Early Analysis: Cessna 310 Crash July 18, 2023 Santa Fe, NM

[@pz2233]

Randy was an incredible person. So generous and kind. I loved him dearly as well as many others. Prayers for his family. He will be missed.

[@sarahalbers5555]

So sorry for his loss, and prayers to for his family.

[@ChosenWon]

Sorry to know this. My condolences.

[@02markcal]

I just read that Randy, “built premier plastic surgery programs in Los Angeles and traveled the world caring for children with hard-to-treat deformities,” it sounds like Randy really helped a lot of people in his 72 years of life.

[@SailingPennyLane]

❤

[@tvividy]

@@02markcalwow, what a man. Prayers to the family.

[@noahgrove2046]

Got to ride with Randy on a C-47 with him as the pilot. Absolutely incredible human being and a man who loved what he did. RIP sir.

[@petemyers9428]

I was on the southern end of Santa Fe when the 310 went down, and saw the horrible black smoke. We have been having calculated 10,000+ density altitudes for weeks. It was HOT the morning of the accident. Santa Fe has been near all-time record heat this past week. Please be careful this summer. It is not worth the risk when it gets so hot at high altitude (6300ft field elevation).

[@jmax8692]

You’re calling the pilot stupid and acting like you’re being helpful. GFY

[@toddb930]

When Richard's on deck, I'm all ears. Thank You for the good reminders of what to prepare for given these circumstances.

[@sarahalbers5555]

I am not a pilot, but a former flight attendant. Richard is an amazing teacher and unbiased source of information. I always look forward to these posts and the comments from the community. Thanks to all!

[@richardmcspadden9189]

Thank you!

[@toddb930]

​@@richardmcspadden9189 -- my dear Richard, may you rest in peace. 😢

[@andrewpomerantz4854]

The excellent commentary and analysis is very much appreciated. The outcome of this situation is truly terrible and tragic. Dr. Sherman was an ambassador to both the aviation and medical communities. Condolences to his family and may he RIP.

[@jtc1964x]

Outstanding anaysis - as usual. You are so informative yet respectful I can't applaud you enough

[@roderickcampbell2105]

These reports are wonderful. I hope they save lives.

[@zakelwe]

@@roderickcampbell2105 Yes, I am sure they do, or help out and reduce the consequences. I hope more people subscribe who are pilots. I am not a pilot and have to say I would be worried now travelling in a light aircraft with someone after seeing a lot of these. Even when people do not make terrible decisions and are good pilots, who fly well, there seems a very fine line at times and the consequences dire if you happen to cross it slightly.

[@sethtenrec]

@@zakelwe ironically so true in the case of this video

[@jjohnston94]

I live about 35 miles south of Santa Fe at a field elevation of 6500' and to the pilots around here, summer is for annuals. We've got something like 300 VFR days per year, so we're not missing out.

[@kwittnebel]

This seems like an immediate take home lesson, even without any facts.

[@jimmiller5600]

Up north we use Winter for annuals since ice is our problem.

[@GregSr]

Great breakdown of the factors involved in this crash. I am not a pilot but I spent 4 years assigned to a KC-135 flight simulator as a maintenance tech in the USAF. Part of my job included daily pre-flighting the simulator to ensure all systems are operating correctly. Also, during simulated flights with actual crewmembers, my job was to observe the various training "missions" to detect any anomalies in the equipment that may need further attention. One of the most common simulated failures was having an outboard engine fail during rotation at takeoff. Too often, the pilot would step on the wrong rudder pedal to compensate for the severe differential thrust. Of course, that caused the simulator to simulate a loss of control and then simulate a crash. When that happened, the IP (instructor pilot) would become very angry with the crew. Whenever responding to an engine failure, over the years, I heard him say emphatically "step on the good engines" when referring to the rudder pedals and which rudder response is called for.

[@edwardrichardson5567]

Dead Foot, Dead Engine

[@Paul1958R]

Colonel McSpadden, Thank you for your analysis and professionalism. Paul (in MA)

[@christiangreen2070]

RIP Richard... you were a great pilot, and an even better man. Fly high.

[@julienb5815]

Yeah I just had this video pop in my suggestions, I hadn't watched any other from him since the accident, and frankly it's still heartbreaking to watch...

[@russhartley4964]

First off, condolences to the family. It does sound like he was a capable pilot as well as a surgeon, and there are four immediate takeaways or lessons learned to use today. First, know your density altitude and how to apply that to your s.e.l. Climb chart and if the number is too low for you, reduce the weight and/or leave at a cooler daylight time. Second, brief your departure and worst case emergency procedure to yourself before each departure (he had a nice clear area straight ahead. Third, know that emergency procedure (and practice it at recurrent training) by heart. You might not have time if you’re single pilot in a light twin to reference a checklist. But do use it when you get the “aviate” portion well under control. And fourth, RAISE THE DEAD engine that is. ALWAYS bank into the good engine. This pilot did not have quite yet the aviate portion in hand yet so there was really no need to talk to the tower, the controller was not going to help save the day and as a matter of fact contributed to the bad situation by saying he was cleared left turn back. I would not lhave been saying anything (except “oh shit” to myself) until I had the emergency under control. I loved that airplane, especially the turbo models as I flew 100s of hours flying freight in them at night, with only once having a partial engine failure, over a city.

[@flyingmulerider7166]

Richard RIP - You will be missed by thousands of us.

[@sethtenrec]

Who you talking to?

[@AM-hs4bz]

@@sethtenrecthis man who presenting the show died recently in aircraft crash

[@sethtenrec]

@@AM-hs4bz I know, plane piloted by former NFL player Russ Francis. They made a mistake. Or he made a mistake I guess. Oops! But the OP above, who is he talking to? As you point out, the guy is dead. Lame comment.

[@diaryofacrankykid7270]

Freaky to think that just 3 months after posting this video, the man, the legend himself would die in near identical circumstances. Rip. Richard McSpadden. "I’d like the memory of me to be a happy one. I’d like to leave an afterglow of smiles when life is done."

[@mitchellh5869]

Light twins: 1.5 times the power, 2x the cost and mechanical issues, 3x the skill required. The point made in the video about accepting a glide to landing off airport in some scenarios can't be forgotten. Break the mindset that a twin always makes it to a runway. So many pilots accept gliding into a field in a single engine airplane with open arms, only to suddenly chuck that mentality out the storm window the moment they get in an airplane with two props. If you know you're pushing the limits of SE performance (High, hot, and/or heavy!) for your airplane, consider that second engine your ticket to a better glide ratio, not a guarantee you'll make it back to pavement.

[@jtc1964x]

well stated

[@wintercame]

Wise words. the instinct seems to be save the plane rather than save yourself and it ends up doing neither.

[@stevemadak6255]

Yeah but I also think 2 bad choices were made by the pilot as well ; 1. "Im gonna gain altitude " and 2. Staying in the left turn- Did the suggestion by tower to go left to 33 stop him from making a long lazy right. Iunno, all monday morning QB. Rest in peace. Thoughts for the family

[@pilotactor777]

Could he have landed on that road? Just interested?

[@semiprofessional8470]

​@@pilotactor777road landings can sometimes work out fine, other times it's rush hour.

[@toma5153]

A great clear and concise presentation. Thanks.

[@deani2431]

Can’t imagine a better person than Richard to help us all learn from and avoid these tragedies. Thank-you.

[@sethtenrec]

I think he taught us how to learn from and avoid these tragedies. Stay out of these light aircraft.

[@Triple_J.1]

Fly the wing. Nothing else matters. Thrust is optional. Lift is not!

[@NW.Modern]

Great point about accepting your off airport landing rather than augering in at 100kts+ still trying to climb. Sad and discouraging to see any pilot go down like this, but particularly one with this breadth of time and experience.

[@boneseyyl1060]

If you look at the area, the choice of an off site landing was as simple as looking down. He even had the option of a dirt road that was perpendicular with runway so he wouldn't even have required a turn and most likely could have gone gear down, particularly if he was having trouble raising them. Of course in that situation processing the information and making a decision is extremely difficult and time sensitive. I bet in flying those older aircraft, his natural instinct would be to preserve them in this type of a situation. Perhaps that kicked in here. But the fatal error of turning into the dead engine, seems like a massive oversight for someone with the vast experience he had.

[@bastogne315]

He died doing what he loved.

[@sethtenrec]

@@bastogne315 yeah, that helps 🙄

[@metaloper]

The quality content of this channel never ceases to amaze me.

[@richardmcspadden9189]

Thank you. We are able to tap into a lot of depth and breadth at AOPA.

[@sananselmospacescienceodys7308]

RIP Richard McSpadden. You were one of the greats.

[@srgordon26]

Thanks for the analysis. Too bad there wasn't a better outcome.

[@trumpsmessage7777]

No one wants to ditch an aircraft away from a regular runway but sometimes it's your best option.

[@CapFreddy]

As a light twin pilot my self, I can only hope that when (and if) I have a real engine failure my glider pilot instincts will keep me from trying to fly when the airplane is not. That’s the major survival factor in a light twin engine failure. Sometimes the operative engine will only fly you to the crash site.

[@colinrasmussen9470]

You need better training.

[@markg4459]

CapFreddy speaks wisdom and mirrors what we heard from the speaker. @@colinrasmussen9470 does not.

[@AlanMydland-fq2vs]

blue line baby😂

[@sethtenrec]

If only aircraft used quality engines like those made by Honda and Toyota.

[@romandecaesar4782]

Thank you sir for pointing out that sometimes the best option in this situation is to feather both engines and prepare the aircraft for an off-field landing such as on a road or highway.

[@shenandoahhills7263]

Excellent review. With such a failure merely flying the aircraft can absorb much of your brain power. Having to take one's hand off the controls to run through the engine failure sequence can be very demanding when you can hardly keep the aircraft under control. With the high D/A everything on the s/e checklist must be correctly and expeditiously completed or the aircraft simply will not perform. This is where recent/recurrent single engine failure proficiency is so important.

[@edadan]

My instructor told me the best thing to do if you lose an engine on a twin during takeoff is to pull both throttles back to idle and land straight ahead. Even though I never flew a twin, I never forgot him giving me that advice…this was around 1992.

[@IslandSimPilot]

“Put all the odds in your favor.” - Barry Schiff

[@jonathanantoun1367]

I love these analyses. I am not even a flight attendant. I believe these are great informative videos for any pilots to learn from.

[@olivierXV]

Thank you for the loud and clear reminder

[@daveaver]

Well done on the upgraded overview w/charts and aides.

[@phantomraven5044]

Rip Richard, I will miss these videos hosted by you :(

[@greenkwaka]

great breakdown, and 100% agree with your final thought.

[@octopusonmyback]

Richard is one of the most clear and logical speakers I've ever heard. Keep up the excellent work.

[@octopusonmyback]

Lesson learned: (1) be prepared when flying in high density altitude, and (2) in an engine out situation even at low altitude, where a second engine can provide sufficient climb performance for the situation, be prepared to fight back the instinct to turn toward the quickest landing pattern, particularly if that turn leans to the off engine, and concentrate first on gaining altitude to run the checklist(s) and perform a single engine landing. What is surprising is that the last words of the pilot seem to indicate he understood this and was focussed on gaining altitude. I suspect something else happened after he started to attempt to gain altitude. One possibillity is that the wrong engine was turned off.

[@richardmcspadden9189]

Thank you for the kind comments.

[@jaydibernardo4320]

Perhaps the pilot turned too soon before sorting out his plane. That checklist is rather daunting as well. Pilot was one busy person trying to handle everything. Got me. My condolences to his family. Wish this would've turned out better.

[@Thechist781]

Those light twins is the kind of plane I wouldn’t ever want to have an engine failure on takeoff. That’s nearly a death sentence 😮

[@CompleteWalkaround]

Excellent video. Gold standard of accident analysis.

[@AirSafetyInstitute]

Thanks for watching!

[@Luftpirat89]

Outstanding analysis. And really sorry for the loss. Blue skies ✈️

[@kevinmurphy2739]

I love the way you describe the issue in hand Not all of us are rocket scientist.

[@craignajjar1671]

This video is excellent! Thank you for the lesson!

[@tomrohan8480]

Thanks for the indepth analysis Sir.. lesson learnt is on an engine failure just on lift off.. - counter the yaw - wings level - landing gears in - feather the inoperative engine - maintain single engine climb out speed - gain safe alt And then look for landing options Thankyou Sir

[@dougfortnam9104]

Richard, Thanks for the early analysis on these accidents realizing that everything is not known about the accident, but there are definitely lessons that can be learned while the accident is fresh in our minds.

[@bombsaway6340]

Great analysis. This pilot seemed exceptionally well qualified and capable of dealing with this emergency. Hopefully the NTSB can sort this out and we can learn from this tragedy.

[@greggpedder]

Clearly not or he would still be alive. 🤔

[@MarkJoseph81]

​@greggpedder That's not necessarily true.

[@bombsaway6340]

@@greggpedder Even great pilots make mistakes or find themselves in no win scenarios.

[@Bren39]

​@@bombsaway6340well then you're not great right? But I know that it's very hot out there these days and the plane wasn't climbing and he was over hostile terrain... It's always better to crash land into ground as opposed to stalling in the air. Also if it was a left engine out, turning left was a mistake.

[@flyingphobiahelp]

Mother Nature is very unforgiving and doesn’t give two hoots as to experience or type ratings. Respect her!!

[@RegularItemShow]

Tragic but a solid reminder to do your density altitude calculations.

[@Mikinct]

Learned something. I thought even with density altitude any turbo charged engines performs as it would at sea level? I'm guessing now that may not be the case?

[@linanicolia1363]

Well, yes that was the first consideration he likely missed and that left turn, with an idle left engine.....was the kiss of death.

[@Jopanaguiton]

@@MikinctYes it can be done. I’ve demonstrated a cessna T310 with a RAM 2 conversion climbing from 9000FT at a rate of 200Ft/minute. However contrary to the VMC demo. My Airspeed was below blue line but above red line while maintaining direction control. Engine settings on the good engine were at 32 inches and 2500 RPM. POH says it can maintain 17000 FT on one engine but the climb performance will start to degrade around 13000 FT as you would have to maintain a higher indicated airspeed to maintain directional control as rudder would become less effective with denser air.

[@DirtFlyer]

If you watched the video, it wasn't density altitude that was the problem. He should have been able to slowly climb to 17,000 feet on a single engine under those conditions. It sounds like he did not get the plane set up properly for single engine.

[@russbell6418]

@@Mikinct Some engines are turbo-normalized, with a wastegate that automatically adjusts to provide sea level horsepower to a given altitude. I think these are a standard turbo, which simply adds pressure to the manifold. As such, they lose performance with altitude, or with density altitude. (Of course, prop and wing also lose performance with altitude or density altitude.)

[@wildgoose419]

"Don't fight it...accept it... deal with the best option you have available." That's a simple and yet wonderful piece of advice, and so logical. I think Richard McSpadden might be a Vulcan.

[@revampmobilesolutions8851]

Great video as usual, may he fly with angels now 😢

[@JLFerguson]

These early analysis videos are great but what happened to the full length videos? I miss them. They were awesome.

[@AirSafetyInstitute]

More Accident Case Studies coming soon.

[@mickcollins1921]

@@AirSafetyInstitute I was wondering the same thing. Good to hear.

[@billbrunson3800]

i think the focus should not be on why the engine quit. the time for figuring out why is later. it quit so dont turn into a dead engine.

[@motorTranz]

May God comfort his family. My sincerest condolences. Thank you for your analysis.

[@effortaward]

Thank you for the lesson.

[@bobteter4300]

Good video, but please recheck the comment (7:28) that the SE climb performance is based on wings level climb. Normally the climb performance is based on climbing with a five degree bank into the good engine which reduces the sideslip and drag. Great comment on accepting what you have got if you are not climbing. If it happens before the gear is up, think as a friend said "well I just sold the aircraft to the insurance company" power off both sides and go for the straight ahead off field landing.

[@180mph9]

Great report, my 2 cents is in line with your evaluation, put another way, he stopped flying the airplane, instead he felt it was necessary to start talking to ATC instead of following the procedures you outlined, straight ahead, clean up, lower wing slightly. At that density altitude, the 310, 402 and 421 need both engines to fly, picking a relatively flat spot and ditching it straight ahead was his only chance, making the turn sealed his fate. The DTSB makes it a point for pilots to mentally brief themselves prior to every departure, this technique can save lives in any aircraft.

[@bobteter4300]

It's easy for us to be critical, but you would be hard pressed to find a more qualified MEL pilot. Fate is the Hunter, may he RIP.

[@180mph9]

@@bobteter4300 I’m guessing he didn’t actually know what poor performance was available on the day in that 310. I wonder when the last time he did any SE air work. Training matters.

[@kennethraysealsphotography3513]

Excellent presentation! Thanks.

[@pjstew]

Will be of interest to find out what state the props were in- whether the correct one, or if any, were in feather or not. Even so, turns on one engine are very demanding in terms of aircraft performance, as this video mentions.

[@linanicolia1363]

these turns are discouraged, especially in low altitude.

[@F1fan007]

Excellent analysis. So tragic and a good reminder all the way around to know it can happen to the best. He must have had a severe case of wanting to get back to the airport. So tragic that he made a left turn. How many hours total did he have? Sounds like he had made plenty of good decisions and had grat flying skills to make it to 72.

[@greathornedowl3644]

Thank you for the informational video. Great reminders for all pilots

[@stevemadak6255]

Its crazy how hot and dry it gets every summer here in New Mexico. Lots of the state has high altitude. This was in the 'cool' morning. I Fly RC jets. Electric ducted fans. Planes that will fly out of your hand @ sea level (easily hand launched) will take a full throttle run on a 300' runway to take off. Its amazing how much MMPH you lose with thin dry air.

[@stevek8829]

Dry isn't a density problem, humid is. High, hot, humid.

[@webcucciolo]

As I commented under Blancolirio's video: "6400 maximum, then down to 6100, so the airport actually seems to sit higher than immediately surrounding terrain. Even if he feathered correctly, it's obvious that he was never gaining altitude, which was his plan (as per audio). I wonder if, after noticing that he wasn't gaining altitude, he tried to go for the highway. When I fly single engine I tend to always look for suitable field to land, while when I fly the Seminole (counter-rotating prop, so no critical engine) I tend to focus more on Vmc and proper procedure. But we need to remember that even in a twin, we need to look for suitable landing area in case of engine failure. Two months ago at KLAF (low altitude, 600ft) on simulated engine failure I could barely climb while keeping slightly above Vmc, even after simulating feathering 😮"

[@Saml01]

Good point! Every pilot should look at the Google map around their home field to find suitable landing spots or taking it a step further and using the measurement tool. You'd be surprised what looks big enough but is not.

[@igclapp]

I'm not sure why you were trying to climb just above Vmc. Fly blue line (Vyse) for best single engine climb rate. You should never be below blue line except on short final when landing is assured. Note however that Vyse may be slightly lower than what is marked on the airspeed indicator when flying at low weights or high density altitudes.

[@garyprince7309]

You gave us a very good overview of procedure for engine loss in a twin for a stable climb and thank you. However, no mention was made on turning into the dead engine. It sounded like the tower asked if he could make a left turn, directing him to the closest runway. It would be sad to find out that he turned into a dead engine trying to rush into a landing on the closest runway, instead of following procedure to establish a climb of some sort straight ahead, or if not possible landing straight ahead gear up. Hopefully, he wasn't in 'gotta save this plane' mode.

[@sethtenrec]

Well, we heard him say that he was gonna try to get some altitude. But I guess he forgot to do that before he made that turn. Don’t forget he was 72.

[@dks13827]

As I review this................. he should fly straight ahead as long as need be to get altitude..... then he would be fine.

[@linanicolia1363]

yeah. You could lose both engines and land straight down, hoping to miss any house or anything in the way. You may total the plane, but walk away.....

[@wintercame]

@@linanicolia1363 In this case there was land clear of obstacles straight ahead. With the left turn he plowed into a trailer home.

[@sibtainbukhari5447]

Miss your videos Richard . Fly high

[@crochelt]

Pilot was a brilliant surgeon. He will be missed by many

[@02markcal]

I just read that Randy, “built premier plastic surgery programs in Los Angeles and traveled the world caring for children with hard-to-treat deformities,” it sounds like Randy really helped a lot of people in his 72 years of life.

[@crochelt]

@@02markcal He was a friend of a friend. Apparently extroadinary man. Too bad. Only good thing was the house was apparently empty.

[@capnhawk51]

I had a left engine failure right after take-off in a tired, old Piper Apache. Fortunately, being a short field, the gear was already retracted. It was a thrill a minute getting back to my home field, as that Apache would not climb over 900 feet MSL. What it did prove was that I was a better pilot than I thought.

[@NeonsStyleHD]

I tried this in the same plane in Microsoft Flight Simulator in the same conditions. I couldn't get a climb rate out of it on one engine at that density altitude, and I also crashed. More specifically, I failed the right engine just after take off. The plane struggled to stay level, in fact I couldn't maintain level flight. I rotated at 90 knots, and was about 100 feet above ground when the engine failed, and it just rolled right and crashed. I feel for this fellow. What bitch of a situation to find yourself. :(

[@wilsont1010]

Does it mean that you should rotate at higher airspeed to cater to the environmental conditions?

[@justinsalaskanadventures]

Thank you for the video

[@hivoltagedriver]

Working on my multi-engine add-on now. I can attest to how much more difficult a light twin is to fly on a single engine.

[@benlundgren3760]

I am not a pilot but at 35 years old I can’t imagine learning this skill and being so knowledgeable and reactive, to navigate an emergency situation.

[@stephenskierski5633]

Single engine max altitude is about 7500 not 17500, the density altitude was higher than the single engine service ceiling.

[@jimw1615]

Cessna T 310 R, II turbocharged - Performance Data Horsepower: 285 Gross Weight: 5500 lbs Top Speed: 237 kts Empty Weight: 3723 lbs Cruise Speed: 223 kts Fuel Capacity: 102 gal Stall Speed (dirty): 70 kts Range: 517 nm Takeoff Landing Ground Roll: 1306 ft Ground Roll 640 ft Over 50 ft obstacle: 1662 ft Over 50 ft obstacle: 1790 ft Rate Of Climb: 1700 fpm Rate of Climb (One Engine): 390 fpm Ceiling: 27400 ft Ceiling (One Engine): 17200 ft

[@jimw1615]

Cessna T310R II Performance Specifications Horsepower: 2 x 285 HP Best Cruise Speed: 223 KIAS Best Range (i): 517 NM Fuel Burn @ 75%: 27.2 GPH Stall Speed: 70 KIAS Rate of climb: 1,700 FPM Rate of climb (1 engine out): 390 FPM Ceiling: 27,400 FT Ceiling (1 engine out): 17,200 FT

[@johningram9081]

I disagree please check the specs again.

[@randominternet5586]

The focus on density altitude is important, but it's possible this airplane had a fair bit of margin still. He was solo - that usually means a LOT less weight when you include luggage etc etc. Some cessna 310's are carrying 6 people aren't they? And many are turbocharged. The other issues (cleaning up / feathering / bank / direction of turn etc) all seem like potentially very direct contributors. Gear out, no feather, turn into dead engine, let speed decay? That would be pretty bad. If he was trying to climb my guess is his speed WAS decaying (keep speed is usually part of engine out but I don't know multi) - that was his radio call.

[@jemez_mtn]

For those saying he should have turned right into the good engine, he would have been turning into higher terrain. His ADS-B data shows he could not climb more than about 100' agl, so this would have been a bad option as well. With no climb performance, either due to density altitude or not having the time/wherewithal to secure the dead engine, landing straight ahead was the only 'good' option he had.

[@scottw5315]

Do we know what engine failed?

[@jemez_mtn]

@@scottw5315 I haven't seen anything confirmed, but all signs seem to point to the left. Regardless, turning right was not a good option in any case.

[@redb.3885]

So sad to see this😢

[@SkylineBaronPilot]

Thank you for sharing. Always appreciated. Great reminder for sure.

[@AirSafetyInstitute]

Thanks for watching!

[@cieloaltoa3405]

Thank you and great video as always ! 👍👍👍👍👍👍😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@terryrobertson8382]

Having flown a Cessna T-50 Bobcat with 245 HP engines and CS but not feathering props, the rule was if an engine failed on takeoff to pull back the throttles and land straight ahead. There was no hope of flying on one. Better to crash wings level than nose down and/or inverted.

[@jafar6785]

Thanks for the insights.

[@NeonsStyleHD]

So sad, but you can see the difficulty he had since the Airport (KFAF)'s surveyed elevation is 6348 feet MSL. All the surrounding terrain is 6500 and above in the immediate area of the airport (according to the approach plate for Runway 20). Yet his departure altitude was at most 6050 feet MSL. Something is wrong with his altitude figures as he's lower than the terrain he's flying over. Very sad. Approach plate can be viewed on Skyvector.

[@jeffhiner]

Maybe the ADS-B data is output pressure normalized to 29.92? Barometric pressure was 30.27 which would be about a 350 foot difference, which lines up with the data.

[@jerrymarbury9365]

I don't fly planes but have watched scores of these uploads.It seems that many crashes of twin engine planes occur when the pilot tries to return to the airport with a quick U turn.I understand the get back on the ground as soon as possible but often it leads to disaster.

[@martianvideo]

RIP Spad! 😪

[@rogerwilcoshirley2270]

Very important case for us light twin pilots. Gave me new perspective on temperature related airfield DA WRT preflight preparation/considerations. One thing of importance is advising which engine failed b/c normally one would want to keep (gentle shallow) turns to the side of the good engine. If he had a left engine failure he would want to avoid left turns and needed to immediately advise tower. Another reason to keep the engines in good shape so a remaining engine can indeed provide max or near max power. Furthermore consideration must be given to mixture settings for max power , full forward is great for cooling but may not provide max power esp at high DA. It was moot but esp at a larger airport he should also have immediately declared an emergency so ATC could put the commercial jets out of the way on a hold or such. Addendum: did his engine actually quit or seize or did the turbocharger fail causing big MAP splits? TC failure esp at high DA may result in significant performance decrement on that side but usually would not require shutting that engine down and feathering, just ignore the split MAPs till back safely on the runway.

[@Maniac742]

This is my home airfield. I'm not multi-rated, but from what I understand, the first thing you do when you have an engine failure is get clean. Get above clean stall speed, get the gear up, get the flaps up, and get to best single engine climb speed. Then you can start to unfuck things. Turning is not going to help your situation if your aircraft isn't clean and well past VMC. Not sure if ATC giving the man a turn was a factor in the crash, but it certainly doesn't help adding more work to an already over-saturated work load.

[@user-sq9dv7ru7v]

The info I was looking for was an explanation for the left turn. What prevented a better right turn?

[@andik2329]

That pilot seemed to be very qualified to fly this Cessna. He sounded very calm when reporting his engine failure to tower. We are not sure which engine failed at this point but the tower cleared him for a left turn. I learned that you never want to turn towards the dead engine. The tower, in my opinion, should just have said "cleared to land any runway". Aviate, navigate, communicate. I know the tower wants to help but they should understand that the pilot in distress runs the show. If the pilot needs anything from tower he will call. Keep communication to the absolute minimum and let the pilot fly. He is pretty busy.

[@F1fan007]

The tower first cleared him to turn left and then cleared him for any runway of his choosing. He probably should have declared an emergency, ignored the tower and flown straight until he gained some altitude and had things cleaned up before turning and communicating further. And make sure he turned into the good engine. I 100% agree about all the talking, especially single pilot at age 72

[@bwalker4194]

The sad thing is that if his engines were turbocharged and not turbo-normalized like I think they were, he probably had another 60 short-term horsepower available on the good engine by overboosting it a bit. Pilots of these planes quickly become religious about avoiding overboost due to the $140K hit to the wallet but there is a decent safety margin for short periods of time. It would almost have to be included in the verbal or non-verbal before takeoff checklist to get burned into one’s brain:”I will sacrifice the good engine to gain altitude if the need arises”. If it pops also, the only choice becomes gear up, flaps down, pick a spot and take what you can get but with no blue line speed to worry about.

[@dianaeisner8939]

Winds calm? What was the terrain elevation situation on the oppisite runway?

[@plasmaburndeath]

I do wish less ATC conversations sounded like fast food drive through quality. RIP

[@crazy4gta1]

Keep in mind that actual transmissions are in good quality. When a recording gets posted online it tends to loose a lot of quality

[@davidbaldwin1591]

I would be interested in how much PIC time this pilot had in the warbirds, especially the multis. I would imagine the warbird multi PIC's would always have engine out procedure down pat.

[@TheAussiePipe]

That single engine climb rate to single engine ceiling assumes a new aircraft and airframe. A lot of these old twins will get no where near “book” even if the pilot handles the engine failure perfectly. That kind of density altitude in an aging 310 is a no go, simple as that.

[@bills6093]

Single engine climb is 390fpm and ceiling is 17,200 feet, so plenty of leeway for an aged turbocharged 310.

[@TheAussiePipe]

@@bills6093 390ft/min at SL in a new aircraft. Different story at 9000ft density altitude in an aging airframe even with a turbocharged engine.

[@bills6093]

@@TheAussiePipe Blancolirio calculated 50 fpm for the standard 310, so the turbo version should do considerably better.

[@TheAussiePipe]

@@bills6093so we have now gone from 390ft/min to "considerably better"? You are still failing to understand it's not just about the horsepower available from the remaining engine. There are the aerodynamic factors to take into account operating the aircraft at 9000ft DA and the book numbers you are quoting are for a new aircraft and airframe flown by a Cessna test pilot.

[@bills6093]

@@TheAussiePipe I'm a big Blancolirio fan and his explanations of density altitude are very good. This plane should have had little trouble climbing and maintaining altitude, given the conditions. Why it did not, is almost certainly pilot error. I've seen no one do the calculations for the T310R. Everyone wants to do them for the naturally aspirated 310, apparently unaware that this was turbocharged. All we have is the sea level specs to judge from. So when someone does the actual calculations for this plane, on this takeoff, then we'll have the correct numbers.

[@c.j.1089]

"well at least I'm alive" is never a disappointing statement when looking at a destroyed plane.

[@davecat1458]

Question. Did pilot firewall throttles and mixture. If so, it could have reduced power output in remaining engine. Turbo's don't like to be red-lined. This may well have nothing to do with density altitude and more about training.

[@Triple_J.1]

Before engine start: Determine engine-out landing options on runway heading for emergencies below 400'. And obtain all information of every field or road longer than 1000' within 30degreea of runway heading, within 3 miles of the airport. Do not plan the impossible turn below traffic pattern altitude. Get to that altitude, or else land straight ahead.

[@flybouy11]

Fly the airplane first, talking is not first

[@Cokie907]

Recency of experience is key. Especially at such a high density altitude. There's very little room for error or sloppiness in procedure. Another factor some may not consider is wind shear due to orographic or other turbulence. Not a big deal at full power but a huge deal when hugging blue line with an unfeathered prop, gear, flaps and lights flapping in the breeze.

[@johnfitzpatrick2469]

I'd be saying my Hail Mary's to the altimeter, looking for a rate of climb. (After all clean and re-start) Thank you sir. 🌏🇭🇲

[@kennethraysealsphotography3513]

There is a river valley off to the right. I would have headed for that until a safe altitude could be attained.

[@_pjd]

As ever, perfect analysis.

[@jeffhiner]

The 100 knot ground track with the given DA would be about 87 knots indicated, which is not much margin above Vmc-- the figure is given for a constant heading, with *5 degrees bank into the operating engine* , not a banked turn away from it. And 87 knots is quite shy of best climb even going straight. It's unclear whether the data is showing baro normalized to 29.92, which might explain why it reads lower than field elevation, maybe 350-400 feet higher given field conditions. Still, that's only a few hundred feet to play with at best, and well on the wrong side of Vyse means behind the power curve. Can't trade altitude for airspeed to get up to best climb, and a turn robs critical energy exactly when it's needed most. From there it doesn't take much to induce an accelerated stall/spin at 85 knots during the turn to final just as the pilot runs out of right rudder.

[@lazman111]

700 hours in a Cessna 340 pressurized I can tell you the comment he made about density altitude that you have to live it to really understand it. He’s not kidding. The mantra that I was trained with was land straightahead land, straightahead land straightahead. So the only thing with this particular accident is did he simply run out of options and wasn’t ready to commit to an off airport landing.? So sad…

[@TheThinkinGuy]

as a lay person watching this, is the suggetion not to turn around but to continue to fly straight and climb until you can get to the next forward airport?

[@buddfoxx5955]

ATC gave him the directive to turn left on a left engine failure. The directive should have never happened and the pilot should have never performed a left turn on a left engine failure. End of story.

[@wayneschenk5512]

Great advice.

[@sthomas6369]

Is it safe to say, with a 9,000ft+ DA, 17,200 ft single engine ceiling (100 fpm climb) that the T310 might only have had about 240-250 fpm climb rate (just taking ratios)? That would assume all sorts of ideal conditions, which we know are unlikely for an aircraft that HAS to be more than 40 years old. Put on top of that the gear question and turning and it's easy to see there may not have been any climb performance.

[@donalddepew9605]

Any twin engine airplane that has a gross weight of under 6000 pounds isn’t required to have a positive rate of climb when an engine fails. So basically the operating engine will take you to the scene of the accident. This pilot should have done some weight and balance as well as determine his single engine climb performance. Had he done this, this adds to his decision making. In case of an engine failure. Great Video!!