Light plane crashes

[3WE]

So Ken, do we ban all light planes? (Definitely an occasion for the italicized we.)

[kent olsen]

No we can't ban light planes but sometimes I wonder. Is it training or maybe maintenance. My first 12,000 hrs was flying light planes and I never had an emergency. A throttle cable that fell off once but nothing after that. I instructed all those years and engine failure and a forced landing was part of it. Then I got into jets and the training was all in the simulator. Again as an instructor I continued training for an emergency and planning for the insuing landing. How about a 4 engine failure, on downwind, and a landing. Energy management.

[BoeingBobby]

G*d help me please.

[Gabriel]

No we can't ban light planes but sometimes I wonder. Is it training or maybe maintenance. My first 12,000 hrs was flying light planes and I never had an emergency. A throttle cable that fell off once but nothing after that. I instructed all those years and engine failure and a forced landing was part of it. Then I got into jets and the training was all in the simulator. Again as an instructor I continued training for an emergency and planning for the insuing landing. How about a 4 engine failure, on downwind, and a landing. Energy management.

There are many more pilots that never crashed than those that did. Congratulations for being one of the former. Not exceptional to belong to a vast majority, but still.

[Evan]

G*d help me please.

I think G*d has left the forum.

[kent olsen]

The 4 engine out landing came from a friend at UPS. He was given a 3 engine out scenario and returned on 1 engine. Sooo, I asked for the same thing in my next sim session. Well you can't climb but was able to work my way back. Being the smart a** I am I said to my instructor "well that wasn't so bad I wonder about a "No" engine approach and of course that's what he gave me. Well that was in my DC-8 days. I enjoyed the challenge and so asked for it on all my subsequent pro checks, in the B-747, then when I went on and flew corporate in the Hawker 1000 and lastly in the Citation X. Energy management.

[Evan]

The 4 engine out landing came from a friend at UPS. He was given a 3 engine out scenario and returned on 1 engine. Sooo, I asked for the same thing in my next sim session. Well you can't climb but was able to work my way back. Being the smart a** I am I said to my instructor "well that wasn't so bad I wonder about a "No" engine approach and of course that's what he gave me. Well that was in my DC-8 days. I enjoyed the challenge and so asked for it on all my subsequent pro checks, in the B-747, then when I went on and flew corporate in the Hawker 1000 and lastly in the Citation X. Energy management.

Is it true that the DC-8 lacked speed brakes and therefore allowed you to deploy #2/#3 reversers in flight? Energy management question.

[BoeingBobby]

I almost did, but I didn't.

[Not_Karl]

And, MAKE NO MISTAKE, a bicycle FUBAR can kill you, too, or make you disappear from an obscure aviation forum for 19 days…

Fixed.

So Ken, do we ban all planes?

Fixed and yes.

[3WE]

The majority of aerial applicators I know have crashed. Thanks to tough airplanes, good harnesses, and maneuvering skills, they often survive.

[kent olsen]

Yes in the DC-8 both with the JT-8 and CFM engines you could reverse #2-3 in flight. The CFM was even more of a challenge to plan your descent as it had a higher in flight idle. After the first time you worked harder to plan your descent as the vibration was terrible. I never found out why they didn't use the roll/ground spoilers. All I could surmise was they where not at an optimal position on the wing.

[BoeingBobby]

Before I was at Atlas, flying under an Aspen call sign @ FL 800......

[Evan]

Yes in the DC-8 both with the JT-8 and CFM engines you could reverse #2-3 in flight. The CFM was even more of a challenge to plan your descent as it had a higher in flight idle. After the first time you worked harder to plan your descent as the vibration was terrible. I never found out why they didn't use the roll/ground spoilers. All I could surmise was they where not at an optimal position on the wing.

It brings up an interesting aspect on the DC-8 in terms of losing all engines, because without flight spoilers and with no engines turning, and thus no reversers either, you have no means to simultaneously slow the aircraft and lose altitude short of cross control or s-turns. So if you are preserving as much airspeed as possible (best glide) with inop or limited flaps (both engine hydraulics out) and need to land at Vref + 70 or something but you're too high to make the runway, it would seem to be disadvantageous to not have those speed brakes.

[BoeingBobby]

It brings up an interesting aspect on the DC-8 in terms of losing all engines, because without flight spoilers and with no engines turning, and thus no reversers either, you have no means to simultaneously slow the aircraft and lose altitude short of cross control or s-turns. So if you are preserving as much airspeed as possible (best glide) with inop or limited flaps (both engine hydraulics out) and need to land at Vref + 70 or something but you're too high to make the runway, it would seem to be disadvantageous to not have those speed brakes.

LANDING GEAR!

[kent olsen]

A friend of mine who was the Chief Test Pilot at Douglas told me an interesting story. Back when they were just building the DC-8 they where curious what would happen if the DC-8 exceeded the speed of sound. So he took it up to 45,000 ft, pushed it over and did about M1.14, as I remember. Everything held together. That was not for public consumption. He told me (just between the two of us) and faxed a conformation. That was back in the 90's. Good old airplane I really enjoyed flying.