Training Options

[Mark McConaughy]

Flying multi-engine airplanes IFR is not difficult but you really need to look and plan ahead more than when flying VFR.
When you look at the Practical Test Standard (PTS) for the multi-engine/instrument check ride you will notice there is no requirement to demonstrate a single engine go around let alone a single engine missed approach. Why? Because the FAA for a number of years paid out a lot of money when airplanes were bent doing this maneuver. It is probably the most, or one of the most dangerous maneuvers you can do in a Multi-engine airplane.

The first thing to look at is what the owner's manual says about single engine performance. There are numbers in the book, but how accurate are they. Keep in mind those numbers were computed by the manufacture's engineering staff. Did anyone go out in an airplane and see if these numbers were correct. NO!

What is the single engine climb requirement for a multi-engine Part 23 airplane? There is none if the aircraft does not have a gross weight of 6,000 lbs. or more. If it is over 6000 pounds gross, weight all it is required to do is show a positive rate of climb on one engine. It is not until you get to Part 25 airplanes (gross weight in excess of 12,500 lbs.) that they must actually demonstrate that the airplane will do what the performance numbers in the book say it will do. Moreover, even in that case it is done in a brand new airplane tweaked to the max with an extremely proficient test pilot who knows it's going to happen.

Should you find yourself one dark and lonely night when the weather is basically crud (feel free to insert your own favorite expletive) and now one of your engines has decided this is the day to swallow a piston, what do you do now?

Things you need to consider. A look at the regulations involved would be appropriate. (Better now than when it happens).

Section 91.3: Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

Section 91.7: Civil aircraft airworthiness.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

Ok, what does all that mean? Well the first thing it means is that you are no longer number 27 for the approach. By uttering the magic phrase “I’m declaring an emergency”, you now have number one priority over everybody. (More on when to declare an emergency later). ATC will now do there level best to give you everything you need.
However, one of the things to consider is FAR 91.7(b), which in part says, “The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur”.

Ok, what does that mean? Well in the case of a twin-engine airplane it means land as soon as possible at the nearest suitable airport. Note it does not say the nearest airport. Consider if you were 8000 ft. the weather is 600 ft and two miles visibility, and your 2 miles from a 3000 ft paved runway with obstructions and no weather reporting and a NDB-A approach that does not line up with a particular runway, and 40 miles away from a large airport with 10,000 ft runways and Cat III ILS approaches to each one of them and of course weather reporting.

Which one would you use? Are you really going to descend to minimums on one engine with weather at minimums (maybe) and hope you will get in? Continuing on to the large airport with the weather such as it is will be easy to get into. You cannot do a CAT III approach but it is what goes with the CAT III approach. Approach lights that make it almost certain you will find the runway. In the opinion of most in the FAA, you would certainly be within your rights to continue to the airport with the 10000 ft. runways.

Now for the go around. There are a myriad of considerations. What’s the density altitude, how heavy are you, is it raining, is it wet, or ice on the runway. However, the big consideration is the available power (or lack of it) that is the big consideration. My personal rule in Part 23 airplanes is that if I leave the Final Approach Fix I consider that I am committed to land. The absolutely dismal performance of most light twins makes that decision for you. (and airplanes make lousy decisions) If you descend to minimums at the airport with the 3000 ft. runway and more to the point the obstructions and decide to miss, are you going to be clear of the obstructions on the climb out maybe, maybe not? At the big airport, you have two miles plus to go before you have to worry about any obstructions. Those are some of the considerations and this is kind of the thought process that is going to keep you out of trouble.

About declaring an emergency, look at the airlines. Those people will declare an emergency at the drop of a hat. Why, because that gets your new best friend, the air traffic controller, on your side and you are now his number one concern. The controller will move heaven and earth to get you what you need. In most air traffic facilities if an aircraft declares and emergency the supervisor will immediately move the rest of the traffic to another controller so you have at least one controller looking out for you. And yes Virginia I can hear all those people saying that now the FAA will be down your throat trying to violate you and you’ll have to fill out a report for the FSDO (under part 91 only if they request it). I’m here to tell you that my personal experience has been that if you declare an emergency, yes the Feds are going to look at it. Unless you’ve done something stupid, you are not going to have a problem, and if you did, there probably going to find out anyway. Over the years I’ve seen several people violated for not declaring an emergency, but I’ve never seen anyone violated for declaring an emergency when they genuinely thought they had a problem. The second question is what do you say when they ask if you need the equipment (Crash Trucks). with the airline guys the answer is always yes. My answer is always yes. Oh! But it will upset my passengers, or I don’t want to bother them. Consider this, airport firefighters are like Maytag repairmen. I use to teach a class for airport firefighters talking about emergencies from a pilot’s point of view. The interesting thing they always told me was they absolutely feel sick when they are called out and see the emergency aircraft coming over the fence as they clear the firehouse door. Many said that they would rather run 100 times for nothing than miss being at the side of the runway when you need them. They say that if there is a post crash fire your chances of them being able to get you out alive go way down. After all, with the size of aircraft we are talking about they can knock the fire down in no time. Not only will this give you and your passengers a much better chance of getting out alive you may save significant damage to your aircraft.

Well sorry for the sermon but if you’re going to drive multi-engine airplanes IFR; these are a few of the things I think you might want to consider.