If it happens soon enough and there's nowhere to land you might as well just choose the building you hate the most and send it (in simulators, I'm not advocating for acts of terrorism lol)
I'm just a glider pilot, but trading height for speed seems worth it for me. You keep the energy but are more maneuverable. Then do the turn at lower altitude. And don't insist on landing on the paved surface. Grass isn't all that bad.
You are very wrong. You need training on them you.. Not all EFATO Turnbacks are impossible turns. I learned them partial power from 400 feet agl. I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html and ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
the turn in the current thumbnail for this video is definitely impossible (to do safely). it depicts turning back to the runway so that the returning aircract is landing 90deg. across the runway, rather than lined up or nearly lined up with the runway.
@@julianbrelsford Also if you use shallow bank, you will go far away and then have to come back to the runway. It is a Vglide 45 Turnback. 45 bank at Vglide. But only if you climbed 700 fpm constant to 700 agl and wind over 7 knots. 7nots or more winds to push you back too.. That is the 777 No Power Turnback Rule i learned years ago from EmergencyLowManeuvering Channel.
Yes, I have done the impossible turn… in my sim. I was practicing an emergency landing on a runway, I overshot it and instinctively did the turn to go back to the runway. I stalled and crashed on the runway. It was a good thing it happened on a sim. I learned the lesson and will never attempt doing it in a real flight.
What kind of plane was it ? How much altitude did you have when you pulled the power or cut the engine ? How steep were your banks ? Were your turns coordinated ? Were you watching your airspeed in the turn ? Did your propeller feather if applicable ? How accurate is the flight dynamics of the sim ? A sim is a sim.
Interesting video, especially for me as a glider pilot. When the rope brakes during a winch-launch, we easily can fly the "impossible turn" - actually, the "impossible turn" is a well trained procedure for us. In case of a rope brake, we fly the impossible turn above an altitude of only 150 feet.
@@LarsLarsen77 I think, it is more about how the tun is performed. As a glider pilot, you fly the turn "vice versa", first you turn away from the center line of the runway, then you make a U-turn, and then, you are back at the ceneter line for the final. I think, that is the main piont making the turn "possible".
You're comparing a leaf to bowling ball. Powered aircraft have a much poorer glide ratio than a glider. In a Duo Discus, you'd actually have to stretch the turn out or fly ahead for a bit in order to lose enough altitude so that you wouldn't overshoot the runway making the turn. In a Bonanza, you'd slam into the ground before even getting around half way.
As with most things, I think proper training and practice is the key here. A game changer for me was when I got my multi-engine rating and was taught that an engine failure WILL happen on every takeoff, so decide and plan how you're going to handle it before every takeoff. I also realized that the 4 second reaction time doesn't fly well in a twin, cause in 4 seconds, you'll be augering into the ground in a twin. This taught me that I had to be preconditioned to react immediately to an engine at various altitudes. I took what I leaned getting my multi and began applying it to flying singles. I went out and practiced the maneuver several times at a safe altitude; leaning how best to accomplish it and establishing a minimum altitude with margin to begin with. I then flew to a quiet airport with a decent size runway surrounded by cow pastures and corn fields and near zero obstacles for a mile all directions and practiced it several more times. Finally, I practiced it at my home airport, which has few options for forced landings, and I continue to practice it a few times a year. I've since tried it in several different Cessna's and found that for me, it can work starting at 500 feet under most conditions. If it's hot or I'm heavy, then I make it 600 feet. The maneuver that works for me is: nose down immediately at power loss and roll into a 45° bank, hold Vy throughout the turn, once I'm headed towards the runway I roll wings level, pitch for best glide, lower the gear (if applicable), and maneuver and add flaps as necessary to land. Out of the dozens I've times I've practiced it in the least few years, I only came up short once, and even at that I would've easily made the grass beside the runway had I not elected to go-around. Another time, I made the runway handily, but used almost all of the mile long runway stopping when I had a 15-20 knot headwind on takeoff, so I now consider 15 knots a maximum. Before each takeoff I take a few seconds to decide if turning back is an option on this takeoff, what will be my minimum altitude, which direction I'll make the turn based on the winds etc. Sometimes it's just not the best option, like if I'm flying in a type that I've never practiced it in before. Even in a twin landing straight ahead is the only safe option sometimes. But some days at some airports, the "not so impossible" it might be the only good option.
Often the multi is really an extension of the straight ahead landing. You can “glide” a little further. Losing an engine off a high density altitude airfield and that other likely won’t get you back around. Startle factor may put you below Vmc hence you need to pull power on the good while getting nose down to get back above Vmc, then increase the good but it may not be enough poop. Straight aheads with multies are still good options; don’t let the second engine preclude consideration of straight ahead. Now with this, check out James McClaran Allen on Medium with his piece regarding Light Twins Spins. The other pieces are pretty good aviation safety bits too.
Some WW2 airfields used to have a "forward landing field" for bombers that could not make the climb fully loaded (e.g. if an engine was misfiring). Instead many small airfields have "suburbia" upwind of the runway so there is not a lot of choice for a safe place to land unless there's a park or a freeway you can line up on. A bunch of sports fields would be fine, but no-one seems to care to do anything about it.
Another factor I rarely hear mentioned is that if there is any crosswind, it is best to make the turn into the wind. This minimizes your runway offset at the completion of the 180 and thus the amount of additional maneuvering you will have to do to line up with the runway. In a strong enough crosswind, you might even find you’re already lined up with the runway at the completion of the 180 degree turn, but only if you make the turn into the wind.
Glider pilot here. We train a lot for a rope break during a winch launch and here is how we do an opposite landing. 1. Push the stick as far forward as it goes until you get to the normal gliding speed +20% (you will maintain this speed until the final). 2. Turn 45° left and fly away from the airfield. 3. Keep calm while getting further from the airfield. You will need this distance for a low bank curve (high bank >30° may cause a stall). This is the time to do the checklist. 4. Turn 225° right. KEEP YOUR SPEED. 5. Land Important points: avoid slipping (big waste of useful altitude) and keep the speed high
In all the clips you have take off flaps, if power goes out the first thing you should do is clean the airplane to have the greatest gliding efficiency, another thing you should mention is that you should always turn in the direction the wind is coming.
I had to make the "impossible turn" at about 500-600ft AGL in my C150 a few weeks ago. On climb out the engine made a few, significant, sputters. Thankfully I still had power and decided to make the turn around as a precaution. I'm glad I did, but If the old girl would have gave up the ghost before the turn there is no way I would have made it. Even though I reacted fast (hiccup to turn back in ~4-5 seconds). Not a fun situation, but I'm kinda glad it happened how it did. You read about engine outs and watch videos but the real thing really puts in in perspective.
I played around with this a lot in sim several years ago. In a C172, it really is very difficult to get back to the runway below 700 or 800 ft once you introduce a bit of reaction delay. However, a lot of airports have roads near the threshold at 60° to 90° deg and they're often viable with 300 to 500 ft AGL (assuming you react quickly). A lot of airports also have taxiways or ramps offset from the runway, so "getting back to the airport" may only require 150° to 180° of turning and may be viable at surprisingly low altitudes. Another big take away for me was to just land straight(ish) ahead unless you've tried it in sim first and know exactly what altitudes allow you to do what; I was not able to reliably judge whether I could make a road or taxiway on the first try.
Flightsafety teaches and checks us on engine failure turn backs every six months in the PC12. They do it at low density altitude (KMEM) at 1300’ AGL although the military kids can do it as low as 500’ AGL. Easy peasy especially in the NG even in zero zero with synthetic vision. Engine failures on a hot day in Montrose are a different matter, I land straight ahead.
In a turn back you’re turn back optimum result is return to runway but landing on the grass or anywhere on the runway environment is better than going into an unprepared landing area! The plan before departure is critical you must know ahead of time your decision!
The most important point is the psychological one. Most GA pilots, if faced with an engine emergency, are not well trained enough to properly assess the risk/benefit ratio of the impossible turn. Panic mode will set in, and their brains will revert to neurological alternate law, and they’ll usually instinctively try to turn back. Either they need to be trained a la AQP and then left to make the decision for themselves in the moment of an emergency, or a standard protocol needs to be established that’s the average safest course of events…which is undoubtedly to NOT attempt the impossible landing. Keep wings as level as possible and find the most suitable place to put the plane down.
The bigger problem is the instinct to pull trying to tighten the turn. If you don’t pull and let the nose drop you won’t increase AOA and you won’t stall.
@@jimallen8186 The key word being “instinct.” Training a human to overcome their instinctual reactions is far easier said than done. So either there needs to be a dependable training modality that people can hang their hats on being thorough enough to override the instinct (in which case, I guess the impossible turn can be officially sanctioned), or not (in which case, it probably shouldn’t be).
Yeah most people won't do well weighing the factors in the moment. Which makes it seem wise to decide your turnaround altitude ahead of time. Maybe right now. For example if you fly a 172, you would likely make the turn from 2000 feet. You shouldn't try it from 800 feet. What altitude can you and your plane make that turn from, in the location and conditions you're most likely to fly in? Seems like it would be good to decide that altitude calmly, on the ground, rather than in a panic in the air.
When I was 14, playing MFS on windows 95, my dad gave me the challenge of cutting my engine on takeoff without warning. I landed straight ahead off airport. He said try again but land at the airfield. On takeoff, as soon as wheels were off ground, I turned about 60° off runway heading and he cut the mixture and I made an easy turnaround lined up perfectly with the runway and landed. Why aren't airports designed to have this as normal?
Here are my 50 cent as being a glider pilot. For us, the "impossible turn" is a rescue procedure in the event of cable brake during the winch launch. It is not the preferren one, but on some airfields, it might be the only feasible procedure. However, we make it "opposit" to the impossible turn. Which means, one does not fly away straightly, but first turns to right or left in the way that the "impossible U-turn" would bring you back to the center line of the runway for the final. Of cource, one should trust his aircraft, which means, the turn should be trained well to make it work. In my opinion, the very thing making the turn impossible is the fact, that you need to "catch" the runway on the final approach. Being in emergency situation, it puts even more pressure on the pilot leading to deadly mistakes.
Always worth considering your weight, the density altitude, the runway length and environment, temperature, wind conditions, and preparedness. If you haven’t briefed the possibility of an impossible turn and when you’ll be able to do it, don’t do it. It will be a lot easier to complete it with a Cessna 172 on a 9000 foot runway than it would on a 3500’ runway. Also if you have a crosswind and turn into the tailwind then you’re just going to push yourself further away. If the density altitude is perfect for climb performance, you’ll be more likely to successfully accomplish it. Trying it with a cfi from safe altitudes and keeping in mind conditions and an idle engine vs complete loss will paint a better picture of how dangerous and difficult it can be. For example, tear drop landings from 1000’, 800’, 700’ etc, will start to really show viable it will be. If you can’t really safely get it around from 700’, definitely not worth pulling it at 500’
It's highly dependant on the aircraft being flown. I had an engine failure after takeoff at about 400 ft AGL in a Mooney 205 and due to It's sleek aerodynamic design I knew I could make it back, which is exactly what I did. Had I been in the Arrow IV that I also flew often at the time it would have been a different story with no alternative other than to continue ahead and look for a field.
It’s definitely impossible under certain circumstances. Due to low performance, low winds, and high density altitude.. many light aircraft will have a departure angle that’s shallower than their glide ratio. Also consider the risk factor vs just having a forced approach straight ahead. If you can fly the plane to the ground without stalling or spinning.. you will survive a forced landing into almost any terrain-including trees and neighbourhoods. There are a lot of dead people who tried to save the aircraft. Don’t. Destroy it to save yours and your passengers lives.
If I were I pilot on a small plane, I would prepare in advance my reactions to the engines failing at different altitude, eventually practicing them on flight simulators, even the Microsoft variety, at least to memorise the sequence. I would also study the maps of the airport surrounding area, to figure out where to look for alternate landing area. Actually I wonder why isn’t there an add on to MS FS 2024 to be used by PPL to train.
I would think all pilots would do this before every take off, have a plan ready for as many as scenarios as possible including a good idea of your planes handling characteristics and capability in such a circumstance.... every take off would have a plan. do they not already do this?
This is why, as a pilot and all pilots should do this if not, it is plan for a landing spot after takeoff if your engine died prior to taking off and even study the airport if your unsure or evensure but the wind suddenly changes you must change runways which then would throw your plans for the original emergency landing spot especially if your 180⁰ opposite to the landing site. Always always plan for the unexpected
People have different opinions on this, some say its possible some say it's not a good idea. It is possible if the conditions are right. Depends on your plane and its ability to glide and turn. Also depends on your ability as a pilot. Winds. What altitude the engine fails. As was mentioned in the video. Well I think it pays to be prepared. Practice the scenario in a practice area. Know your plane, how it can turn, the limits etc. Have a plan for yourself ahead of time, including which decision you're going to make if the engine fails at different altitudes. Study the airport surroundings, fields golf course highways farms etc. Be prepared that the engine could fail on climb out and make a decision depending on altitude. Know your plane's best glide speed. I think the Cessna poh says land straight ahead, but use your discretion. Cessnas. don't have the best glide ratio. A cirrus might have better chances of making it back at lower altitudes. Well they got a parachute too. But ya practice and plan ahead. To know what the best decision is. Got to make decision fast.
One day after you posted this a plane in TJIG Puerto Rico aparently tryed to do this because the direction of when he crashed, the two pilots are alive if want to try to research the school was Ace aviation
Good lesson. I have some empirical data for the low altitude forced landing, but have had only one engine failure at altitude. From fifty years and 17,000 hours at 200' or lower crop dusting and flying pipeline patrol my orientation changed from altitude is life to airspeed is life. Nine of my eleven low altitude engine failures were six second deals. Aviate... No navigate. No communicate. Because I always had cruise or near cruise airspeed from either extra ground effect energy in the spray run or just cruising on the pipeline, I was able to make the very safe energy management 1 g turn at any bank angle necessary to make a good landing zone. I would simply use cruise airspeed to pitch up wings level and when slow bank at whatever angle needed while releasing back pressure on the yoke. Because of neutral dynamic stability, the airplane cannot stall itself. A pilot pulling on the stick is required. In this energy management turn, airspeed is traded for altitude (law of the roller coaster) and then altitude is traded for airspeed (same). Try it at altitude and you will like it too. The basic level in low ground effect, sort of like the old soft field, takeoff is default for the crop duster as he always is max loaded and needs all the extra free ground effect energy he can get. If the runway is 1,000'' he gets into ground effect well below Vso, and out of ground effect airspeed anyway, levels the fuselage and stays in six inch ground effect until any obstruction forces him to pitch up and then only pitch up enough to just clear the obstruction. Airspeed and not altitude is life down here. While on the pipeline the level in low ground effect takeoff was default for me as well in small Cessnas. My only engine failure on takeoff was in a 172. From my six inch perch, I landed on the runway remaining. It hurts my sole, and many pilot's tin and skin, to see pilots use no free ground effect energy, pitch to Vx or Vy when not appropriate as the obstruction is thousands of feet away, and struggle as the outcome of such a poor energy management decision is always in doubt. So, while as a crop duster I have the energy management turn that would most likely result in a favorable impossible turn, I have never chosen that technique as a get out of jail free card. After thousands of impossible turns with power, yea even tighter, crop dusting, I had no confidence in going back into the field I was spraying without power. I did have the energy, airspeed, to maneuver to a suitable landing site.
Alternately, you can say “energy is life.” Whether it be kinetic, potential, or both. Military low level flying is similar, have sufficient energy to maneuver to include zoom. Note a zoom is distinctly different from a climb. Zoom is trade in KE for PE while climb is chemical for PE.
l'm not a pilot, but it seems to me that forethought is paramount for this situation. That is, have a good idea of all factors before takeoff. Then when taking off, you will instinctively know from your height and flaps and speed at what point the impossible turn IS possible. In other words, you pass a line or haven't reached the line yet and actions depend on if you have hit that line or not.
1 plan for engine failure on every flight with low altitude before you take off. Pick where you will land... It's impossible for the pilots this video is designed to instruct. Best to land wheels up in a field Don't save the plane... Save your life.
If the climb gradient after takeoff is not significantly higher than the glide gradient, an impossible turn is impossible at any height. Am I wrong? This can easily happen at high weight or high density altitude.
Right. Better climb at over 700 fpm and some wind to bring you back. From 700 agl up. Most engine fails are the partial power kind. You can Turnback from 400 agl if not climbing. I learned them in 2001. ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
My CFI demo'd it to me from 450ft and he made it, he reacted immediatly so add some feet call it 550-650 but it seems pretty doable if you train to it, if you don't train to it enough then don't attempt it.
In shipping there is the Williamson turn. It’s for man overboard. Turn left 60 then immediately right onto a reciprocal of your original course For engine out it takes you slightly further out but has the advantage that you can do shallow turns and you don’t end up at 90 degrees to the runway. I would be interested to see how it would work for engine out
@@xisotopexI'd assume that'd be the maneuver you'd use in a larger aircraft where a single engine failure will not necessarily cause the craft to stall, like say a passenger plane. I'm not a pilot I just know the science 🤷
These are safe to practice in real life as long as you are very comfortable with the glide characteristics of your plane, know what stalls in a bank feel like and what speed youll stall at for a specific bank, are comfortable with a tailwind landing, are doing it at a empty untowered field, and start at a high altitude, like 800ft and work your way down lower as you have successful impossible turns. My personal minimum is 400ft. AGL in a cessna 172 and 500ft for archers warriors and DA40s with a headwind component of up to 15kts on takeoff. Stay coordinated and at or +5kts of Vg, do not exceed a 45 degree bank and you will be very far away from any stall/spin situation. The factor that will 100% make this maneuver impossible is if you're taking off with any type of tailwind whatsoever so consider that next time you think about opting for a shorter taxi to use a runway with a light tailwind.
I had engine problems in my Glasair in April 2024 and landed straight ahead. Investigation team said would have end deadly if i would have try the turn
I was telling the pilot that shared this on an unrelated Discord server that I'm no pilot but with my option being a maneuver called "The Impossible Turn" my ass is gonna be look for a nice road or open field to kiss the ground.
Bottom line: the impossible turn has impossibly low odds of working out. 1) You have to be incredibly well rehearsed in doing it. That means lots of high risk practice. The practice has a higher chance of getting you than an actual engine failure. 2) Most engine failures are not instantaneous. It's gives a pilot too much indecision time, too much lost speed, and by the time the decision is made, it's too late. Add to that, there's risk of a false positive where the engine is not having any serious problem and the reaction is an over-reaction. 3) You can do a wingover rather than a turn. That has all the problems of 1 & 2 combined x 10. Plus a badly executed wingover at low altitudes is a guaranteed stall/spin. Add to any of these scenarios a complicating factor: wheels dropped, fire, passenger freaking out, flaps set wrong, ... and probably of failure is x 100.
I can demonstrate a 180 turn after engine failure from climb with 60 knots in a Cessna 152 losing less than 200 feet. Immediately nose down and 60 degrees bank simultaneously. Hold 60 Knots, stall waring is constantly beeping. Roll out hard with a little rudder. Turn diameter is about 70 Meters. Therefore, you nearly stay over the runway. We practiced this 100th of times while I was an aerobatic flight instructor. It is an absolutely save maneuver once you practiced it, so you can do it in your sleep, while drunk. Without that level of practice, it can be dangerous.
Great video, thank you. Something that wasn't considered here is traffic. Is there enough time to communicate with ATC to have them clear the runway if other traffic is lining up to takeoff? Thank you
Yes and no. I had plenty of time to call out "N1234 engine failure landing runway 3" but by the time I was initiating the maneuver a Bonanza was just off the ground behind me. I knew he was there because I'm always paying attention to the radio, and I was able to dodge him. The tower told him to watch out but he never saw me, or even had a clue there was an emergency happing right in front of him. In my opinion the radio call is very important at busy airports and it's easy to make very rapidly, especially if practiced. However it won't always make a difference if traffic is already on the move behind you. Just another reason to maintain awareness of everything happening on the field and on the radio.
Field elevation where I'm at is 6200 feet. The "impossible turn" isn't even worth considering for a heavier, faster aircraft. In the summer, density altitude can be as high as 10,000 feet standing on the ground, so your aircraft drops from the sky like a stone if you lose power. A supercub or 172 might pull it off if you react swiftly, but otherwise you're far better off putting it down in a field. Odds of making the runway aren't great.
I guess so according to your ending yeah keep climbing regardless for quite a while after takeoff I think is just good advice - don’t stay below 1000ft in particular usually!?
I think it’s critical to do the initial climb at Vx to have the best relationship of gained altitude to distance back to the runway and then make the impossible to the side the crosswind component is coming from, so the wind carries you back to the runway, not further away. I always include this in my emergency briefing. We trained the manoeuvre during my ppl training and one thing that stuck with me was by how much I had to drop the nose to speed up and keep the speed without the engine while swiftly inducing a steep bank angle of about 45°. In this intense situation I think it’s not that important to achieve the optimal airspeed, just to make sure there is enough buffer to high bank stall speeds and a possible stall/spiral. In discussions about the impossible turn there is often no or not enough emphasis on the things a pilot can do to increase the likelihood of the impossible turn to actually work. And it’s absolutely recommended to try this at least in the sim.
I'm not arguing with you or here to say you're wrong on the internet or whatever. I just want you to hear my perspective based on my experience. I'm a long-time CFI and I've practiced and carefully experimented with the "impossible" turn countless times in different conditions, and I've done it for real twice. Please take the time to consider what I have to say. Engine failure during a Vx climb at low altitude can be really sketchy in a lot of planes, even without trying to initiate the relatively aggressive turn back to the field. You're giving yourself a disadvantage by starting the whole process with a high AoA and low speed. I know it makes sense numerically to climb at Vx if you're focused on height vs distance to the runway, but that doesn't account for the rapid altitude loss due to the low energy state of the aircraft when entering this scenario from a Vx climb. First, you REALLY have to shove the nose down aggressively and immediately if you lose the engine during a Vx climb. Assuming you react fast enough and don't immediately stall (and spin if you didn't train yourself to immediately release the heavy Vx right rudder) you've lost a solid chunk of altitude already just getting the nose down and preventing a stall. Now you're sitting there with an even bigger AoA, lower speed, and a rapid sink. A normal climb is much more forgiving to a sudden loss of power and you'll lose significantly less altitude right out of the gate just in the process of lowering the nose and avoiding a stall. So you got the nose down and didn't stall, but the plane is still below best glide speed, so you're sinking fairly rapidly at this point due to the extra induced drag. You can drop the nose and try to speed up, or just deal with it but DEFINITELY don't get any slower! Either option you choose is going to result in a rapid and unavoidable sink, definitely more than if you were at best glide speed. At this point, whatever gains you initially made with the Vx climb have been negated by the rapid sink rate caused by the low speed and high AoA when thrust was removed from the equation. If you were at Vy (and reacted quickly) you'd already be set up at your best glide speed! Now you have to actually execute the turn, which will need to be fairly aggressive. Banking the plane is going to cause an even faster loss of altitude, because you're definitely not pulling in this turn considering your already-high AoA. Or you shouldn't be, at least. It's very difficult to resist the urge to pull back just a tiny little bit when you're in this situation for real. By climbing at Vx you've already set yourself up with very thin margins. So now you're sinking even faster, and you have no extra margin before a stall if you pull back a little bit subconsciously. At this point, you've DEFINITELY negated any gains you made by starting off with a Vx climb. Here's another consideration for performing this maneuver at speeds below Vy/best glide: The plane is going to fly like a wobbly mushy turd. How often do you practice flying the plane in this flight regime? We're basically talking about power-off descending slow flight with aggressive banking. The controls will be very mushy and you'll need skillful rudder work to stay coordinated, which is very important in this situation. I'd much rather be flying this highly stressful maneuver in a configuration I'm well accustomed to; best glide/approach speed. You should absolutely go out and compare these scenarios for yourself at altitude using ground references and a "deck" altitude. Be strict about the numbers and be observant. Even better if you can stick a gopro in the cockpit and review the footage afterwards so you can give your full attention to the maneuvers and review the gauges later. Give yourself at LEAST 3 seconds before reacting to the simulated engine failure. Good luck!
No you aren’t. Probably about 270-280 after you add all of the angles up if you’re aggressive enough on the first high altitude turn and turn the into wind after letting the plane drift during departure.
It's probably a very difficult manœuvre with a regular aircraft. But it's really good if you train for it... and it's reasonable to try with an ultralight. 400 ft is enough... The training means you're ready to react quicker and very aware of all conditions like wind which is nearly never exactly in the track axis. Turning against the wind helps a lot. And an ultralight climb so steep you can reach the possible turn altitude before the end of the track, you can glide very slow... eventually landing on any surface without the need to reach the hard track. My usual field was ending over a forest so I was very careful to make accurate plan for any north bound takeoff. The official rule was no attempt to turn back below 500ft...but in good days I reckon 300 would be enough...and practice at 400 wasn't really hard. Of course it depends on many factors and the key is to think about it before you even start the engine.
The problem with all of these power pilot analysis of the turn back procedure (which is required training for glider pilots as stated in several comments above) is they assume best glide speed yields the best performance. This maneuver is best done at minimum sink angle of attack not best glide and 45 degrees bank should be the goal not the limit. If the airplane is equipped with a stall horn and it is properly setup minimum sink AOA is roughly equal to the AOA that the stall horn is triggered at. In testing with a 172 at 500ft AGL 45 and 60 degree banks yielded nearly identical results but the skill required for 60 was significantly higher and unrealistic in a high stress emergency. At 30 degrees bank it was indeed impossible to return from 500ft AGL. 1. Don’t do it unless you have practiced it. 2. Practice it at altitude with a CFI using at least 1500AGL as “field elevation” then step it down 500 ft at a time over an open field before moving on to an airport. 3. Stalling while banked is not inherently dangerous but stalling while uncoordinated is. This maneuver should only be performed if your coordination skills and awareness are high enough to keep it coordinated under the stress of an emergency. If they are not this isn’t for you.
OK, so at 500 ft AGL it might not be an impossible turn. But what about 450 ft AGL? or 475, or even 490? And what happens if you try it at 490, or what you think is 490 AGL, and you see that you're not going to make it? what do you do then, in those circumstances, not sitting at your desk thinking about it. There is a reason it's called the "impossible turn", it's not because it's impossible, but because too many people have died trying it after an engine failure (or even just a reduction in power). We all need a rule of thumb that is clear and easy to remember, and that we tell ourselves before every flight. 1. if engine loss, push forward on the yoke immediately, get that nose pointed down (same orientation as when on final for landing - to keep up a speed that is above stall) 2. if above 1500 AGL then turn to return, but no more than 30 degrees bank (remember that the stall speed goes up as you bank) 3. if above 1000 AGL you have about 90 degrees left or right from which to choose a landing site 3. above 500 AGL, you've got about 30 degrees left or right to choose from 4. below 500 AGL, land straight ahead Practice this in the practice area at 4 or 5000 AGL so you can see how much you actually lose in a 360 degree turn with no engine (it's not 180, because you're not lined up on the runway after 180, you've got to do 270 in one direction and 90 in the other, or a total of 360). Then you can change the numbers to suit your airplane.
I would not advise to practice the impossible turn below 1500 AGL. That being said though it is a good idea to see how little loss of altitude one can get after practicing the maneuver in safe conditions then keeping that number in mind with a safety margin when briefing their before takeoff checklist. I have practiced in the sim at airports I operate out of the impossible turn on all the runways so I have a good idea of what altitude I could reasonable pull it off on to declare a cutoff point to where I would rather go to my chosen emergency landing spot than try to turn back.
I have personally watched someone attempt the impossible turn. They made the turn and made it back to the field. Not the runway, though. Unfortunately, the rest of it didn't go so well for them.
Completely depends on the plane. The more powerful your engine and the better the glide ratio, the more likely it is that you can do the impossible turn.
I'm not a pilot so this might be insane, but would a reverse cobra turn work? Pitch up momentarily for a quick altitude/speed swap, then bank hard and pitch down hard, effectively pulling a tight U turn in the air. You'll be screaming toward the ground, but if you can pull up smoothly, it should get you pointed in the right direction. I've done it on RC planes but never without engine power. No idea if it would work here.
if you use shallow bank like that illustration, It is wrong. You will go far away and then have to come back to the runway. It is a Vglide 45 Turnback. 45 bank at Vglide. A Vglide 45 bank Turnback. You program before take off. Plan to Turnback only if you climbed 700 fpm constant to 700 agl and wind over 7 knots. 7 knots or more winds to push you back too.. The 777 Turnback. That is the 777 No Power Turnback Rule i learned years ago from EmergencyLowManeuvering Channel. Program before take off The 777 No Power Turnback. We did it even before preflight. You know if you will climb 700 fpm or not before preflight based on temp airplane and conditions. If not, dont plan to turnback unless partial power, but no power, no turnback if no 777 Rule met on that take off. 777 Rule ...
In most light aircraft yes it’s completely impossible, the big problem is not the stall or the turn it’s the fact that you just won’t have the height, light aircraft typically have very little excess power so the climb rate is very poor.
No, it's not. I did it while receiving dual as a Student Pilot, upon the surprise power-loss on climbout that was courtesy of the ME-CFII. Response was almost immediate, setting-up as taught in prior lessons. The keys were: Immediate response & proper setup. That's all there was to it. Did a 200-220° turn & was prepared to touchdown on the departure runway, when the ME-CFII returned power to the aircraft.
@@PilotInstituteAirplanes 200-220° turn, followed by opposite-direction turn to line-up with the departure-runway, having somewhere around a quartering-tailwind.
Maybe you ought to look at the gliders with their 200 feet AGL rope break. 45 AOB is the quickest way to turn and to lose the least altitude in the turn. There is no such thing as best glide speed, only best glide AOA (though this is for still air or through the air mass). We trim to AOA not speed, if you set 45 AOB and don’t pull back, you won’t stall and you’ll get through the turn quicker. Terrain permitting, make the turn into the wind or in the direction of turn if turn already started. 45 AOB gets you quicker around to sooner have your wings under you to be set to land. G only goes up with bank angle if you’re holding the aircraft up. Those charts are for level flight. It is ok to accept an increased rate of descent for more turn to get the turn done quicker. Stall speed does not increase with AOB. It increases with longitudinal stick pull or increased pitch rate. You’re increasing your pitch rate hence load with the AOB when combining the pull to stay level or to maintain a given rate VVI. If you turn with no additional pull, you’ll maintain constant AOA and constant load though with increased VVI and consequently increased speed - it is ok to let the nose drop to affect the turn - in fact, it is safer to do so. You’re correct to say “… or increase airspeed” but this is a consequence of rather than deliberate choice action, the choice is to maintain AOA. (We should probably teach constant AOA turns in slow flight rather than or in addition to constant speed turns) There’s a good Medium article Improve your Landings with AOA and Power Techniques that applies here. Ultimately, though, for any given airframe you need to have an idea of AGL required to complete. Airport layout with alternate runways and taxiways becomes a factor to consider while runway length may help with some of those congested airports which may not have off airport “straight ahead” options.
Theoretically, if there's a mile long building with a perfectly flat roof that's also strong enough to drive a fully loaded semi on, and then there's zero air conditioning or industrial equipment anywhere on the roof, then maybe it might be possible. Practically, no. Aim for a flat open area without buildings.
If you can avoid a stall and a spin, higher bank angles will make you lose less height to make a full 180º turn. Considering a Cessna 172 and the 4 seconds reaction time: 30º: 400ft 45º: 300ft 60º: 250ft 75º: 210ft
If you have the proper altitude and climb rate and know hot to do Vglide 45 banks. Why crash it somewhere. Vglide 45's are supposed to be done by all pilots, not just the top best only.
If you do it like that illustration, YOU DO IT WRONG. It is not a low and shallow turn. It is over a calculated altitude and if climbing over 700 fpm and some wind too to bring you back. I Used to teach Turnbacks when CFI in the 1990's. You have to have an altitude marker and i used to put a blue line on the Vglide speed. 2 markers. Turnbacks is a Vglide 45 bank turn from at least 700 agl if you climb at ovr 700 fpm. Besides EFATO, it can be used on GRM Flyovers, Box Canyon Turns, Circling Approaches, and even make you better doing those Power Off 180"s from downwind leg, which makes a lot of commercial pilots that didnt know turnbacks (WTF?) fail the commercial pilot test. A CPL that dont know how to make efficient and safe tight turns without messing up ? Oh yeah, many there.
The technique described involving best glide speed is wrong. Push forward to get a much higher speed and do a steep semi split S at minimum g s. This gets the turn done quickly. You will be low and fast. It is not necessary to get to the runway, only more unobstructed area on the airport. Another technique is after takeoff and local obstacle clearance turn 30 deg off the runway heading towards any downwind crosswind. The turn back into the crosswind gives a better chance of making the airport. 172 type aircraft the turn should be done above 90 knots. The pushing and accelerating in the dive will reduce the g s in the turn which should be at least 60 deg bank. G s are only pulled at constant speed and altitude. This diving bank can actually be done near 1 g. In a 170 it can be done at 400 ft. AGL.
Additionally, a formula for navigating an aircraft emergency is a recipe for disaster. You make the best decision based on the situation given, and if returning to the airport is the best decision, then that is the course of action you must follow. Don't discard a solution based on a catchy phrase.
These cowards dont believe you. You are too good for them. I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
Not for the clumsy or coward. Those should not be pilots. But FAA dont require Turnbacks. I think many of those pampered Mild Maneuvering pilots cant do hard maneuvers too. Fakes.. You will poop doing this save. You cant handle the thruh. ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
@@JavierBrent OK, see if those FAA workers can fit their own requirements, see if they can pass their own Tess, I guarantee you, the majority of them. If not all of them cannot, they don’t know what they’re doing. FAA workers are just pompous government employees who hardly work unless they’re working toward evil, and get a huge paycheck. I doubt Joe Biden could pass those “tests” why should anybody else be expected to, it’s a way for FAA workers to control the people. FAA workers do not care about the people, they want this country to fall. They want China, they want the one world order. They want to stop the good people from doing what they know how to do. FAA workers don’t know. Government workers don’t know that’s the truth. Never trust government. God bless the heroes atBoeing. God bless America. Let freedom fly.
04:28 Wrong.. LOL.. My CFI did idle Turnbacks on Bonanzas from 800 agl and 10 knot wind tailwind landings. He said to keep the real Vglide not the grossed Vglide speed.. I took hhis training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
@@PilotInstituteAirplanes ...unless they're motorgliders. ;) Their use of similar engines to equivalent airplanes suggests similar odds of engine failure. With that said, the sink rate calculus for a motorglider still looks very different than the Cessna's.
if you do the turn wrong, you will stall or not reach the runway. Military, Bush Pilots, glider pilots and crop duster pilots do turnbacks every dam day, even with armament or 2,000 pounds of chemicals weighing them down. A Turnback, if safe and well done, is not an impossible turn- but some morons call all turnbacks as impossible turns. Bullshiters putting down the ones that do them right, and those are the best pilots that should be exalted, and never put down by liars that are AFRAID of doing Turnbacks and lying by calling Turnbacks as Impossible turns.. LIars...
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
What do you think about the impossible turn?
If it happens soon enough and there's nowhere to land you might as well just choose the building you hate the most and send it (in simulators, I'm not advocating for acts of terrorism lol)
I'm just a glider pilot, but trading height for speed seems worth it for me. You keep the energy but are more maneuverable. Then do the turn at lower altitude. And don't insist on landing on the paved surface. Grass isn't all that bad.
You are very wrong. You need training on them you.. Not all EFATO Turnbacks are impossible turns. I learned them partial power from 400 feet agl. I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm.
SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html and ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
the turn in the current thumbnail for this video is definitely impossible (to do safely). it depicts turning back to the runway so that the returning aircract is landing 90deg. across the runway, rather than lined up or nearly lined up with the runway.
@@julianbrelsford Also if you use shallow bank, you will go far away and then have to come back to the runway. It is a Vglide 45 Turnback. 45 bank at Vglide. But only if you climbed 700 fpm constant to 700 agl and wind over 7 knots. 7nots or more winds to push you back too..
That is the 777 No Power Turnback Rule i learned years ago from EmergencyLowManeuvering Channel.
I think this falls under the category of it's not that it's impossible, you just really don't want to be in a situation you find out if it is or not.
Spot on!
100%
@@PilotInstituteAirplanes John Young didn't want to fly an RTLS for STS 1 for this very reason.
Yes, I have done the impossible turn… in my sim. I was practicing an emergency landing on a runway, I overshot it and instinctively did the turn to go back to the runway. I stalled and crashed on the runway. It was a good thing it happened on a sim. I learned the lesson and will never attempt doing it in a real flight.
What kind of plane was it ? How much altitude did you have when you pulled the power or cut the engine ? How steep were your banks ? Were your turns coordinated ? Were you watching your airspeed in the turn ? Did your propeller feather if applicable ? How accurate is the flight dynamics of the sim ? A sim is a sim.
Interesting video, especially for me as a glider pilot. When the rope brakes during a winch-launch, we easily can fly the "impossible turn" - actually, the "impossible turn" is a well trained procedure for us. In case of a rope brake, we fly the impossible turn above an altitude of only 150 feet.
A single engine aircraft falls like a brick compared to a glider. You have to nose it down to even stay in the air.
Then it's only the "impossible turn" if it happens _under_ 150 feet in a glider.
@@LarsLarsen77 I think, it is more about how the tun is performed. As a glider pilot, you fly the turn "vice versa", first you turn away from the center line of the runway, then you make a U-turn, and then, you are back at the ceneter line for the final. I think, that is the main piont making the turn "possible".
You're comparing a leaf to bowling ball. Powered aircraft have a much poorer glide ratio than a glider. In a Duo Discus, you'd actually have to stretch the turn out or fly ahead for a bit in order to lose enough altitude so that you wouldn't overshoot the runway making the turn. In a Bonanza, you'd slam into the ground before even getting around half way.
As with most things, I think proper training and practice is the key here. A game changer for me was when I got my multi-engine rating and was taught that an engine failure WILL happen on every takeoff, so decide and plan how you're going to handle it before every takeoff. I also realized that the 4 second reaction time doesn't fly well in a twin, cause in 4 seconds, you'll be augering into the ground in a twin. This taught me that I had to be preconditioned to react immediately to an engine at various altitudes. I took what I leaned getting my multi and began applying it to flying singles. I went out and practiced the maneuver several times at a safe altitude; leaning how best to accomplish it and establishing a minimum altitude with margin to begin with. I then flew to a quiet airport with a decent size runway surrounded by cow pastures and corn fields and near zero obstacles for a mile all directions and practiced it several more times. Finally, I practiced it at my home airport, which has few options for forced landings, and I continue to practice it a few times a year. I've since tried it in several different Cessna's and found that for me, it can work starting at 500 feet under most conditions. If it's hot or I'm heavy, then I make it 600 feet. The maneuver that works for me is: nose down immediately at power loss and roll into a 45° bank, hold Vy throughout the turn, once I'm headed towards the runway I roll wings level, pitch for best glide, lower the gear (if applicable), and maneuver and add flaps as necessary to land. Out of the dozens I've times I've practiced it in the least few years, I only came up short once, and even at that I would've easily made the grass beside the runway had I not elected to go-around. Another time, I made the runway handily, but used almost all of the mile long runway stopping when I had a 15-20 knot headwind on takeoff, so I now consider 15 knots a maximum. Before each takeoff I take a few seconds to decide if turning back is an option on this takeoff, what will be my minimum altitude, which direction I'll make the turn based on the winds etc. Sometimes it's just not the best option, like if I'm flying in a type that I've never practiced it in before. Even in a twin landing straight ahead is the only safe option sometimes. But some days at some airports, the "not so impossible" it might be the only good option.
Thanks for your detailed reply with experience ❤
Often the multi is really an extension of the straight ahead landing. You can “glide” a little further. Losing an engine off a high density altitude airfield and that other likely won’t get you back around. Startle factor may put you below Vmc hence you need to pull power on the good while getting nose down to get back above Vmc, then increase the good but it may not be enough poop. Straight aheads with multies are still good options; don’t let the second engine preclude consideration of straight ahead. Now with this, check out James McClaran Allen on Medium with his piece regarding Light Twins Spins. The other pieces are pretty good aviation safety bits too.
Some WW2 airfields used to have a "forward landing field" for bombers that could not make the climb fully loaded (e.g. if an engine was misfiring). Instead many small airfields have "suburbia" upwind of the runway so there is not a lot of choice for a safe place to land unless there's a park or a freeway you can line up on. A bunch of sports fields would be fine, but no-one seems to care to do anything about it.
Mine has a river and a cliff face, ouch.
@@storiesfromthedepthsofspac6413 I would choose the river landing!
@@redbaron07 Yeah, but cliff face would definitely earn you an episode on Mayday haha
As does the space shuttle.
@@falconwaver Zaragoza!
Another factor I rarely hear mentioned is that if there is any crosswind, it is best to make the turn into the wind. This minimizes your runway offset at the completion of the 180 and thus the amount of additional maneuvering you will have to do to line up with the runway. In a strong enough crosswind, you might even find you’re already lined up with the runway at the completion of the 180 degree turn, but only if you make the turn into the wind.
Glider pilot here. We train a lot for a rope break during a winch launch and here is how we do an opposite landing.
1. Push the stick as far forward as it goes until you get to the normal gliding speed +20% (you will maintain this speed until the final).
2. Turn 45° left and fly away from the airfield.
3. Keep calm while getting further from the airfield. You will need this distance for a low bank curve (high bank >30° may cause a stall). This is the time to do the checklist.
4. Turn 225° right. KEEP YOUR SPEED.
5. Land
Important points: avoid slipping (big waste of useful altitude) and keep the speed high
In all the clips you have take off flaps, if power goes out the first thing you should do is clean the airplane to have the greatest gliding efficiency, another thing you should mention is that you should always turn in the direction the wind is coming.
I had to make the "impossible turn" at about 500-600ft AGL in my C150 a few weeks ago. On climb out the engine made a few, significant, sputters. Thankfully I still had power and decided to make the turn around as a precaution. I'm glad I did, but If the old girl would have gave up the ghost before the turn there is no way I would have made it. Even though I reacted fast (hiccup to turn back in ~4-5 seconds).
Not a fun situation, but I'm kinda glad it happened how it did. You read about engine outs and watch videos but the real thing really puts in in perspective.
I played around with this a lot in sim several years ago. In a C172, it really is very difficult to get back to the runway below 700 or 800 ft once you introduce a bit of reaction delay. However, a lot of airports have roads near the threshold at 60° to 90° deg and they're often viable with 300 to 500 ft AGL (assuming you react quickly). A lot of airports also have taxiways or ramps offset from the runway, so "getting back to the airport" may only require 150° to 180° of turning and may be viable at surprisingly low altitudes. Another big take away for me was to just land straight(ish) ahead unless you've tried it in sim first and know exactly what altitudes allow you to do what; I was not able to reliably judge whether I could make a road or taxiway on the first try.
Flightsafety teaches and checks us on engine failure turn backs every six months in the PC12. They do it at low density altitude (KMEM) at 1300’ AGL although the military kids can do it as low as 500’ AGL. Easy peasy especially in the NG even in zero zero with synthetic vision. Engine failures on a hot day in Montrose are a different matter, I land straight ahead.
In a turn back you’re turn back optimum result is return to runway but landing on the grass or anywhere on the runway environment is better than going into an unprepared landing area! The plan before departure is critical you must know ahead of time your decision!
The most important point is the psychological one. Most GA pilots, if faced with an engine emergency, are not well trained enough to properly assess the risk/benefit ratio of the impossible turn. Panic mode will set in, and their brains will revert to neurological alternate law, and they’ll usually instinctively try to turn back. Either they need to be trained a la AQP and then left to make the decision for themselves in the moment of an emergency, or a standard protocol needs to be established that’s the average safest course of events…which is undoubtedly to NOT attempt the impossible landing. Keep wings as level as possible and find the most suitable place to put the plane down.
The bigger problem is the instinct to pull trying to tighten the turn. If you don’t pull and let the nose drop you won’t increase AOA and you won’t stall.
@@jimallen8186 The key word being “instinct.” Training a human to overcome their instinctual reactions is far easier said than done. So either there needs to be a dependable training modality that people can hang their hats on being thorough enough to override the instinct (in which case, I guess the impossible turn can be officially sanctioned), or not (in which case, it probably shouldn’t be).
at that point the plane belongs to the insurance company. Do whatever it takes to survive.
Yeah most people won't do well weighing the factors in the moment. Which makes it seem wise to decide your turnaround altitude ahead of time. Maybe right now. For example if you fly a 172, you would likely make the turn from 2000 feet. You shouldn't try it from 800 feet. What altitude can you and your plane make that turn from, in the location and conditions you're most likely to fly in? Seems like it would be good to decide that altitude calmly, on the ground, rather than in a panic in the air.
When I was 14, playing MFS on windows 95, my dad gave me the challenge of cutting my engine on takeoff without warning. I landed straight ahead off airport. He said try again but land at the airfield.
On takeoff, as soon as wheels were off ground, I turned about 60° off runway heading and he cut the mixture and I made an easy turnaround lined up perfectly with the runway and landed.
Why aren't airports designed to have this as normal?
Here are my 50 cent as being a glider pilot. For us, the "impossible turn" is a rescue procedure in the event of cable brake during the winch launch. It is not the preferren one, but on some airfields, it might be the only feasible procedure.
However, we make it "opposit" to the impossible turn. Which means, one does not fly away straightly, but first turns to right or left in the way that the "impossible U-turn" would bring you back to the center line of the runway for the final. Of cource, one should trust his aircraft, which means, the turn should be trained well to make it work.
In my opinion, the very thing making the turn impossible is the fact, that you need to "catch" the runway on the final approach. Being in emergency situation, it puts even more pressure on the pilot leading to deadly mistakes.
Always worth considering your weight, the density altitude, the runway length and environment, temperature, wind conditions, and preparedness. If you haven’t briefed the possibility of an impossible turn and when you’ll be able to do it, don’t do it.
It will be a lot easier to complete it with a Cessna 172 on a 9000 foot runway than it would on a 3500’ runway. Also if you have a crosswind and turn into the tailwind then you’re just going to push yourself further away. If the density altitude is perfect for climb performance, you’ll be more likely to successfully accomplish it.
Trying it with a cfi from safe altitudes and keeping in mind conditions and an idle engine vs complete loss will paint a better picture of how dangerous and difficult it can be. For example, tear drop landings from 1000’, 800’, 700’ etc, will start to really show viable it will be. If you can’t really safely get it around from 700’, definitely not worth pulling it at 500’
It's highly dependant on the aircraft being flown. I had an engine failure after takeoff at about 400 ft AGL in a Mooney 205 and due to It's sleek aerodynamic design I knew I could make it back, which is exactly what I did. Had I been in the Arrow IV that I also flew often at the time it would have been a different story with no alternative other than to continue ahead and look for a field.
though, there is NO load factor increase if we do not pull that yoke and accept altitude loss!
But vertical lift reduces in a turn anyway, even with a LF of 1...
It’s definitely impossible under certain circumstances. Due to low performance, low winds, and high density altitude.. many light aircraft will have a departure angle that’s shallower than their glide ratio.
Also consider the risk factor vs just having a forced approach straight ahead. If you can fly the plane to the ground without stalling or spinning.. you will survive a forced landing into almost any terrain-including trees and neighbourhoods.
There are a lot of dead people who tried to save the aircraft. Don’t. Destroy it to save yours and your passengers lives.
Maybe don’t have a departure ratio that is less then your glide ratio
That should stop it
Awesome video 😎 I love watching your content as I train to get my private pilot rating
If I were I pilot on a small plane, I would prepare in advance my reactions to the engines failing at different altitude, eventually practicing them on flight simulators, even the Microsoft variety, at least to memorise the sequence. I would also study the maps of the airport surrounding area, to figure out where to look for alternate landing area. Actually I wonder why isn’t there an add on to MS FS 2024 to be used by PPL to train.
I would think all pilots would do this before every take off, have a plan ready for as many as scenarios as possible including a good idea of your planes handling characteristics and capability in such a circumstance.... every take off would have a plan. do they not already do this?
This is why, as a pilot and all pilots should do this if not, it is plan for a landing spot after takeoff if your engine died prior to taking off and even study the airport if your unsure or evensure but the wind suddenly changes you must change runways which then would throw your plans for the original emergency landing spot especially if your 180⁰ opposite to the landing site. Always always plan for the unexpected
People have different opinions on this, some say its possible some say it's not a good idea. It is possible if the conditions are right. Depends on your plane and its ability to glide and turn. Also depends on your ability as a pilot. Winds. What altitude the engine fails. As was mentioned in the video. Well I think it pays to be prepared. Practice the scenario in a practice area. Know your plane, how it can turn, the limits etc. Have a plan for yourself ahead of time, including which decision you're going to make if the engine fails at different altitudes. Study the airport surroundings, fields golf course highways farms etc. Be prepared that the engine could fail on climb out and make a decision depending on altitude. Know your plane's best glide speed. I think the Cessna poh says land straight ahead, but use your discretion. Cessnas. don't have the best glide ratio. A cirrus might have better chances of making it back at lower altitudes. Well they got a parachute too. But ya practice and plan ahead. To know what the best decision is. Got to make decision fast.
The head of my flight school had 50,000+ hours on the C172. He told me he’d tried it and made it 😂
One day after you posted this a plane in TJIG Puerto Rico aparently tryed to do this because the direction of when he crashed, the two pilots are alive if want to try to research the school was Ace aviation
Good lesson. I have some empirical data for the low altitude forced landing, but have had only one engine failure at altitude. From fifty years and 17,000 hours at 200' or lower crop dusting and flying pipeline patrol my orientation changed from altitude is life to airspeed is life. Nine of my eleven low altitude engine failures were six second deals. Aviate... No navigate. No communicate. Because I always had cruise or near cruise airspeed from either extra ground effect energy in the spray run or just cruising on the pipeline, I was able to make the very safe energy management 1 g turn at any bank angle necessary to make a good landing zone. I would simply use cruise airspeed to pitch up wings level and when slow bank at whatever angle needed while releasing back pressure on the yoke. Because of neutral dynamic stability, the airplane cannot stall itself. A pilot pulling on the stick is required. In this energy management turn, airspeed is traded for altitude (law of the roller coaster) and then altitude is traded for airspeed (same). Try it at altitude and you will like it too.
The basic level in low ground effect, sort of like the old soft field, takeoff is default for the crop duster as he always is max loaded and needs all the extra free ground effect energy he can get. If the runway is 1,000'' he gets into ground effect well below Vso, and out of ground effect airspeed anyway, levels the fuselage and stays in six inch ground effect until any obstruction forces him to pitch up and then only pitch up enough to just clear the obstruction. Airspeed and not altitude is life down here. While on the pipeline the level in low ground effect takeoff was default for me as well in small Cessnas. My only engine failure on takeoff was in a 172. From my six inch perch, I landed on the runway remaining. It hurts my sole, and many pilot's tin and skin, to see pilots use no free ground effect energy, pitch to Vx or Vy when not appropriate as the obstruction is thousands of feet away, and struggle as the outcome of such a poor energy management decision is always in doubt.
So, while as a crop duster I have the energy management turn that would most likely result in a favorable impossible turn, I have never chosen that technique as a get out of jail free card. After thousands of impossible turns with power, yea even tighter, crop dusting, I had no confidence in going back into the field I was spraying without power. I did have the energy, airspeed, to maneuver to a suitable landing site.
Alternately, you can say “energy is life.” Whether it be kinetic, potential, or both. Military low level flying is similar, have sufficient energy to maneuver to include zoom. Note a zoom is distinctly different from a climb. Zoom is trade in KE for PE while climb is chemical for PE.
l'm not a pilot, but it seems to me that forethought is paramount for this situation. That is, have a good idea of all factors before takeoff. Then when taking off, you will instinctively know from your height and flaps and speed at what point the impossible turn IS possible. In other words, you pass a line or haven't reached the line yet and actions depend on if you have hit that line or not.
A fascinating video that may well save somebody's life some day.
It also requires a fast turn rate of 40-45 bank so practice often or subscribe yourself to landing on whatever is in front of you when down low.
1 plan for engine failure on every flight with low altitude before you take off. Pick where you will land...
It's impossible for the pilots this video is designed to instruct.
Best to land wheels up in a field
Don't save the plane... Save your life.
Tried it several times from 500' In 172 on X plane 12 without success.
If the climb gradient after takeoff is not significantly higher than the glide gradient, an impossible turn is impossible at any height. Am I wrong? This can easily happen at high weight or high density altitude.
Right. Better climb at over 700 fpm and some wind to bring you back. From 700 agl up. Most engine fails are the partial power kind. You can Turnback from 400 agl if not climbing. I learned them in 2001. ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
My CFI demo'd it to me from 450ft and he made it, he reacted immediatly so add some feet call it 550-650 but it seems pretty doable if you train to it, if you don't train to it enough then don't attempt it.
In shipping there is the Williamson turn. It’s for man overboard. Turn left 60 then immediately right onto a reciprocal of your original course
For engine out it takes you slightly further out but has the advantage that you can do shallow turns and you don’t end up at 90 degrees to the runway.
I would be interested to see how it would work for engine out
this is actually what I assumed the impossible turn was, a return to a reciprocal heading.... so that is wrong?
@@xisotopexI'd assume that'd be the maneuver you'd use in a larger aircraft where a single engine failure will not necessarily cause the craft to stall, like say a passenger plane.
I'm not a pilot I just know the science 🤷
These are safe to practice in real life as long as you are very comfortable with the glide characteristics of your plane, know what stalls in a bank feel like and what speed youll stall at for a specific bank, are comfortable with a tailwind landing, are doing it at a empty untowered field, and start at a high altitude, like 800ft and work your way down lower as you have successful impossible turns. My personal minimum is 400ft. AGL in a cessna 172 and 500ft for archers warriors and DA40s with a headwind component of up to 15kts on takeoff. Stay coordinated and at or +5kts of Vg, do not exceed a 45 degree bank and you will be very far away from any stall/spin situation. The factor that will 100% make this maneuver impossible is if you're taking off with any type of tailwind whatsoever so consider that next time you think about opting for a shorter taxi to use a runway with a light tailwind.
I had engine problems in my Glasair in April 2024 and landed straight ahead. Investigation team said would have end deadly if i would have try the turn
* right after takeoff
I was telling the pilot that shared this on an unrelated Discord server that I'm no pilot but with my option being a maneuver called "The Impossible Turn" my ass is gonna be look for a nice road or open field to kiss the ground.
Bottom line: the impossible turn has impossibly low odds of working out. 1) You have to be incredibly well rehearsed in doing it. That means lots of high risk practice. The practice has a higher chance of getting you than an actual engine failure. 2) Most engine failures are not instantaneous. It's gives a pilot too much indecision time, too much lost speed, and by the time the decision is made, it's too late. Add to that, there's risk of a false positive where the engine is not having any serious problem and the reaction is an over-reaction. 3) You can do a wingover rather than a turn. That has all the problems of 1 & 2 combined x 10. Plus a badly executed wingover at low altitudes is a guaranteed stall/spin.
Add to any of these scenarios a complicating factor: wheels dropped, fire, passenger freaking out, flaps set wrong, ... and probably of failure is x 100.
Also, the stall speed of a cessna is so low, you can put it down in trees and still survive.
me doing that but in almost mach 1 in ksp and actually wanting to land without boom and failing miserably
I can demonstrate a 180 turn after engine failure from climb with 60 knots in a Cessna 152 losing less than 200 feet. Immediately nose down and 60 degrees bank simultaneously. Hold 60 Knots, stall waring is constantly beeping. Roll out hard with a little rudder. Turn diameter is about 70 Meters. Therefore, you nearly stay over the runway. We practiced this 100th of times while I was an aerobatic flight instructor. It is an absolutely save maneuver once you practiced it, so you can do it in your sleep, while drunk. Without that level of practice, it can be dangerous.
As a student my intructor made me practice at safe altitude. You have to react immediately and it is not a good option.
Great video, thank you. Something that wasn't considered here is traffic. Is there enough time to communicate with ATC to have them clear the runway if other traffic is lining up to takeoff?
Thank you
That's a good point.
Yes and no. I had plenty of time to call out "N1234 engine failure landing runway 3" but by the time I was initiating the maneuver a Bonanza was just off the ground behind me. I knew he was there because I'm always paying attention to the radio, and I was able to dodge him. The tower told him to watch out but he never saw me, or even had a clue there was an emergency happing right in front of him.
In my opinion the radio call is very important at busy airports and it's easy to make very rapidly, especially if practiced. However it won't always make a difference if traffic is already on the move behind you. Just another reason to maintain awareness of everything happening on the field and on the radio.
Field elevation where I'm at is 6200 feet. The "impossible turn" isn't even worth considering for a heavier, faster aircraft. In the summer, density altitude can be as high as 10,000 feet standing on the ground, so your aircraft drops from the sky like a stone if you lose power. A supercub or 172 might pull it off if you react swiftly, but otherwise you're far better off putting it down in a field. Odds of making the runway aren't great.
Are some runways long enough that you could land back on those runways even if the engine died above 100 ft without turning at all!?
I guess so according to your ending yeah keep climbing regardless for quite a while after takeoff I think is just good advice - don’t stay below 1000ft in particular usually!?
I think it’s critical to do the initial climb at Vx to have the best relationship of gained altitude to distance back to the runway and then make the impossible to the side the crosswind component is coming from, so the wind carries you back to the runway, not further away. I always include this in my emergency briefing. We trained the manoeuvre during my ppl training and one thing that stuck with me was by how much I had to drop the nose to speed up and keep the speed without the engine while swiftly inducing a steep bank angle of about 45°. In this intense situation I think it’s not that important to achieve the optimal airspeed, just to make sure there is enough buffer to high bank stall speeds and a possible stall/spiral. In discussions about the impossible turn there is often no or not enough emphasis on the things a pilot can do to increase the likelihood of the impossible turn to actually work. And it’s absolutely recommended to try this at least in the sim.
I'm not arguing with you or here to say you're wrong on the internet or whatever. I just want you to hear my perspective based on my experience. I'm a long-time CFI and I've practiced and carefully experimented with the "impossible" turn countless times in different conditions, and I've done it for real twice. Please take the time to consider what I have to say.
Engine failure during a Vx climb at low altitude can be really sketchy in a lot of planes, even without trying to initiate the relatively aggressive turn back to the field. You're giving yourself a disadvantage by starting the whole process with a high AoA and low speed. I know it makes sense numerically to climb at Vx if you're focused on height vs distance to the runway, but that doesn't account for the rapid altitude loss due to the low energy state of the aircraft when entering this scenario from a Vx climb.
First, you REALLY have to shove the nose down aggressively and immediately if you lose the engine during a Vx climb. Assuming you react fast enough and don't immediately stall (and spin if you didn't train yourself to immediately release the heavy Vx right rudder) you've lost a solid chunk of altitude already just getting the nose down and preventing a stall. Now you're sitting there with an even bigger AoA, lower speed, and a rapid sink. A normal climb is much more forgiving to a sudden loss of power and you'll lose significantly less altitude right out of the gate just in the process of lowering the nose and avoiding a stall.
So you got the nose down and didn't stall, but the plane is still below best glide speed, so you're sinking fairly rapidly at this point due to the extra induced drag. You can drop the nose and try to speed up, or just deal with it but DEFINITELY don't get any slower! Either option you choose is going to result in a rapid and unavoidable sink, definitely more than if you were at best glide speed. At this point, whatever gains you initially made with the Vx climb have been negated by the rapid sink rate caused by the low speed and high AoA when thrust was removed from the equation. If you were at Vy (and reacted quickly) you'd already be set up at your best glide speed!
Now you have to actually execute the turn, which will need to be fairly aggressive. Banking the plane is going to cause an even faster loss of altitude, because you're definitely not pulling in this turn considering your already-high AoA. Or you shouldn't be, at least. It's very difficult to resist the urge to pull back just a tiny little bit when you're in this situation for real. By climbing at Vx you've already set yourself up with very thin margins. So now you're sinking even faster, and you have no extra margin before a stall if you pull back a little bit subconsciously. At this point, you've DEFINITELY negated any gains you made by starting off with a Vx climb.
Here's another consideration for performing this maneuver at speeds below Vy/best glide: The plane is going to fly like a wobbly mushy turd. How often do you practice flying the plane in this flight regime? We're basically talking about power-off descending slow flight with aggressive banking. The controls will be very mushy and you'll need skillful rudder work to stay coordinated, which is very important in this situation. I'd much rather be flying this highly stressful maneuver in a configuration I'm well accustomed to; best glide/approach speed.
You should absolutely go out and compare these scenarios for yourself at altitude using ground references and a "deck" altitude. Be strict about the numbers and be observant. Even better if you can stick a gopro in the cockpit and review the footage afterwards so you can give your full attention to the maneuvers and review the gauges later. Give yourself at LEAST 3 seconds before reacting to the simulated engine failure.
Good luck!
Thank you for the input, it makes sense to me. And I usually climb with Vy, so it's the more realistic scenario to train anyway.
@@fhb1991 Right on. Blue skies brother!
If PTFS says it’s possible then it is possible.
This is a joke btw
What people don’t understand is that you are making a 360 degree turn by the time you line up with runway centerline.
No you aren’t. Probably about 270-280 after you add all of the angles up if you’re aggressive enough on the first high altitude turn and turn the into wind after letting the plane drift during departure.
It's probably a very difficult manœuvre with a regular aircraft.
But it's really good if you train for it... and it's reasonable to try with an ultralight. 400 ft is enough...
The training means you're ready to react quicker and very aware of all conditions like wind which is nearly never exactly in the track axis. Turning against the wind helps a lot.
And an ultralight climb so steep you can reach the possible turn altitude before the end of the track, you can glide very slow... eventually landing on any surface without the need to reach the hard track. My usual field was ending over a forest so I was very careful to make accurate plan for any north bound takeoff. The official rule was no attempt to turn back below 500ft...but in good days I reckon 300 would be enough...and practice at 400 wasn't really hard.
Of course it depends on many factors and the key is to think about it before you even start the engine.
get those damn flaps up
I'll head for the Hudson.
The problem with all of these power pilot analysis of the turn back procedure (which is required training for glider pilots as stated in several comments above) is they assume best glide speed yields the best performance. This maneuver is best done at minimum sink angle of attack not best glide and 45 degrees bank should be the goal not the limit. If the airplane is equipped with a stall horn and it is properly setup minimum sink AOA is roughly equal to the AOA that the stall horn is triggered at.
In testing with a 172 at 500ft AGL 45 and 60 degree banks yielded nearly identical results but the skill required for 60 was significantly higher and unrealistic in a high stress emergency. At 30 degrees bank it was indeed impossible to return from 500ft AGL.
1. Don’t do it unless you have practiced it.
2. Practice it at altitude with a CFI using at least 1500AGL as “field elevation” then step it down 500 ft at a time over an open field before moving on to an airport.
3. Stalling while banked is not inherently dangerous but stalling while uncoordinated is. This maneuver should only be performed if your coordination skills and awareness are high enough to keep it coordinated under the stress of an emergency. If they are not this isn’t for you.
OK, so at 500 ft AGL it might not be an impossible turn. But what about 450 ft AGL? or 475, or even 490?
And what happens if you try it at 490, or what you think is 490 AGL, and you see that you're not going to make it? what do you do then, in those circumstances, not sitting at your desk thinking about it.
There is a reason it's called the "impossible turn", it's not because it's impossible, but because too many people have died trying it after an engine failure (or even just a reduction in power).
We all need a rule of thumb that is clear and easy to remember, and that we tell ourselves before every flight.
1. if engine loss, push forward on the yoke immediately, get that nose pointed down (same orientation as when on final for landing - to keep up a speed that is above stall)
2. if above 1500 AGL then turn to return, but no more than 30 degrees bank (remember that the stall speed goes up as you bank)
3. if above 1000 AGL you have about 90 degrees left or right from which to choose a landing site
3. above 500 AGL, you've got about 30 degrees left or right to choose from
4. below 500 AGL, land straight ahead
Practice this in the practice area at 4 or 5000 AGL so you can see how much you actually lose in a 360 degree turn with no engine (it's not 180, because you're not lined up on the runway after 180, you've got to do 270 in one direction and 90 in the other, or a total of 360). Then you can change the numbers to suit your airplane.
I would not advise to practice the impossible turn below 1500 AGL. That being said though it is a good idea to see how little loss of altitude one can get after practicing the maneuver in safe conditions then keeping that number in mind with a safety margin when briefing their before takeoff checklist. I have practiced in the sim at airports I operate out of the impossible turn on all the runways so I have a good idea of what altitude I could reasonable pull it off on to declare a cutoff point to where I would rather go to my chosen emergency landing spot than try to turn back.
I have personally watched someone attempt the impossible turn. They made the turn and made it back to the field. Not the runway, though. Unfortunately, the rest of it didn't go so well for them.
Completely depends on the plane. The more powerful your engine and the better the glide ratio, the more likely it is that you can do the impossible turn.
I mean I think it should be a requirement to immediately offset to a side of the runway left or right so it reduces the bank angle
Yesss,,,
I'm not a pilot so this might be insane, but would a reverse cobra turn work? Pitch up momentarily for a quick altitude/speed swap, then bank hard and pitch down hard, effectively pulling a tight U turn in the air. You'll be screaming toward the ground, but if you can pull up smoothly, it should get you pointed in the right direction. I've done it on RC planes but never without engine power. No idea if it would work here.
Yes extreme maneuvers involving abrupt control input at low airspeed and low altitude are a great idea
if you use shallow bank like that illustration, It is wrong. You will go far away and then have to come back to the runway. It is a Vglide 45 Turnback. 45 bank at Vglide. A Vglide 45 bank Turnback. You program before take off. Plan to Turnback only
if you climbed 700 fpm constant to 700 agl and wind over 7 knots. 7 knots or more winds to push you back too.. The 777 Turnback.
That is the 777 No Power Turnback Rule i learned years ago from EmergencyLowManeuvering Channel.
Program before take off The 777 No Power Turnback. We did it even before preflight. You know if you will climb 700 fpm or not before preflight based on temp airplane and conditions. If not, dont plan to turnback unless partial power, but no power, no turnback if no 777 Rule met on that take off. 777 Rule ...
I’ve seen it happen experience and altitude
In most light aircraft yes it’s completely impossible, the big problem is not the stall or the turn it’s the fact that you just won’t have the height, light aircraft typically have very little excess power so the climb rate is very poor.
No, it's not. I did it while receiving dual as a Student Pilot, upon the surprise power-loss on climbout that was courtesy of the ME-CFII. Response was almost immediate, setting-up as taught in prior lessons. The keys were: Immediate response & proper setup. That's all there was to it. Did a 200-220° turn & was prepared to touchdown on the departure runway, when the ME-CFII returned power to the aircraft.
Your CFI pulled the power on you on takeoff as a student pilot and you did a 180 degree turn to come back and land on the runway, for practice?
@@PilotInstituteAirplanes 200-220° turn, followed by opposite-direction turn to line-up with the departure-runway, having somewhere around a quartering-tailwind.
Maybe you ought to look at the gliders with their 200 feet AGL rope break. 45 AOB is the quickest way to turn and to lose the least altitude in the turn. There is no such thing as best glide speed, only best glide AOA (though this is for still air or through the air mass). We trim to AOA not speed, if you set 45 AOB and don’t pull back, you won’t stall and you’ll get through the turn quicker. Terrain permitting, make the turn into the wind or in the direction of turn if turn already started. 45 AOB gets you quicker around to sooner have your wings under you to be set to land. G only goes up with bank angle if you’re holding the aircraft up. Those charts are for level flight. It is ok to accept an increased rate of descent for more turn to get the turn done quicker. Stall speed does not increase with AOB. It increases with longitudinal stick pull or increased pitch rate. You’re increasing your pitch rate hence load with the AOB when combining the pull to stay level or to maintain a given rate VVI. If you turn with no additional pull, you’ll maintain constant AOA and constant load though with increased VVI and consequently increased speed - it is ok to let the nose drop to affect the turn - in fact, it is safer to do so. You’re correct to say “… or increase airspeed” but this is a consequence of rather than deliberate choice action, the choice is to maintain AOA. (We should probably teach constant AOA turns in slow flight rather than or in addition to constant speed turns) There’s a good Medium article Improve your Landings with AOA and Power Techniques that applies here. Ultimately, though, for any given airframe you need to have an idea of AGL required to complete. Airport layout with alternate runways and taxiways becomes a factor to consider while runway length may help with some of those congested airports which may not have off airport “straight ahead” options.
I’m so lucky my airport is surrounded by water so if I was in this situation I wouldn’t have to worry about turning back so I don’t hurt people
I'm not a pilot except RC planes, but I wonder if you can put in a lot of rudder with less bank angle, which may give more lift and still turn?
that is a spin entry .. NO..
question if u have to and there is a large industrial building w/ a flatish top could u land on the roof if there are no other options?
Theoretically, if there's a mile long building with a perfectly flat roof that's also strong enough to drive a fully loaded semi on, and then there's zero air conditioning or industrial equipment anywhere on the roof, then maybe it might be possible.
Practically, no. Aim for a flat open area without buildings.
@@alexlowe2054 makes sense, thanks!
I did this at 600 ft in a 182
2:55 This is misleading. Load factor only increases with the application of back pressure.
If you can avoid a stall and a spin, higher bank angles will make you lose less height to make a full 180º turn. Considering a Cessna 172 and the 4 seconds reaction time:
30º: 400ft
45º: 300ft
60º: 250ft
75º: 210ft
I don’t think load factor is such a bid deal unless you are trying to maintain level flight. In a descent it shouldn’t matter.
For those who are trying to keep as much altitude as possible, they would definitely pull on the control and increase load factor.
Maybe you can somehow land in some field or area in front of the plane.
If you have the proper altitude and climb rate and know hot to do Vglide 45 banks. Why crash it somewhere. Vglide 45's are supposed to be done by all pilots, not just the top best only.
If you do it like that illustration, YOU DO IT WRONG. It is not a low and shallow turn. It is over a calculated altitude and if climbing over 700 fpm and some wind too to bring you back. I Used to teach Turnbacks when CFI in the 1990's. You have to have an altitude marker and i used to put a blue line on the Vglide speed. 2 markers. Turnbacks is a Vglide 45 bank turn from at least 700 agl if you climb at ovr 700 fpm.
Besides EFATO, it can be used on GRM Flyovers, Box Canyon Turns, Circling Approaches, and even make you better doing those Power Off 180"s from downwind leg, which makes a lot of commercial pilots that didnt know turnbacks (WTF?) fail the commercial pilot test. A CPL that dont know how to make efficient and safe tight turns without messing up ? Oh yeah, many there.
If I ask my cfi what the min height is for the impossible turn will he know what I mean
Most dont know hell about EFATO Turnbacks. The just ass ume...
Subscribed
The technique described involving best glide speed is wrong. Push forward to get a much higher speed and do a steep semi split S at minimum g s. This gets the turn done quickly. You will be low and fast. It is not necessary to get to the runway, only more unobstructed area on the airport. Another technique is after takeoff and local obstacle clearance turn 30 deg off the runway heading towards any downwind crosswind. The turn back into the crosswind gives a better chance of making the airport. 172 type aircraft the turn should be done above 90 knots. The pushing and accelerating in the dive will reduce the g s in the turn which should be at least 60 deg bank. G s are only pulled at constant speed and altitude. This diving bank can actually be done near 1 g. In a 170 it can be done at 400 ft. AGL.
Low and fast at many airports out West is not an option unless you like craters.
One should have a little emergency rocket booster. 30 sec of thrust wouldn't weigh much.
pack a parachute on the plane, hit the button, plane wafts in the breezes as it gently returns to earth under its canopy...
Ejections seats for all passengers on airliners too. And all cars too. Cheap solution..
@@JavierBrent That would look cool. A few hundred people ejecting like flares.
Looking
How old is too old to become a private pilot ?
It's all about your health. There's no age limit.
Depends, a friend of mine had total engine failure at 600 feet. Made it back to runway with a little to spare. Cessna 150.
600 feet, depending on density altitude, is right at the edge of this being possibly feasible.
You have the same accent as the guy who makes pizza comedy videos.
Human factors was not considered in this video. That makes the impossible turn even less posible. Dont do it! Straight ahead, don’t get dead.
We mentioned the human factors a few times.
Author said it takes 4 seconds, and longer if the pilot is inexperienced.
Additionally, a formula for navigating an aircraft emergency is a recipe for disaster. You make the best decision based on the situation given, and if returning to the airport is the best decision, then that is the course of action you must follow. Don't discard a solution based on a catchy phrase.
Don’t this turn several times in a PC12. The PC 12 easily does this turn.
These cowards dont believe you. You are too good for them. I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
"RTLS (return to launch site) requires continous miracles and acts of God to be sucessful"
CMDR John Young, STS 1
Anything is possible.
Not for the clumsy or coward. Those should not be pilots. But FAA dont require Turnbacks. I think many of those pampered Mild Maneuvering pilots cant do hard maneuvers too. Fakes.. You will poop doing this save. You cant handle the thruh. ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
@@JavierBrent OK, see if those FAA workers can fit their own requirements, see if they can pass their own Tess, I guarantee you, the majority of them. If not all of them cannot, they don’t know what they’re doing. FAA workers are just pompous government employees who hardly work unless they’re working toward evil, and get a huge paycheck. I doubt Joe Biden could pass those “tests” why should anybody else be expected to, it’s a way for FAA workers to control the people. FAA workers do not care about the people, they want this country to fall. They want China, they want the one world order. They want to stop the good people from doing what they know how to do. FAA workers don’t know. Government workers don’t know that’s the truth. Never trust government. God bless the heroes atBoeing. God bless America. Let freedom fly.
04:28 Wrong.. LOL.. My CFI did idle Turnbacks on Bonanzas from 800 agl and 10 knot wind tailwind landings. He said to keep the real Vglide not the grossed Vglide speed.. I took hhis training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
I do a 30 degree turn after lift off once I am out of runway, keep low and accelerate to max speed before I start to climb. This way I can turn back.
I took training on 2 kinds of turnbacks in 1999. Cherokee short wing. Partial from 400 agl. Total from 700 agl if climbed over 700 fpm. SEE THIS. 500 AGL crosswind leg turnback Bonanza v tail ruclips.net/video/pwIvao_ONSY/видео.html
It's not impossible, I do it with a model airplane all the time, but I would never try it with human flight.
just do a split s
Not very impossible in a glider, given a few hundred feet we will go for an abbreviated circuit
Good thing engine failures in gliders are… rare ;)
@@PilotInstituteAirplanes ...unless they're motorgliders. ;) Their use of similar engines to equivalent airplanes suggests similar odds of engine failure. With that said, the sink rate calculus for a motorglider still looks very different than the Cessna's.
Not impossible.
The unlikely turn.
if you do the turn wrong, you will stall or not reach the runway. Military, Bush Pilots, glider pilots and crop duster pilots do turnbacks every dam day, even with armament or 2,000 pounds of chemicals weighing them down. A Turnback, if safe and well done, is not an impossible turn- but some morons call all turnbacks as impossible turns. Bullshiters putting down the ones that do them right, and those are the best pilots that should be exalted, and never put down by liars that are AFRAID of doing Turnbacks and lying by calling Turnbacks as Impossible turns.. LIars...
Ask all the people who are dead after attempting it if the impossible turn is a good plan to have.
I know about 4 that did EFATO Turnbacks and landed safely all. We practice it partial power from 400 agl. 1990's. So you are a liar.