This guy does a pretty damn good job of not going for the 180. He lined it up with a smooth part and put 'er down. Nice work, guy. The terrain seemed pretty smooth.

Looks staged. The breathing is a nice touch. Great idea to generate some hits.

Hell, no kidding his engine went FUBAR. He used up all his gas sitting there reading all those checklist thingys.

Gump

This video was first posted over on Cessna Pilots Association by pilot who experienced it. Broke some wheel pants on his 182 on landing.Overall not a bad recovery -suspect carburetor float stuck up-or closed . When Carburetor bowl is full metering valve pin stops fuel from entering bowl -hence out of fuel situation .Smacking side of carb (sizemeck adjustment) with blunt force object will usually bring it back to life. YMMV

Subject: Video of C182 partial engine failure / emergency landing

182 STOL driver wrote:This video was first posted over on Cessna Pilots Association by pilot who experienced it. Broke some wheel pants on his 182 on landing.Overall not a bad recovery -suspect carburetor float stuck up-or closed . When Carburetor bowl is full metering valve pin stops fuel from entering bowl -hence out of fuel situation .Smacking side of carb (sizemeck adjustment) with blunt force object will usually bring it back to life. YMMV

Turning the fuel selector off would simulate this, and even give you a touch more fuel (whats in the lines) having said that, do you know of any 182 that will stay running that long with the fuel selector in the off position?

If this is not staged, I would be inclined to dig deeper into the situation before I flew it again...
And I am not suggesting this is staged, just that I would not be inclined to "whack the carb" and call it good.... Even if that notion came from an IA....


Take care, Rob

The pilot posted on the Red Board, and I would have to say it reads like the real deal to me. Not sure where the idea it could be staged originated, I don't see it at all.

I can think of a number of ways to get intermittent fuel flow, perhaps the most obvious is water in the fuel that comes through in small packages, but any sort of contaminant inline could restrict fuel. If it is a carb, I'd have it rebuilt rather than just whacked...

I had a bad o-ring in my fuel selector that restricted flow to 12gph from one tank.
Plenty to keep it flying, but lacking in climb.

OK YOU GUYS>>> These things really torque me. Is it fake, or is it real?
I want to believe it is real... want to watch it very closely and learn from a rare footage of inflight engine failure.
But, some have said it is a setup. Is it really that hard to document something these days? The N number is on the audio for craps sake.
Is the pilot standing up and saying it was all REAL and happened just the way we saw it? He sure got quiet after all the talk during the over long checklist part.
Somebody HELP me out here with some documentation. PLEASE

dying of curiosity... Saturday morning.

flightlogic wrote:OK YOU GUYS>>> These things really torque me. Is it fake, or is it real?

For the doubters, I just checked here : http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/AccLi ... &year=2012

As of today the most recent incident listed on the NTSB was from 10/22. The video title says 10/23, so I imagine this incident will show up in a few days. Brooks County Airport, Falfurrious, TX. If he truly faked it, which I seriously doubt, then it wont show up on the NTSB and chock it up to some weirdo getting his jollies off by faking a youtube video.

Like Bill Reid said, this pilot posted his video on the Cessna Pilots Association site and after reading his subsequent posts it seems very real to me. He is a relatively new pilot of a couple years and is understandably pretty shook up after this incident. Many words of support and encouragement have been offered to him by fellow CPA'ers to try and keep him flying. I for one think he did a hell of a job with the scenario and would fly with him any day.

It still seems suspect. His voice is somewhat somewhat nervous and scripted. @ 2:56 engine rpm drops A glimpse out the window seconds afterwards shows a shit loads of runway ahead of him. Power seems to conveniently comes back on going over the bush. Could be wrong, but I'm a cynical sob.

Relevant thread on red board:

http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=84571

A couple of posts from the pilot:

Thanks everyone. I was hoping to reinforce my confidence, and after a day of support from the community, I'm not so eager to throw in the towel anymore.
Plus, my insurance has an allocation for rentals while the 182 is offline.

I'll post some pics I took from the field 20 or 30 minutes after putdown. About the time it took me to stop pacing around the field.

I will add a play by play on my thought process at every adjustment in flight. It was automatic at the time, but after watching the clip many times, I am recalling my intent. Some of the major ones was as follows:

*First burp: Level the plane and keep speed. Pulled throttle and considered option one. Try to make pavement.
*Right turn: I didn't think 17/35 was doable, so I banked right to consider the taxiway. I may have been able to dump the flaps and attempt a slip down, but I was dealing with one burp of the engine and wasn't completely convinced of a problem. Maybe water that I could work it through.
*Level off and power away from aerodrome: Well it settled in that I had never heard that from the engine and by that time my option 1 had passed. Unable. I leveled the plane and I added power to see if I could burn myself to good fuel. At this point I knew I had the field out there. It is my home airport.
*Next round of misses: Ran good for a split second, but then started missing again. Note: The video only give sounds. The physical feeling of the loss of thrust and the weight that it adds in your seat is inexplicable.
*Bank left: Once the second round of misfires happened, I decided time to get myself over the pipeline clearing south of runway 17/35. Not too visible on video, but they are wide enough to put a plane down.
*Biggest power loss: As I nursed the engine to a decision point and it gave what I thought was the biggest power dip of the flight. It was time to put it down. I had the field made. I couldn't afford to try to limp the engine any further. There were no other fields past this one.
*Landing was obviously a decent crosswind, but very common in south tx. I don't remember even consciously thinking about wing low, opposite rudder. I'm proud to see I did that automatically. Probably could've pointed more into the wind, but glad I didn't. The caliche road I settled up next to at the end was a winding one and I would've surely hopped over that one and really bungled up the nose gear and a likely prop strike.

and:

So far looks like only damage is to the landing gear. Left main and nose pants got shattered. Right looks undamaged, but is covered up by a mean thorn bush. FAA inspector said no visible firewall damage and all the lines look clean. All in all, airframe is good.

No firm cause yet. FAA runup was off and ignition and induction systems are top of the suspect list.

Transport coming Monday to haul out of field. It'll be interesting to see the wings come off.

Why would this ever show up in NTSB records? Not an accident, is it even an incident?

Well, I am going to believe it. His explanation sounds credible...
And, if he is low time... he did a great job.

I posted my engine failure this summer under another heading (about whether to go to a lawyer).
Most responders here said fight the FAA and get a lawyer. Well, the AOPA counsel I contacted said his advice was just to go along with the FAA and do a re-examination test under 709.

This really pissed me off... since I have 39 years of violation free flying.
But, I sucked it up and did the exam last week. I availed myself of the legal right to use another FSDO other than the charging one. That worked well. The inspector was fair, friendly and direct.
We did an oral exam and I was done.

NOW.... I am going after the original inspector. He has lied to me. Perjured himself in writing.
Caused me future financial harm and a bit of stress to add to the situation. His actions defined the term ADD Insult to Injury.

I will persue this to Washington D.C. with the head of Flight Standards. I have worked with these people in the past on other issues. My senator will hear about it as well.
Wish me luck. The FAA dropped the ball in learning why my engine failed. Easier to say I ran out of gas. I expected much better from our civil servants. Lesson learned.

Troy Hamon wrote:Why would this ever show up in NTSB records? Not an accident, is it even an incident?

Well Troy I'm no fine print, FAA/NTSB regulation expert, but assumed since an FAA inspector is involved, there was some minor damage to the AC and it is a great learning opportunity that happens to be all over the web now they might investigate and report on it, we shall see.

If carb float stuck? kind of hard to tap while in flight, interesting why.

Maybe some of the crap that came loose when he ran that 10 gallons of ethanol blend Mogas through there 2 months ago
Well just saying
GT

I want to here what happens at the end. The audio cuts out and it is either for the profanity or he starts crying. Not to say that I don't have some embarrassing tapes from the Sim that I wouldnt want out.

4Whitey wrote:

Troy Hamon wrote:Why would this ever show up in NTSB records? Not an accident, is it even an incident?

Well Troy I'm no fine print, FAA/NTSB regulation expert, but assumed since an FAA inspector is involved, there was some minor damage to the AC and it is a great learning opportunity that happens to be all over the web now they might investigate and report on it, we shall see.

I'm not really either, but if the only damage was to the wheel pants, which are cosmetic, then I very much doubt it will qualify as an incident. If it shows up anywhere, it might be only in the FAA incident database (not the NTSB one), but it isn't there so I suspect it won't be listed anywhere. If your engine fails and you land safely it doesn't necessarily show up anywhere.

Heck, I don't know if it was contrived or real. If contrived, that was dumb. If real, he did OK. But since there apparently wasn't any airframe damage, neither the FAA nor the NTSB would be all that interested.

8 1/2 years ago, my engine threw a rod northeast of Fort Collins. I landed in a field, cracked the wheel pants of the mains, and that was it. Major damage to my wallet, of course, to build a new engine. But when I called the FSDO in Denver, the Inspector asked what damage there was to the airplane, whether I'd hit anything on the ground, and whether anyone was hurt. I related about the wheel pant cracks, that nothing was hit, and no one was hurt. He said. "OK, well, thanks for calling." That was it.

And of course, the basic requirements for notifying the NTSB are that there must be either substantial damage to the aircraft or serious injury, or damage to property other than the aircraft of $25,000 or more.

Substantial damage: Substantial damage means damage or failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component. Engine failure or damage limited to an engine if only one engine fails or is damaged, bent fairings or cowling, dented skin, small punctured holes in the skin or fabric, ground damage to rotor or propeller blades, and damage to landing gear, wheels, tires, flaps, engine accessories, brakes, or wingtips are not considered “substantial damage” for the purpose of this part.
Serious injury: Serious injury means any injury which: (1) Requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours, commencing within 7 days from the date of the injury was received; (2) results in a fracture of any bone (except simple fractures of fingers, toes, or nose); (3) causes severe hemorrhages, nerve, muscle, or tendon damage; (4) involves any internal organ; or (5) involves second- or third-degree burns, or any burns affecting more than 5 percent of the body surface.

It does appear that either he was a newbie or he was trying to impress someone with his adherence to a checklist, perhaps for the video. Other than that, who am I to judge?

Cary

flightlogic wrote

NOW.... I am going after the original inspector. He has lied to me. Perjured himself in writing.
Caused me future financial harm and a bit of stress to add to the situation. His actions defined the term ADD Insult to Injury.

I will persue this to Washington D.C. with the head of Flight Standards. I have worked with these people in the past on other issues. My senator will hear about it as well.
Wish me luck. The FAA dropped the ball in learning why my engine failed. Easier to say I ran out of gas. I expected much better from our civil servants. Lesson learned.

Interesting read.

http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/ ... 01221b.pdf