A continuation on everything you need to know about Vmc aerodynamics using the crash of a Turbo Cessna 310 to illustrate how good intentions sometimes leads to tragedy. Aircraft accidents almost always involves human error.
New private pilot here. (C172,152) Actually based out of Burlington airport KBTV where that Baron contacted KBTV FSS in the Seven Die In a Six Seater video. I have to say the quality of your videos/narration is unmatched by any other aviation channel I have seen. I've told everyone on the airport about you and they all say the same thing. Also the fact that you made an entire in depth video just to educate and talk about what some people commented on one of your videos shows how much you care about people learning about these topics and making the aviation community more informed. You're doing great and I will be waiting for the next video. -Owen Shannon
YT creators get nudged by thumb jockeys. You are the one with all the effort put in. Be humored, & not bothered, when spreading knowledge to the YT wolves.
Your explanations on VMC aerodynamics for this particular aircraft got me thinking about the possible cons on getting certified to different aircraft makes. It makes it harder to react properly to the emergency at hand for that particular airframe when you know too much on many of them, but not so much experience. Better to just fly one make and try to know everything about the plane, its engine and emergency procedures.
I am a wonabee pilot, l have had a few lessons, flown with various pilots and spoken with many of the old school . A very skilled wartime bomber pilot friend, sadly long gone …….. said that all the best training in the world could not make up for a natural pilot Mindoro way of thinking . I believe a good pilot has a talent to fly . A natural understanding of the environment of three dimensions, and being able to operate your machine in any altitude in those dimensions. The most hazardous part of the task being to take that machine from two to three dimensions and bringing it back again . To all those who are able to take to the skies, stay safe and enjoy the privilege!!!
For what it’s worth, I think your videos are the best. Most other RU-vidrs on aircraft accidents always seem to point fingers and start placing blame without any real facts available (Dan Gryder). Thanks for your informative content.
Gryder's chickens came home to roost after one of the people he defamed sued and received a $1.1M judgment against him in a Texas court of law. Let's see if he tones down his rhetoric going forward. I agree with your assessment of these videos, they are among the best. I fly a C310 so these VMC rollover accidents hit close to home. If faced with an engine failure on T/O will I do the right thing? The information presented here, discussing the correct options and mistakes made by the pilot will hopefully help me keep me from making the same errors.
As an instructor, this is what I love about aviation. It's complicated and counter intuitive. Training, learning, and finally planning are the only ways to survive this business. The interaction of dead engine, working engine, rudder, and ailerons got complicated just to maintain Vmc as you were explaining.
I believe you to be the most articulate, intellectually gifted aviation commentator on you tube. Your grasp of technical concepts, and your objectivity is second to none. The fact that folks are commenting with any kind of negative tone is laughable and just goes to show you simply can’t do “right” by everyone, all of the time. Keep moving, their thoughts are not in your control. What is in your control is your content, and your hard work in making these videos. Please 🙏 continue as I look forward to every one, and watch them 2-3x. Very grateful.
Based on the way you've always narrated your videos I could definitely tell you were either a writer professionally or did a lot of it recreationally. Nice economy of words and phrasing.
I think it's helpful to consider all the factors that lead to air accidents and incidents. I'm not sure exactly who the audience is here, but in my opinion, being absolutely clear and consistent about principles and terminology is critical to building understanding. I'm not at all hung up about being right about this, but I'd strongly suggest that lift is not dependent on weight at all. Lift, weight, thrust and drag combine to give rate of climb. Lift (as distinct from rate of climb) is basically determined by airspeed and angle of attack. I offer this opinion in the hope that it will be taken constructively - as is intended :-)
If we’re being clear and consistent about terminology here, aircraft certification standards (when establishing Vmc speeds) allow for up to 5-degrees of bank “at the most adverse weight,” which is the lightest weight not restricted by CG limits. But weight isn’t the thing that lowers Vmc. Lift does (technically when in a bank, a portion of the lift vector fights against yaw allowing for the use of less rudder). So lift is what’s important, but it’s also variable based on g-loading. So certification standards define lift by weight (or lift that occurs at 1g). From a pilots perspective, being totally “clear and consistent” can sometimes be overly complex. Ball half out of center when an engine fails, and you can turn whatever direction you want is what’s operationally important. Intellectual types are convinced by intellectual arguments, while everyone else is convinced by colloquialism. Sometimes it’s a battle…
Good work, this is a sad event. The pilot had his hands full but flying the aircraft is the first and only thing to do. Pilots will often answer and then do what ATC suggests.
keep up the good work. interesting. organized. really decent tie-ins with the videos and ATC cuts. when contrarians in comments present an organized argument or counter point, that too is helpful. comments implying the commenter carries the burden of some self described but unsupported higher level of expertise and knowledge is just tiresome nonsense from the commenter. if they have a point, make it with the same level of logical presentation and willingness to discuss potential shortfalls. this, like all of your work to date, is a good video, going through a thoughtful reflection on the previous video in response to responses. your rapid-fire discussion and colorful side remarks are well done. I appreciate your work and efforts to bring topics to light.
I liked your videos better when you didn't show your face...lol. When you just did narration it created somewhat of a different atmosphere. Not saying you have a face for radio, but it kind of ruined the mystery of who you were and what you looked like, if that makes any sense. I still enjoy your videos, they just have a different vibe to them. 👍
I’m still going to do the recreation videos, but they take a ton of time to make. I’ve got to do some talking heads in order to post more than once a month…
His stories are as much noire drama, as informative. I cannot imagine the efforts involved. Actually...I can. It's a lot. So I hear what you are saying - the mysterious voice was part of the noire vibe - but I'm also quite pleased to have the voice giving us more information, more often. And besides, my daughter says he ain't as ugly as me. So he's got that going for him.
I appreciate your new video clarifying some statements made in the previous video. However, you seem to be focusing on details and missing the most important factors. When I look at the comments it is clear that many of your listeners are new and inexperience pilots so I want to emphasise the basics. VMCg = Velicity for minimum control on the ground. See the flight manual. VMCa = Velocity for Minimum Control in the Air. Red line on the ASI. Vyse = best single engine rate of climb speed. This is marked on the ASI with a blue line. You should not raise the nose wheel until you are above VMCg. If an engine failure occurs below VMCa you should close both throttles and land ahead. If you have lifted off and can achieve VMCa you go ahead with the procedure to feather the failed engine if there is insufficient runway left to land.. If you are in cruise, you have time to maintain VMCa (or greater) and will have time to trouble shoot why the engine has stopped before feathering. The primary factor involved here is VELOCITY! With zero speed aircraft controls do nothing! With increasing speed they become more effective. There is a thing called the lift/drag ration, all pilots learn this in basic training. This is used to determine VMCa. If you do not fly the "book" numbers you are a TEST PILOT gambling your life that you know more than the manufacturer (with seconds to live if you are wrong)! Fly the plane according to the flight manual regardless of theories on the internet. When I flew Cessna 310's and 400 Series aircraft our Company procedure specified that we NEVER used full rich on take off. Mixture was set to a specified fuel flow during the take off roll. In the event of an engine failure mixture in these aircraft would NEVER be firewalled. The mixture was already set to the best performance! The MOST important thing at low level is to achieve and maintain "blue line" speed! Pitch and power are different. Both are pushed forward to help identify the failed engine and to avoid shutting down the good engine. The failed engine is identified and confirmed by reducing the power on the suspected failed engine. If you get it wrong, push the throttle forward! Once confirmed, feather the failed engine, clean up the aircraft and finish shutting down the failed engine, switches, cowl flaps, ect. Beware a failed engine during an approach! With power off the aircraft may yaw AWAY from the failed engine when you are trying to identify it. I learned this by making this mistake during a dual session! The main thing is AIRSPEED! There is no time to re-write the flight manual, just maintain your speed and climb the aircraft! IF you get below "Blue line" and get anywhere near VMCa, YOU ARE GOING DOWN! Unless you can regain "blue line", treat the aircraft as a single with extended gliding range and put it down! WAY too much over analysis VMCa! It is interesting in theory for an arm chair discussion but WAY too many American pilots are dying for this to be not fully understood. I do not mean to be over critical of your videos, what you are saying is all true but there is an over-emphasis on the minor points with a lack of emphasis on the major factor, which is AIRSPEED! Many low time pilot watch videos like this ( and the ones on "the "impossible" turn) and I fear they will not understand the BASICS of the problem. For VMCa it is AIRSPEED. For return to the runway it is ALTITUDE and DISTANCE! The standard proceedures used in flight manuals are there because of hours of testing and the experience, in real life, of others who did not make it Believe them!
Thanks for the detailed reply. I agree that speed is of paramount importance, but that is pretty well known and so I didn’t overemphasize it. There was another RU-vid presenter who covered this accident who blamed the direction of the turn for the accident (he said you should never turn into the good engine-i.e. that the aircraft can only turn in one direction following an engine failure. I focused on Vmc and the more technical details in order to counter his claim.) For what it’s worth, the vast majority of people watching these videos aren’t student pilots. Lots of GA and pros and lookie-loos. Student pilots should get their primary instruction from professional instructors and approved materials, not RU-vid.
@@flyingformoney777 Thanks for your response. As I said I don't intend to be over critical, I appreciate the effort you make to produce these videos. I responded because i am concerned that a number of presenters are producing videos on topics like "The Impossible Turn" and how you might be able to do it. There have also been several videos that seem to think there is a magic formula that will save from the basics of VMCa. Too many American pilots die every week because they do not seem to understand the basic fundamentals of flying. As I said, I intend my comment to be supportive criticism, and I enjoy and appreciate your videos. I am not trying to criticise you, i am trying to reach out to the less knowledgeable members of your audience who may not grasp the fundamentals of flying twins, even though they have enough money to own one! The accident statistics suggest there are a great many of them out there.
You were talking about Dan Gryder at the start of this vid, I’m sure of it. I hope he has learned his lesson, I doubt it though. I feel so vindicated by his tribulation.
Training is the only real defense against startle factor while flying any aircraft. The faster the aircraft, the greater the need for regular training. Todays pilots seem to lack any of the traditional skills that we used to know as airmanship. Good thing that modern glass passenger jets have the capacity to do much of the actual critical flying, with auto rudder and high AOA protection. Can’t say I agree with you regarding communication. Thats the last thing I care about, just fly the plane. Talk when you get things squared away. I think that way too many pilots think that talking on a radio is the first order of business. Fly the plane first and focus on flying exclusively, until your completely out of danger. Then talk. You’re putting out some great information.
Guys like to dick measure on how much they know, not much correlation on actually being a good pilot with that. You’re doing a good job, keep up the vids.
Randy specifically said his priority was to gain some altitude when ATC suggested he turn. Why he decided to turn without gaining the altitude is anyone's guess. The NTSB will ultimately tell us what state the prop was in. Personally I hope they find something wrong with the dead motor and not a fuel starvation thing. Condolences to everyone affected by this.
Leaning is ok for economy, (save a few gallons but go slower and not make TBO if you run too lean too often). But, leaning is great for making best power at high DA's
IMHO that pilot shouldn't have even made a radio call until he re configured his twin for single engine operation got it climbing and got up say 2 grand over There were other airports in front of him he could have continued to in a straight line Live and learn
Right 95% of the time! A bold statement but probably (>50%) accurate when you stick to your field of expertise. Academics think like this too, that being an expert is a narrow field makes them an expert in general on a much wider array of topics. You're video and comments about the experimental jabs proved that you think like an academic. Sticking to your field of expertise is why I continue to watch. If I want unqualified opinion I'll just turn on the TV news.
I’m sorry, but there is no way any pilot is going to consider ANY of these issues in an engine out situation. Simply put, in GA piston engine multiengine aircraft, when handling an engine out, always consider pulling power back on the remaining engine and landing engine out in a field just like a single engine machine. You do not spend time calculating any, you respond to training and fly.
