Blanco

Amazing. We don't even know what caused this accident and you guys are redesigning the Navajo fuel system

Instead, maybe the focus of the discussion should be basic multi engine airmanship and the ability to FLY THE AIRPLANE when one quits. Fly first, fix second. This airplane was nowhere near heavy, yet couldn't make the airport 20 miles away. And It appears that neither engine was feathered.

N9373M

Was on the floor just about a foot from the rudder pedals. "Seasoned" guys with a gut (like me) would have to unbuckle, slide the seat back to get to it. Also, to switch tanks, you'd go thru the "off" position!

Many folks built a tool - sort of a "T" handle with prongs to move the lever, avoiding the unbuckle, slide seat dance. I was wary, as I felt I would lose the tactile feel of the L-OFF-R detents.

The POH (all 20 pages) called for 1 hour on one tank, switch and run the other tank dry, then switch back.

Cubdriver

Thanks JB and Blanco, this discussion got back on track again. Yes airmanship is where we pilots can do our best to compensate for weaknesses in aircraft design and human factors of which we know there are many. I often force myself to think through detailed engine out scenarios since that is the most dangerous risk I face, and how I am going to deal with it. That takes a lot of mental effort, and obviously the plan is never to even need it. But not planning for that terrible day is like sticking your head in the sand, and frankly in all my years of flying I have never seen a subject as routinely glossed over as engine outs. At best a student gets a few demos and maybe 3 minutes of discussion. Training should accompany linear thinking about the subject, because there is no standard scenario that any standardized program can teach.

When that engine or two engines quit, you will need to almost instantly answer all these questions.

• Do I try for an airfield? What's nearby? What's the light control frequency there, and how high is the ground? Or else try for a highway then? Which one? Or a grass field? What about a small lake?
• How far can I glide from here? How do I estimate that?
• What configuration do I need to be in to get optimum range?
• How much time should I spend talking to ATC versus other things?
• Is a restart attempt worth it now?

I guarantee you most pilots, myself included, are not ready for this scenario in real life and usually botch the crap out of it. No matter how great we think we are the truth is when the engine goes boom most pilots just fly to the crash site. It does not have to be that way, but regular mental effort is the cost of that readiness.

TallFlyer

And your point is what, exactly?

So we void all older type certificates when something newer and better comes along? Ground all Navajos? Wait for the human factors fairy to come along and save you when an engine starts running rough? Require an SIC?

There are much more complicated aircraft out there being flown successfully, single pilot, everyday. This is not rocket science.

TallFlyer

That's a very good textbook, CFI answer. That wold get you past a CFI oral, no doubt. It's a very good survival mechanism for a private pilot who flies once every other month in an old 172. It's what we teach new private pilot because we don't want to go full on deer in the headlights if, God forbid, they have an issue on a solo flight.

For someone flying a complex aircraft every day for a living it's flat out wrong.

If your in a fuel injected piston engine aircraft and the engine stops making the noises you want it to make, the VERY FIRST THING that should come into your mind is one word:

FUEL!

Consider this thought exercise with me. In any piston aircraft there are four things that you must have for it to be operating:

1. Rotation: if the crankshaft isn't turning, there's nothing in the world you can do. If it stops in flight, either because the engine winds down and the crankshaft breaks, you're not getting it restarted. If it stops suddenly, pray the engine doesn't tear itself off the aircraft.
2. Spark: If a mag stops working, or is no longer turning, or a spark plug departs the aircraft (I've heard about tha first hand from other people,mill go right through the cowl), well, that's why we have two.
3. Air: In a normally aspirated, fuel injected aircraft, generally the only thing that will prevent air from getting in the engine is airframe ice, but if you have enough air on the airplane to stop the engine from inducting air you've got much bigger problems. On a turbo'd airplane, the turbo can stop working and the most you'll get out if is about 15". In a carbureted airplane, maybe you should think about carb heat first, the fuel.
4. Fuel: if you think about it, this is the only one we really have control over, unless we just run out completely. In the Navajo, or the cherokee, or a lot of other airplanes, switch tanks.

Loose any one of those 4 things, the engine stops. It's pretty simple. In a piston aircraft, 99% of the time, it's a fuel issue. If it's a fuel issue, and you have multiple tanks, switch tanks, boost pumps on.

If you're head is so far up a textbook that you can't do that FIRST, well, have fun on your forced landing. In the NTSB report I'm sure they'll note your adherence to the private pilot PTS right next to the part where it says the engine ran fine on the test stand and there was pretty of fuel left in the airplane.

Cubdriver

In debate they call this ^ the straw man response where make it sound like an opponent is saying something they are not, in order to refute that rather than something they actually said. Sure, check the fuel knobs to see where they are, and IF you have time for a restart before ground meets airplane, and IF you suspect starvation was what originally killed the engines and it's likely to work, then by all means go for it. I would not attempt it if oil is coating the windscreen or a fire has begun or any of a number of other situations are going on. It's one option among several to weigh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

TallFlyer

Um, I'm just repeating your words, which I'll quote for you again:
In your own words, I have to consider "all these questions," "almost instantly."

So tell me Mr Human Factors, how many complex tasks can the human brain do simultaneously, and do well? Do the words "task saturation" mean anything to you? Perhaps you're able to have so many lofty thoughts while the airplane is starting to fall out of the sky, but for the rest of us mere mortals that's a prime recipe for a helmet fire.

Have you ever had an engine failure? We imagine them as big, dramatic events, like the oil on the windshield you talked about, etc, but the reality is most are slow moving, insidious events. An engine running out of fuel does not suddenly quit in a short amount of time. It looses a little power, starts running rough, etc. There is plenty of time to switch tanks, boost pumps on, and continue.

Now, why is that a good idea? According to one FAA Advisory Circular, fuel starvation and/or mismanagement accounted for "over 51%" of engine failures in piston engine aircraft between 1994 and 1996. So, speaking specifically of the Navajo, and assuming you actually made sure there was gas in it, with one quick technique we can quickly correct the problem that causes well over half of engine failures.

Or we can think lots of thoughts simultaneously.

Back to my earlier question, have you ever had an engine failure? I've had two. One was a PA32 in Alaska that sucked in a value, and that precipitated a chain of events that ended up with that engine grinding to a halt on the rollout in JNU. You can read more about that here if you want.

The other was a KL Navajo that lost exhaust air to the turbo on the left engine, and therefore would only make about 15" MP. I shut it down, went back to Denver, and 5 minutes after wheel stop I was back in another bird heading to MCK.

Both of those were somewhat tame events. The airplane kept flying. A different decision process in the first and I would've ended up off airport somewhere. I'm REALLY glad that didn't happen.

Aside from that, I've had a few (intentional and not) tanks run dry in both the PA32 and PA31. It definitely gets your attention, but it's also not cause for a helmet fire.

Look, I'm not putting myself out there as some super awesome pilot. But I did survive years of flying piston singles in AK, and 18 months of a Navajo at KL. All that has shown me that entering freak out mode the first moment something goes unexpected is not a recipe for success.

TallFlyer

Back to the original intent of the thread, this is what we know:

Since the last week of December Key Lime has had two accidents and one Metro Engine failure. We don't know much about the first one, but because I know the skill of the pilot involved I'm very curious to see what the NTSB digs up.

As to the Metro Engine Failure, stuff happens. Even Garrett engines fail occasionally.

As for the Navajo, fortunately the pilot walked away, but when the final report comes back I'd be very surprised if it wasn't fuel related, either not enough gas in the airplane when it left, or stupid pilot tricks with the fuel selectors, which is a really stupid simple system, from the perspective of the pilot.

I'm no math whiz, but quite honestly I don't see these three events happening in close succession as statistically significant. Stuff happens.

As a Key Lime Alum, would I recommend you go work there? It's really not the greatest company in the world. Kinda sucks sometimes, but that has more to do with the schedule than anything else. They do push you, and they'll blame UPS for it. Say no too many times, and well, figure it out. If it's legal, plan on going. If it's not legal, plan on departing to a different airport, then changing your destination enroute if the wx improves.

There are plenty of guys that started there as piston guys, moved into the Metro, then either moved on, or stayed for a while. If you want to live in Denver, 5 of their 6 piston runs would have you in DEN a fair amount of the time, but the schedule is pretty brutal. Very few of the Metro runs would give you significant time off in DEN. If you want to live in one of their outstations, a Metro run would have you there a lot. There are several senior guys with families in their outstation that will be there a while.

If you don't live in DEN and want to experience night freight (which in my opinion is a great way to make yourself a good IFR pilot), go to AmFlight.

JamesNoBrakes

Easier, maybe, but there's no reason you can't have a system that presents itself just as simply to the pilot, there are numerous examples.