.
First I wanna say that you're are thinking about the problem and that is a credit to qualities as a pilot. I don't agree with you here so much but maybe time and math will prove me wrong. With that said, onto the engine failure:
I'd be curious if the engine failure had to do with all the oil pouring out of the engine due to some mechanic not putting on the cap (watched it happen the aircraft in front of me). Awesome when you dump all that oil on the tires and those brakey things connected to the wheely things (on a turboprop). Lose an engine past V1 go in the air, do your procedures, come back and land, and the best part will be now you have the whole 11,000ft of runway (-1000 for touchdown), maybe the wind will knock a little of that oil off on the approach so you don't have to burn so much runway lightly touching the brakes trying to burn off the oil from your discs. Trust your SOP's. I would even encourage you to blindly follow your SOP's because both companies I've been at, the SOP's tell you on the first page that the SOP's can't forsee every eventuality. By making something up when a new/different suitation comes up you ARE following SOP's. For the situations that are spelled out in the SOP's, like a simple engine failure, follow the procedures. |
Very very very very very good points. Nothing I can really argue with there, glad to see too that your brief includes it. 11,000' vs. 8,000' is a very good argument for it, though I wonder if it is a good idea to bring the airplane in the air just out of the very nature of accidents (e.g. a list of things going wrong that in their compilation become catastrophic). I dunno, engine failures are pretty simple and straight forward compared to the myriad of other possibilities that can occur in an emergency, and should typically be followed to the letter, but even then sometimes I wonder.
Example:
Dutch harbor, spooky place. The problem is that 3900' doesn't really give you that many options. Do you take off into weather that changes so rapidly that you might no longer have a place to land? or do you mash on the brakes and risk flying off into the drink. In that case I pick fly, because you can pull fuel out of the other tank and get to PACD, PAKN, or PADL, if all of those are closed you've still got illiamna and anchorage if you've got the fuel. However, if you're doing the same thing out of Kodiak, you're shafting yourself, because even though there's an ILS, the wx might go below mins before you can get back around. Plus, there's a lot of terrain that can make things challenging, no radar, and brutal violent winds, and in winter months terrible icing. Now, granted, at PADQ, you've only got 7500' of runway on 25, so you have to weigh that against the other options, but I've seen 40kts of wind there last winter on the GPS on short final, so you could use that too. None of these situations are favorable, even coming back around at ADQ and shooting the ILS isn't really a good option, you'd have to go out, then join the arc, then come back around land through bad ice and brutal winds with a full load with less directional control on a windy runway than usual, and thus more chance for fire if you rupture your tanks in a botched landing. Plus, you have to land, because with the special approach I don't know if I'd want to go missed with the mountain at the end of the runway.
Lots of stuff to think about.
Notice the mountain at the end of runway 25 (the only runway with an ILS, though granted its not that high)
