FLYING LESSONS Weekly

FLYING LESSONS for January 11, 2024

Download this report in a pdf.

FLYING LESSONS uses recent mishap reports to consider what might have contributed to accidents, so you can make better decisions if you face similar circumstances.  In most cases design characteristics of a specific airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents—but knowing how your airplane’s systems respond can make the difference in your success as the scenario unfolds. So apply these FLYING LESSONS to the specific airplane you fly.  Verify all technical information before applying it to your aircraft or operation, with manufacturers’ data and recommendations taking precedence.  You are pilot in command and are ultimately responsible for the decisions you make.     

FLYING LESSONS is an independent product of MASTERY FLIGHT TRAINING, INC.

This week’s LESSONS:

We’ve heard a lot this week about doors opening in flight. But while a door (or “door plug”) separating from a passenger cabin during high-speed pressurized flight is an extreme hazard by itself, there are many lesser “door opening in flight” events that are dangerous only if the pilot responds in a way that makes it dangerous. Take for example this event that also happened this week (from an FAA preliminary incident report):

Most experts teach flying a normal pattern when a door opens after the airplane is airborne, then landing and securing the door. In most low-wing airplanes—Bonanzas among them—suction over the wing pulls the door outward while the slipstream pushes it inward, resulting in the door riding slightly open at equilibrium between the forces acting on it. In some airplane types—Bonanzas not among them—it works to open a pilot-side vent window, put the airplane into a steep slip and then secure the door. Or at least some Pilot’s Operating Handbooks (POHs) suggest this is possible, I’ve never tried.  

Regardless of airplane type, there are two larger issues here. Some events, such as engine failure immediately after takeoff, require an immediate response. Single or twin, at low altitude the best, most survivable response is to push the nose down to maintain airspeed and angle of attack and hold wings-level heading primarily with rudder to avoid asymmetric aileron drag and its increased likelihood of a low-altitude snap roll. 

An unlatched door, however, usually leaves the airplane controllable with only somewhat degraded climb performance. The loud “pop” might sound like an engine explosion, so it’s up to the pilot to make a quick initial diagnosis or at least rule out catastrophic engine failure. Other possibilities, including bird strikes (and the growing number of drone strikes) might also sound similar, leaving the pilot to assess aircraft controllability. 

The first LESSON from this initial report (which, unless the damage is determined to be “substantial” per the NTSB 830 definition:

…is to react properly and immediately in the event of engine failure, but react correctly and deliberately to any other sudden event. To be ready and able to do this requires training in emergencies, optimally supplemented by Aviation Training Device or simulator emergency and abnormal indications training. And it takes forethought, considering your response before every takeoff to refresh yourself on your reaction to sudden events, engine related and not.

The second LESSON is the whole idea of “runway remaining.” We usually consider “runway remaining” in the context of retractable gear airplanes, i.e., “retract the landing gear when there is no usable runway remaining.” The idea is to leave retractable landing gear down until it’s of no use to you during engine failure. 

This means you’ll have to keep the runway in sight during your initial climb, continually evaluating not only the amount of runway remaining ahead of you but also your height above that runway, and if you could push and hold now and still get stopped on the remaining runway. That’s no easy task. One way might be to adopt something similar to the balanced field concept. Although a balanced field is not necessarily the same as a multiengine airplane’s accelerate/stop distance, it is similar: the runway distance required to accelerate to takeoff speed, lose one engine at that precise moment (while still on the ground), and then, using maximum braking and reverse trust if available, come to a complete stop.  

Note that every POH, Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) or Owner’s Manual I’ve seen for retractable gear airplanes calls for gear retraction upon confirming a positive rate of climb. I’ve not seen any that suggest delaying retraction while “usable runway” remains, probably because of the difficulty of making that determination.

In the context of deciding whether there is sufficient runway remaining after a sudden event—engine failure, a door coming open, whatever—accelerate/stop distance and/or a balanced field length runway doesn’t answer the question. Both those calculations, if you have data to compute them, assume the event that prompts a rejected takeoff (RTO) happens on the ground

More usable information might come from computing the airplane’s takeoff obstacle clearance distance, which (if the pilot uses the handbook technique, in most POHs/AFMs essentially a short field takeoff) takes the airplane from the beginning of the ground roll to a point 50 feet above the runway at Best Angle of Climb (VX) speed, and adding the computed 50—foot obstacle clearance landing distance (starting from close to that same speed, and using short field landing technique and maximum braking). 

The result gives an estimate of taking off, having a sudden event immediately after liftoff (in most airplanes 50 feet is less than two wingspans above the ground) and then landing and coming to a stop. This is valid only if you use short field takeoff and landing techniques including maximum braking on landing—use more “normal” techniques and you’ll need some unknown, longer runway length. And it only works in the initial seconds after taking off, when you’re not yet climbed two wingspans into the air. Even if you’re a “positive rate, gear up” pilot in retractable gear airplanes, if you actually confirm a positive rate of climb you’ll probably be 50 feet in the air by the time you make that confirmation. 

Back to the report that prompts this week’s LESSONS. It may well have been that landing immediately was the best option for the pilot of the accident airplane, even knowing it would take the airplane off the end of the runway—we don’t know the full circumstances. Given this will may not meet the “substantial damage” reporting requirement there probably will be no further public investigation and we’ll never know more than we do right now. 

This event does remind us, however, that if we’re making a decision whether there’s runway remaining to land ahead of us, for whatever reason, it’s not as easy to make that determination as you might think. And short of using POH/AFM data to find the sum of takeoff and landing distances over a 50-foot obstacle, providing usable data for only the first seconds of flight and requiring maximum performance technique every time to be able to use that sum in this way, there is no performance data from which to decide. 

So unless you’re making a full-length takeoff from a very long runway, if you experience a sudden event shortly after takeoff and the airplane is still capable of powered flight, your best response is probably to continue to fly, make a normal pattern and then land to resolve the problem.

Questions? Comments? Supportable opinions? Let us know at m[email protected]

Debrief

Readers write about recent FLYING LESSONS:

Reader Chris Kirk of Wild Blue Aircraft Sales writes about last week’s LESSONS on avoiding runway and taxiway incursions:

You’re right. Last week I warned of distraction from using aviation technology while taxiing—including use of georeferenced taxi diagrams—but I did not mention the hazards of cell phones, text messaging and other nonaviation devices. Going “airplane mode” with phones, texts, onboard video cameras and such, whether literally (turn them off) or at least practically (ignore them) should be part of your pre-start briefing as well. Good reminder, Chris.

Reader/instructor Brian Sagi adds:

That holds true whether or not multiple pilots are aboard—if in doubt, ask. Multiple pilots aboard an aircraft, in whatever capacity, gives us an opportunity to improve safety if we clearly define each pilot’s roles before flight and then effectively communicate until after engine shutdown. Any time there’s doubt, clarify. Thank you, Brian.

Reader/instructor John Rosenberg takes us back to earlier LESSONS which suggest the wisdom of making forced landings gear up as a standard operating procedure (SOP), with putting the wheels down being an exception only under optimal circumstances. John asks:

My opinion is tempered with my focus on light airplanes (by FAA definition, less than 12,500 pounds maximum weight). This is different from our previous discussion about off-airport landings with engine failure and the danger of attempting to extend a glide if barely able to make it to a runway.

If I have a situation where one or more gear leg is not fully down and I cannot get them fully down, but I still have engine power and an otherwise controllable airplane, if possible I’ll retract all the gear and make a controlled gear-up landing. This is to avoid a high speed, sudden change in direction upon landing or even cartwheeling the airplane, both extremely hazardous to survivability of persons on board. 

But I’ll open the question to FLYING LESSONS readers with experience in heavier airplanes. What do your manuals and your training suggest? Is the recommended response different if it’s a main gear leg or a nosewheel that’s partly extended? Let me know the SOP in heavier airplanes.

More to say? Let us learn from you, at m[email protected]

Share safer skies. Forward FLYING LESSONS to a friend

Please help cover the ongoing costs of providing FLYING LESSONS through this

secure PayPal donations link.

Or send a check made out to Mastery Flight Training, Inc. at 247 Tiffany Street, Rose Hill, Kansas USA 67133. Thank you, generous supporters.  

Thank you to our regular monthly financial contributors:

And thanks to these donors for helping with the Mastery Flight Training website rebuild and FLW costs in 2023


Pursue Mastery of Flight

Thomas P. Turner, M.S. Aviation Safety 

Flight Instructor Hall of Fame Inductee

2021 Jack Eggspuehler Service Award winner

2010 National FAA Safety Team Representative of the Year 

2008 FAA Central Region CFI of the Year

FLYING LESSONS is ©2024 Mastery Flight Training, Inc.  For more information see www.thomaspturner.com. For reprint permission or other questions contact m[email protected].  

Disclaimer

FLYING LESSONS uses recent mishap reports to consider what might have contributed to accidents, so you can make better decisions if you face similar circumstances. In most cases design characteristics of a specific airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents—but knowing how your airplane’s systems respond can make the difference in your success as the scenario unfolds. Apply these FLYING LESSONS to the specific airplane you fly.

Verify all technical information before applying it to your aircraft or operation, with manufacturers’ data and recommendations taking precedence. You are pilot in command, and are ultimately responsible for the decisions you make.