Fatal C-310R Engine Failure - Santa Fe, NM

AUDIO - archive.liveatc.net/ksaf/KSAF...
ASN Report - aviation-safety.net/wikibase/...
KOB4 News Report - www.kob.com/new-mexico/plane-...
MERCH: blancoliriostore.myspreadshop...
PATREON: www.patreon.com/user?u=529500...
GEFA Aviation Scholarship: goldenempireflyingassociation...
Learning The Finer Points -10% OFF! www.learnthefinerpoints.com/g...
Theme: "Weightless" Aram Bedrosian
• Weightless - Aram...
www.arambedrosian.com

[@FlynChse]

One of the best men I had the pleasure of knowing. Selfless beyond words, and extremely passionate about aviation.

[@ellend7680]

I am sorry for the loss of your friend.

[@timothybuck6860]

So sorry for your loss

[@pamshewan9181]

😔

[@JR-kc8jx]

I’m sorry. That really sucks.

[@petersmith8134]

@@zLigHt44 What a silly and unnecessary comment. Clearly you are not a good Pilot.

[@wiljam1968]

Hey Juan, thank you for an honest, non biased assessment of this accident. Randy was a dear friend of mine and we flew formation a lot. He was a great man, a great doctor and he moved mountains to help all those around him. He will be missed greatly. Will

[@johncox4273]

Sorry for the loss of your friend Will. Sounds like a fine gentleman. My heartfelt condolences to his family and his friends.

[@martinkiddy1588]

My

[@cheddar2648]

So sorry for your loss.

[@Alanoffer]

It’s tough hearing the pilots voice , sincere condolences to his family

[@Rob_Stefan]

ATC Radar Controller here, i recognize this call sign and am pretty sure I’ve talked to him a number of times. It’s a weird feeling when you lose a regular and I can think of a few others I’ve never met but the callsign and voice is lost. One that struck me was N928PJ crashing into a building in Idaho. I didn’t know Brittney, but I worked with her almost every day.

[@dirkmohrmann8960]

8:00 this is a very important point. Another way to say it is, if you take your twin engine aircraft somewhere where it can't maintain altitude on one engine, you really have the equivalent of a single engine aircraft - but with twice the chance of having an engine failure.

[@webdaddy]

And twice the cost of operation.

[@gmonnig]

The registration says it’s a T310R, so it’s a turbo 310 with TSIO-520. The POH in your video is for a 310R. So the single engine ceiling on a T310R is 17,200ft with a climb rate of 390’ per minute. Fly safe everyone….

[@r2db]

This comment needs to be pinned.

[@kearyk1]

Yes I noticed that also that it was a T310R with a single engine service ceiling of 17,200’

[@gmonnig]

@@kearyk1 yep, very different performance. I posted somewhere else that this plane would've been able to climb better on one engine than a Cessna 172 at a 9000' density altitude

[@richardtreat9187]

This is exactly right and McSpadden of the Air Safety Institute (AOPA) has a good video on this.

[@nothingmuch875]

Once upon a time I was an instructor and taught students in a few different light twins. When an engine fails everybody wants to be a hero. But when you have such lack of performance your safest bet is to throttle back on the good engine and land straight ahead as if you're in a single-engine airplane to begin with. He never had a chance, performance wise. I know, that's a lot easier said than done....

[@engineeringoyster6243]

In my half century of paying attention to this issue, it seems like several pilots are killed annually because they were unable to pull back the good engine & land in the rough. When I was flying my Apache, I would review this point before rolling for takeoff. It simply took all the fun out of flying.

[@josephoberlander]

Yep. It's far better to "land" in some brush and small rocks and take your chances. Saving the aircraft isn't really an option if you're a few hundred ft off the ground. I mean, my son and I survived a crash at 70mph a few years ago (off the side of a road into brush and small trees out in the desert), though the car was done for. But at 120mph? There would have been pieces.

[@bittnerbs]

I fly into this airport often. Density altitude can easily get over 10,000’ on hot days. For non-turbo charged piston airplanes, if you can’t make an early morning departure, then don’t go flying. RIP to the pilot. 😢

[@Jopanaguiton]

This was a T310

[@jimmydulin928]

While I was in the NG there ten years, I flew Ercoupe, Champ, Tri-Pacer, and C-175 home to Gallup three times a month. I left drill weekends on Sunday at 5 pm summer and winter. Additional flight training was mostly 5 pm to 9 pm so I left the next morning. Low ground effect until cruise was always available on long runways and down drainage egress towards the Rio Grande. Those techniques had to be default to be safe, but that and later pipeline patrol in 172 requires flying in heat and wind. Managing all energy, not just turbo or jet engines, makes it safely possible. Ground effect, wind energy, potential energy of altitude, thermals, and ridge lift are all free energy. In the mountains or high DA, when pulling on the yoke doesn't get you up, push a bit on the yoke. Attempting too hard to maintain altitude can kill you. The design of the airplane is to fly, not stall, in turns. Only a pilot pulling on the yoke can stall an airplane. The critical angle of attack is when stall happens. The pilot pulling on the stick is what causes it. Low powered flying in the mountains and high desert is mostly maneuvering flight.

[@Phiyedough]

So the pilot was foolhardy to attempt this flight?

[@Stepclimb]

@@Phiyedough Too early to tell. For every flight it is important to know the performance capability of the aircraft for the given weight and density altitude. In this case, it’s entirely possible that a C-310R can climb on one engine with a solo occupant. In the case of a light twin, the pilot also needs to have a mindset that an engine WILL fail on takeoff and he/she will be ready to feather the inop engine’s propeller to ensure the pre-calculated performance will be available. More often than not, ME pilots are not in the proper mindset at takeoff and are startled by the engine failure. This is when mistakes happen, especially in a single pilot environment.

[@paulholterhaus7084]

@@jimmydulin928 Pulling on the Yoke or turning INTO a dead engine...........Paul

[@jakebrodskype]

As a 310 pilot yourself, this lesson couldn't have come from a better source. The sad thing is that someone died to teach it.

[@johnpublic6582]

Life is a hard teacher. You get the test first, and the lesson afterward.

[@Palmit_]

@@johnpublic6582 love that saying. I dont know who first spoke it but it's pretty good. Obviously these days with aircraft, there's PLENTY of lessons .. before even sitting in the pilot seat. So the saying is 'life' wise correct.. but piloting wise.. meh...perhaps a little mis-appropriated to this situation

[@masonmax1000]

yep a lot of FAA rules are written in blood.

[@jarrettleto]

I guess my turbos are good for something besides expensive annuals

[@masonmax1000]

@@johnpublic6582 100%

[@jimmydulin928]

This was the most common fatality accident during my time in New Mexico. I was a Huey medevac pilot with 717th Med Det NMARNG out of Santa Fe from 1974 to 1982. Bob Norris, rated both fixed wing and helicopter, took off runway 20 solo with full fuel in the Army's version of the C-310. When an engine quit (I don't remember which) he pulled power on the other engine, landed in the desert, and walked back to the unit. He didn't question it. His job "in real life," as we guardsmen tended to say, was pilot of a Mitsubishi MU-2 for a bank. I had an engine failure in a C-175 climbing out from 20 after a MUTA 4 on my way back to Gallup. I landed on the road at Santa Domingo Pueblo. Like we who flew normally powered small airplanes, light twin pilots in the mountains need to use ground effect to develop zoom reserve airspeed (I think twins actually require something like that) and to egress down drainage when possible. In yesterdays accident, turning back to a high DA airport when down drainage egress was straight ahead makes no sense. Albuquerque, two thousand feet down drainage, was available. While harder to recognize in the desert, down drainage egress is always nearby in the mountains. We used to use it up drainage to the pass and down drainage to the next civilization rather than GPS direct. For safe flying with limited power we should continue to use it.

[@Tom-tk3du]

Good point about heading south towards ABQ. But his only route to ABQ may have been via the Rio Grande canyon...provided he could hold altitude. The terrain rises somewhat between KSAF and the summit of La Bajada had he followed I-25 southbound.

[@dryan8377]

was pilot of a Mitsubishi MU-2 for a bank....

[@spiller212]

Good comment. Treating an engine failure in a light twin like an engine failure in a single (or a dual engine failure in a twin, if you like) would have probably saved dozens of lives in the past.

[@Tom-tk3du]

@@spiller212 In flat or rising terrain it might be the better choice. But it’s not always the case if there’s an escape route to lower elevation airport. Which in this case might have been a better choice. Lots to be learned from this tragic accident.

[@spiller212]

@@Tom-tk3du Yes, that is true. But I am just thinking out loud that operating in light twins with not much proficiency with regards to engine failures (at least here in Europe, most GA twin pilots "train" engine failures exactly ONCE a year at their annual MEP checkride), especially in twins notorious for their bad performance on one engine and relatively high Vmca, it might be better to just pull the power on the live engine and settle for a forced landing in a nearby field or wherever suitable instead of trying to hold blue line on one engine, bleeding speed but still be low enough that the consequent "Vmca-spin" will kill you. Asymmetric thrust has maybe killed more people in twins than a second (redundant) engine has saved lives because they experienced an engine failure where a single would have not had the chance to land (in very bad IMC, over the sea, over mountains)? Sorry if my English doesn't make sense, it is not my native language.

[@smidee1]

I heard the plane full throttle. Looked west to see white and red plane level to the ground flying north 25 to 30 feet off the ground west of I-25. Watched it go behind one our building hope it would be pulling up. That didn’t happen, next I hear a boom, then two more booms and black smoke rising. I was located at the Santa Fe armory.

[@flyerguy4173]

Juan, this looks to be a T310R. SE service ceiling should be about 17200. The numbers you are using appears to be from a normally aspirated chart.

[@markwhatley9955]

As a non pilot, I truly appreciate the breakdowns Juan provides. The complexities of flying amaze me. RIP to the pilot and his family and friends.

[@FreshTillDeath56]

Yeah people say i'm brave for flying Paramotors, but the truth is, these guys are the real geniuses. Paramotors play by their own rules, but there's so much more to know in traditional fixed wing flight.

[@dryan8377]

@@FreshTillDeath56 The same rules of aerodynamics apply to you in a paramotor. They're just a little 'warped'... (sorry for the terrible humor) but it's true. Actually I think they are more complex if you actually try to put it into computer modeling. Hanging from anything with a wing besides a Cessna, truly horrifies me. Respect!

[@FreshTillDeath56]

@@dryan8377 lol

[@DiveJersey]

@markwhatley9955 My feelings exactly. Thank you Juan

[@HomeGypsy]

I do, too - Thank you Juan! So thankful there was nobody home in that house 💜💜💜💜 From Albuquerque 🌶🐈🌶

[@steveasher9239]

I personally learned about this kind of density altitude when flying sightseeing rides out of Taos. It's just north of this Santa Fe airport but 1000' feet higher. Pulled out of a bad situation and never made that mistake again. Incidents like this make me realize how lucky I've been to have had that "learning experience", rather than create a tragic outcome. RIP. Thanks Juan.

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

Man... my eyes must be getting tired... First 3 or 4 times I read that I'd SWEAR it said "Laos"... and I was just SURE one of the two of us had lost his g** d*** marbles! ;o)

[@gstevens6948]

@@gnarthdarkanen7464😂😂😂

[@steveasher9239]

@@gnarthdarkanen7464 yeah, that would have been a completely different story

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

@@steveasher9239 Well, upon realizing my mistake, I got so tickled at myself... I figured you'd enjoy reading up about it... and yeah, Laos would've made for a completely different set of issues... whether or not there was a reference just north of Santa Fe... though that, too, would've raised all new questions... haha ;o)

[@davidgunther1282]

This airplane had turbocharged engines (according to Flight Aware, it had TSIO-520s, not IO-520s as Juan states at 4:18) which would raise the single-engine service ceiling significantly. Density Altitude wasn't as big a factor as is described here.

[@2whl4re]

Turbocharged aircraft are not immune to density altitude. Turbocharging may even give a false sense of security. Horsepower doesn't fix everything. The prop still has to provide thrust, the wing still has to provide lift - both in reduced air density.

[@davidgunther1282]

@@2whl4re 1. Never said turbocharged aircraft were "immune" to density altitude, I said "density altitude wasn't as big a factor as is described here." 2. "Turbocharging may even give a false sense of security." Completely irrelevant statement. It's almost as if you're looking for something to argue about. Temps are 90 degrees. You're at an airport that is 8,000 asl. There are 2 piston twins on the ramp, both identical except one has turbochargers and one does not. Would you seriously consider choosing the non-turbocharged airplane because it doesn't "give a false sense of security?" 3. "Horsepower doesn't fix everything." "Fix," no. "Help," absolutely. My point is that the aircraft crashed more likely due to the pilot turning away from the good engine at too slow an airspeed vs. the engine didn't have enough power to maintain altitude due to density altitude that Juan explains here. With all due respect, you're looking for an argument where there isn't one.

[@BillSmith-rx9rm]

​@@davidgunther1282I agree. I think the accident was due to the left hand turn into the dead engine. Resulted in a classic stall spin into terrain. Had he kept going straight he could have gained altitude and airspeed.

[@robertdering2084]

Juan may be using the single engine service ceiling for the non-turbo versions of the 310. A Cessna 310 fact sheet on the AOPA website authored by Mark E. Cook, AOPA Pilot in May 1994 states: “Single-engine service ceiling [for the 310] went up with the turbo models, to 17,200 feet in the T310R; a 310B could hold 7,700 feet on one engine.” If density altitude that morning was even as high as 9,000 ft, the single engine service altitude of the turbo version of the 310R would have exceeded it. Presumably turbocharging compresses ambient air to offset loss of power at actual high altitude or equivalent density altitude.

[@richsarchet9762]

I have flown normally aspirated and turbocharged 310s in Colorado. In the turbo my pre takeoff briefing to myself goes "If one quits before I have the gear up, I'm closing both throttles and landing/crashing straight ahead" In the no-turbos version in the summer that is amended to "If one quits before I have 1,000 feet above the runway, I'm closing both throttles...." If an engine fails later I will secure it, establish blue line airspeed and land as soon as I can. The single engine service ceiling is almost always below the surface if the temperature is above standard and the airplane doesn't have turbos. There is no such thing as balanced field length in those conditions - the 310 is effectively an especially thirsty and noisy single with good climb performance at high density altitude - if an engine quits you will be flying a high-speed very noisy glider with controllability issues.

[@Saltlick11]

Well said Juan. I used to have a 414 but sold it because I worried that my engine out skills in just this type of scenario were inadequate to recover. It worried me enough that I decided to sell the airplane after a wonderful period of ownership. It just takes aggressive regular training to be ready for this type of scenario, and once Vmc hits, sadly, game over. Under these conditions, margin of success was very slim. Pilot was very calm. RIP aviator.

[@brinkee7674]

That's a lot of plane for 310 hp engines, Yeah it's fine when both are working. Glad you were never presented with a situation like this

[@skippmclovan1135]

@@brinkee7674 ..and much harder engine out on an Apache 150 ..really tough staying in the air then under the best of conditions even at sea-level density..

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

@@skippmclovan1135probably why so many upgraded the engines on the Apache if they could

[@fivestarAZ]

I was in and out of Farmington many times in a 414. Often on very warm summer days. Never had any trouble..and being on a plateau helped in the am. Usually. I don’t miss the angst I felt.

[@MarekMarciniak]

i had an engine failure in a 414 last August. Thankfully it happened at 17500 feet over the water enroute to the Bahamas. I had zero issues bringing it back to Fort Lauderdale with a steady 500 fpm decent. It flew very nicely on one engine, but I surely wouldnt like the engine to quit right after takeoff...

[@rexmyers991]

Juan - I owned a 310R (non turbo) for eighteen years. As an airline pilot, I understood the very same operating limitations you have just outlined. As a result the first thing I did was put Vortex Generators on it. That put Vmca less than Vso. I then developed the take off procedure of holding the airplane on the ground until I was at Vmca (or the end of the runway whichever came first). This put me in the air at or near Vmca. I would quickly retract the gear and accelerate to climb speed. I never had to test my take off procedure with an engine failure, but I felt it reduced the time where the airplane would be unable to fly away on one engine. And, I know there is the very real factor where critical seconds are lost by the mind not accepting the reality of an engine failure. But, at least I remain cognizant of the limitations of general aviation twins. Thank you for your EXCELLENT work reporting on the accidents. My condolences tomthe the family of the pilot.

[@Tom-tk3du]

Being based in the Four Corners region, if I owned a light twin with similar single-engine performance at high DA, after watching this I'd be selling it immediately. My condolences to the pilot's family and friends.

[@bwalker4194]

Completely agree with boxing yourself in to an undoable situation because one engine is still making noise and vibration. If indeed it was the left engine that failed and he felt the need to tighten up the turn to make rwy33, he sealed his fate with a skidding turn into the dead (sorry, RIP) engine. Straight ahead, flaps down, gear up and take what you can get.

[@dousiastailfeather9454]

Yes. Clean up, level up and gain groundspeed then pick your poison and fly the freaking plane!

[@ddvette]

He does that he’s walks away. Plenty of flat ground to put it down straight ahead, no need for that turn.

[@kennydings3879]

Fly the plane into the ground 😢

[@zepm7184]

Yep, as soon as you hear him say " I am going to gain some altitude" he has the wrong mindset in a DA of 9000'.

[@Tom-tk3du]

@@zepm7184 Perhaps he was unaware that climbing was impossible. I'm wondering where he was normally based.

[@kennyt2904]

This is heartbreaking to listen to. I am getting ready to add a commercial multi to my ticket and this is an incredibly valuable accident review. My take away is, even in a twin, your best option may be an off field landing straight ahead. Condolences to the family and the Gone West pilot.

[@MichaelLloyd]

I flew out of Farmington, NM (NW of Santa Fe) for about 5 years ago. There were many days when density altitude was 9,000' sometimes greater, and a C172 didn't have the power to climb more than 200' a minute. Even at that you quickly reached the equivalent of the service ceiling. Fly early or stay on the ground. Night time flight up there was, in my opinion, IFR. There are no lights out in the desert. Very sad to see this end this way. I would love to see a video where a light twin had an engine failure and the outcome was a safe landing.

[@johnpublic6582]

I would settle for a safe crash flaps down gear up straight ahead. AQP.

[@johncox4273]

@@johnpublic6582Yes, sometimes landing straight ahead is the best option in a light twin. Flying the airplane into the crash while maintaining airspeed and control, and avoiding the stall/spin, which is deadly.

[@Charon58]

I know the controller was trying to be helpful but directing him to turn left may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back. Taking off into a density altitude higher than SESC means you have to accept before you take off that you will have to “drift down” into terrain at a speed above VMC if you lose an engine. Recently I had to shut down an engine on a piston twin over the Cascades. We were above SESC but fortunately had a canyon avenue to follow and drift down to lower terrain where the plane would maintain altitude. Not a fun feeling

[@CalmBeforeTheStorm76]

My condolences to the departed... I can safely say I just learned more practical aviation information in this short 9 minute video than I've learned in months of other aviation content. Thank you for the sober, informative content.

[@PittsSZ]

Sorry to see this. I flew from that airport for a few years in the late 90's, and remember that density altitude being a constant challenge. Tricky winds, too.

[@williambarringer6513]

What is density altitude? Doesn’t the air get thinner? But doesn’t thinner just mean more water?

[@williambarringer6513]

The “thinner” the air is the more the humidity this is opposite of what you would think and I don’t see how that’s just a “minor factor” how high do you have to go before there’s no water, it seems like there’s water all the way up as high as you can go, they’ve never found a place yet as far as o know where there is no water

[@aquaticllamas28]

I fly out of that airport often. And yes DA can be extremely high and today was very hot

[@mastabugfish]

@@williambarringer6513 It is a term used in aviation to indicate the conditions (related to outside air temperature and barometric pressure) that the aircraft is operating in. When it gets hotter outside the air is less dense and the aircraft will have a reduced performance envelope that is the equivalent of a higher altitude. I was always taught it had more to do with the density of the air molecules as opposed to humidity in the air. Naturally aspirated engines lose power at higher elevations, and for aircraft, less thrust is developed by the propeller since the air is less dense (less of an equal and opposite reaction, so to speak). In this case the actual altitude of the airport was a little over 6000 feet, but because it was in the 90's, the aircraft performed like it was at 9000 feet.

[@royschering1140]

@@williambarringer6513 It seems counter-intuitive that humid air is less dense than dry air, but it's easy to understand why. Back in high school physics we learned from Avogadro's Law that the number of molecules in a fixed volume of any gas is constant at constant pressure/temperature. Dry air is made up almost completely of nitrogen and oxygen molecules (over 99%). Nitrogen molecules, N2, are made up of two nitrogen atoms with each atom's mass 14 times as much as a hydrogen atom. Oxygen molecules, O2, are made up of two oxygen atoms with each atom's mass 16 times as much as a hydrogen atom. In humid air, almost every H2O molecule will replace either an N2 molecule or an O2 molecule (in order to keep the number of molecules constant). Since an H2O molecule's mass is only 18 times as much as a hydrogen atom and it is replacing either N2 (28 times hydrogen atom) or O2 (32 times hydrogen atom) the mass (and density) of air decreases as the water vapor in the air increases (higher humidity). Since lift depends on air density, planes have less lift in humid air when temperature and pressure are constant. As an interesting side note (to me at least), the humidity of air also has a profound effect on velocity of propagation of radio frequency signals (which propagate slower in more dense/dryer air).

[@erinmac4750]

As someone who's not a pilot, it's a reminder that Nature is to be respected, and to be aware of conditions when operating transport. We can't push things beyond the limit without consequences. My condolences to his loved ones and the flying community.

[@jeremy2001happy]

With Turbo single engine ceiling is much higher: "Single-engine service ceiling went up with the turbo models, to 17,200 feet in the T310R; a 310B could hold 7,700 feet on one engine."

[@gtr1952]

This was "one of those" for me. I saw the paint and tip tanks, I have a good friend with a 310R and that paint. Hands got sweaty and had a hard time hitting the "play button" with shaking. It was not him. God Speed to this gentleman, and sincere condolences to his family. Everyone please be careful out there!! Review that "lost engine" procedure. God Bless. --gary

[@Darkdog65]

I'm glad it wasn't your pal too. I am gutted that this happened and to hear this fellow communicate with the tower when he had to be really working hard to keep it together brings out the humanity of this man's predicament.

[@gtr1952]

@@Darkdog65 I had a long talk with my buddy, then ended up thinking about it all night. This guy was on the right track, he told ATC he was going to gain some altitude. Feathering the prop and gaining altitude is exactly the right thing to do. I'm sure ATC meant well, but they told him to turn left for the other runway, and he did it, right into the dead engine at low altitude... and it was all over then. He had to know right after he did it, there was just not enough altitude to fix it. If you could fix it. He knew, all the way down. So sad 8( --gary

[@vernmeyerotto255]

I learned to fly out here in the southwest at high altitude airfields. It was always stressed that on hot days, one did their flying in the morning to avoid the trap of high density altitude. The oft quoted example was Leadville CO at a field elevation of 9934 ft msl. The density altitude would frequently soar to over 15,000 ft by lunchtime. The reduction in climb performance on takeoff and over high terrain has taken many unwary pilots and their passengers over the years. Even the lower elevation fields east of the foothills at 5000 to 6000 ft msl can be deadly on hot afternoons, and straying into the canyons to the west can be a trap that is inevitable.

[@fivestarAZ]

You said a mouthful there. I nearly saw the afterlife at a lot lower altitude @ kmtj on a quite warm summer morning. In a turbo centurion. I skimmed the cornfield and managed to eak out my escape. But barely. It was my fault. I learned.

[@MalachiWhite-tw7hl]

Wow.

[@Garth2011]

True, those density numbers are very close to a no go with just one engine ! I doubt there was a lot of preparation for this kind of circumstances.

[@jrkorman]

I was a weather forecaster at Cannon AFB, NM (Elev 4290) back in the early 1980s. We were a popular cross-country destination and used to get USAF student pilots "stuck" there quite often during July/August because of DA minimums.

[@oldschoolmotorsickle]

That pilot had one chance to survive; the land south of runway 20 drops away, along with I-25 also going downhill. Had he maintained a straight-ahead course, he might have used the freeway OR the frontage road flanking I-25 southbound as a landing zone. Even a turn into his “good” engine wouldn’t have gotten him back to the field. An unfortunate loss, my sympathies to the family.

[@kennysherrill6542]

Thanks for the info Juan, it always bothers me when I hear things like this. I've been more lucky than I should have been and by the grace of God I've survived. I've told more than one pilot if you lose an engine and it's clear just put it down in front of you and don't try and turn. Prayers to his family and friends. 🙏❤️🇺🇸

[@TheRealRoch108]

Thanks for the brutal reminders. I fly a 310 out of KRYN. Its 113F right now and was 92 before sunrise today. I took your backed in a corner comment to heart. Razor thin to no margins.

[@speedandstyletony]

Sante Fe was cool compared to the Southern part of New Mexico. I can attest that Roswell was 109 F today. Fell for the pilot and from his voice it sounds like he was trying his best but the situation and conditions were not on his side.

[@microjetpilot8025]

I'm not sure if this is in the comments, but the registration comes back as a Turbo 310 which would have slighly different book values. Either way, there is still a high density altitude to compete with here and especially with a loss of the critical engine. I am a T310R owner and know all to well how badly things can turn when faced with this situation. RIP

[@megadavis5377]

This is THE scenario that has to be worked out before you ever leave the ground: "What am I going to do if I lose one in these conditions?" But I guess when it actually happens and you're under great stress it's easy to see all your plans fly right the window... I wish he could have a do-over.

[@sethfeder6693]

Thanks for the excellent analysis. I am local to the accident. This occurred earlier in the day, about 9am, which as you covered would have been 80F. That area of town is mostly just desert. It’s a miracle that the plane struck a home given the lack of density, and further miracle the family that lives there was not home. Newspaper reports said there was no recognizable aircraft on the crash scene, so the impact must have been high energy.

[@00andJoe]

A sad situation all around. Especially since, and all respect to the departed pilot, but it sounds like he didn't do a density altitude check before takeoff to me - his comment "going to try to get some altitude" when the density altitude was WELL in excess of single-engine service ceiling...well.

[@toupac3195]

Dang it. Yes, after takeoff failures is difficult for single pilots. Very sad. May god guide him to eternal happiness.

[@elosogonzalez8739]

I looked up the registration of this airplane. It was registered to a Southern California pilot. Flying at Sea Level is very different than flying in the mountain. With density altitude over 9,000ft, it would have been difficult to control the 310. Having flown into KSAF many times, as you turn left off Rwy. 20 the elevation rises. DENSITY ALTITUDE if not experienced, can be dangerous. The winds can be tricky, but from the the reported weather, I don't think weather(other than high density altitude) was an issue. Thanks Juan!

[@elosogonzalez8739]

Hi I attempted to reach out but I couldn't due to an issue with the app. Enjoy Oshkosh!

[@Private-GtngxNMBKvYzXyPq]

Thank you for your continued focus on safety. The best way to honor those who have perished is to learn and communicate the lessons for which they gave the ultimate sacrifice.

[@ronnl001]

Slight correction: I believe this was a t310r and the tables shown are for a normally aspirated bird.

[@flybouy11]

May be better off to pull the good engine back and land straight ahead if there is flat area

[@smokeless7774]

Thanks Juan. A sad video but I learned so much about hot and high conditions.

[@markg4459]

Don't recall it being stressed in ME training but sometimes (as here where DA precludes a climb) it might be wisest to pull power on both engines and set it down if & where the terrain permits. Something to think about before the takeoff roll under these conditions.

[@noahgrove2046]

Just discovered Randy was the one flying. Cannot believe I didn't recognize that 310. One of the best warbird pilots I had the pleasure of knowing, and an incredibly kind man. I'll miss you sir.

[@lincturcotte6194]

You and Scott Purdue are my go-to favorites for factual analyses- free of self aggrandizement. Your expertise is obvious and comes through loud and clear!

[@kevinheard8364]

I would add Mentour Pilot ... also a great channel

[@4life409]

Please people, when you do your pre flight planning do not just consider the density altitude (t/o and climb performance) but also thermal turbulence, sudden wind changes and climbing through weather like cumulus, a dep (SID) with many turns, all often happening around high elevation airports. It will degrade your climb performance even more than 'just' a high density altitude. Quito was always a great lesson for me, taking off in big iron on a summer day, wind shift right after t/o to a tail wind while having to turn on the SID while climbing through weather, your performance suddenly sucks, that without an engine out...

[@e.m.productions839]

I work at KSAF at envoy air and on this very day I saw the black smoke when I came back from my break.

[@scottycatman]

Accidents like this make me nervous about multi-engine training. It's such an in-demand type of license and training hours to have, but twin engine *piston* aircraft just seem like trouble.

[@chrisnielsen9885]

My old instructor used to say the other engine on a light twin is just there to take you to the scene of the crash

[@rodcoulter997]

Excellent analysis and explanation of the Performance Data…..those numbers are REALLY important.

[@PCBill0622]

I had a Twin Comanche with over 2,000 hours PIC, based at DEN. My multi-engine rating instructor pounded it into me: 1. Higher elevations do not leave the ground until you’re well above VMC. I would literally have to push hard on the yoke as plane wants to fly. 2. If engine fails on takeoff, fly straight(no turns) until you get the aircraft cleaned-up (gear, flaps). Feather the prop on the dead engine. Then figure out about making turns, where to land, etc. 3. He always emphasized that violating VMC was always a bad outcome. My sympathies and prayers go out to the pilot’s family.

[@ritaloy8338]

Thanks for the report Juan. 😢

[@rrich8371]

High density altitude is nothing to mess around with. Tried taking off once at 3200 msl and a pretty warm mid-day. Weight Balance put me well within the envelope, but seeing the end of that runway come up so fast was a little concerning, even though I was able to get up at about the calculated roll. Next time I took off from there... it was in the VERY early morning.

[@GARDENER42]

Thanks for your clear explanation of the density altitude issue. I've known about it but not fully understood the potential problems until now.

[@laina6219]

Thank you for posting this 🤗

[@paulputnam2305]

Juan, Thank You for sharing this update. Much Love

[@YZ250W1]

Thanks for what you do here. Much appreciated.

[@hubriswonk]

RIP. Air density in the SW is tricky when it gets hot and there are many GA accidents every year.

[@shufflerp3868]

Always outstanding coverage.

[@d.t.4523]

Thank you Juan. My condolences to his family and friends.

[@F1fan007]

So sad and tragic. So glad you have your channel to keep everyone aware of the dangers. Seems like so many pilots think they can push their luck until there is no luck left

[@shenandoahhills7263]

This 310R may have had the upgraded TSIO 520 engines. The single engine performance figures quoted appears to be for the lower horsepower IO 520. With the TSIO 520 the single engine service ceiling may have been as high as 17000 ft since that engine can hold sea level horsepower well into the teens. If that is the case this aircraft had the capability, if handled properly, to sustain flight under the given conditions.

[@Shamrock100]

The USCAR shows that those were indeed the engines fitted.

[@shenandoahhills7263]

@@Shamrock100 Juan makes a good point about high density airports, however, his premise that the pilot was taking off into a no win situation should an engine fail may have missed the mark. This appears to be a case of pilot overload, in that the aircraft continued to turn left, so the left wing was never raised, and the aircraft may have not been properly trimmed up and cleaned up. I can envision the pilot just struggling to fly the aircraft with little brain power to complete the engine failure tasks. This a problem encountered on high performance aircraft which are flown single pilot. With two pilots one devotes their primary focus to safely flying the aircraft while the other manages the engine failure items, greatly reducing the workload.

[@rdabneyutube]

It was a T310R not a 310R as claimed here so it had TSIO-520 engines. The author of this video missed that.

[@jr5218]

Excellent analysis Juan

[@flankerroad7414]

Thank you for this insightful analysis, Juan.

[@kiwidiesel]

As a light twin pilot myself I can't think of anything more horrifying to experience than an unintended vmca roll scenario playing out in front of me. Engine failure at that DA is always going to be a clencher of an experience.

[@paulhootisn848]

Hindsight is easy but controller should have said cleared to return. Not dictated left/right without know what engine failed. Pilot should also know not to turn into dead engine regardless of controllers directions.

[@Milkmans_Son]

controller gave him several options including "any runway"

[@paulhootisn848]

@@Milkmans_Son but is first comment was “turn left”

[@dermick]

@@paulhootisn848 I agree that in a moment of stress, the pilot might just blindly follow ATC instructions. I think ATC should be trained in cases like this that the first thing they should say to a pilot when they indicate that they are having a problem is to "fly the airplane". This should be repeated over and over with every ATC call to the pilot. Every good CFI repeats this to their students 100s of times, and this can trigger the instinct in the pilot to "fly the airplane."

[@verdantacres4460]

Thank you for your explanation as it makes sense.

[@northgateaviation]

Thanks for another informative and respectful debrief Juan. We appreciate the info, fly safe everyone.

[@BudFox559]

It's unfortunate that someone lost their life. It gets hot where I live, and we use to take off as early in the morning as possible when full of fuel and cargo, because colder air is denser. These people who fly twins are usually excellent pilots. so it's sad that this happened.

[@deansawich6250]

Thanks for the great explanation.

[@wendygerrish4964]

Thank you for covering this tragic incident.

[@craigmiller332]

Thank you for the very clear explanation. Fly safe all, RIP to the pilot.

[@womblenz8698]

I used to treat a Cessna 402 as a single engined aircraft until it reached a reasonable circling altitude depending on the day. In other words the single remaining engine gives you some options on the way to yor of field crash landing. Also don't forget to Aviate, Navigate, and only then Communicate. That is, focus on the aircraft until you are ready to communicate. That pilot appeared to prioritise the Communicating instead of Aviating.

[@davejones542]

@4:47 - those are figures for a non turbo 310R, the aircraft that crashed was turbocharged.. s/e service ceiling for turbo 310R is 17200 ft so it should have been able to climb even in that temp

[@ji3194]

So sorry to hear. Im local to this one. Its a tough airfield with the altitude and heat in the summer. RIP

[@leeoldershaw956]

Registration says it was a T310R and turbocharged so he probably had single engine capability at 10,000 ft. density altitude.

[@jarrettleto]

Yeah was just about to say when I look up the tail number it says it's a turbo which should have a single engine ceilings around 16,000. Will have to wait and see report showing which engine failed. Also most twin engine planes these days have vortex generators so Vmc is reduced. One last thing with the 310s are the tip tanks put a lot of weight at the edge of the wings and they would probably be full on take off so it makes handling on single engine a little more difficult.

[@5holeaviation]

Was gonna say the same. Juan double check your engine and aircraft type before commenting on performance and POH values. If this is really a T310R then it’s likely a turbo tsio520 which should have a critical altitude up to 10k

[@djsniper6364]

Perfect explanation of what actually caused this accident. He had a better chance landing straight ahead with both engines feathered at that high pressure altitude.

[@neilreith7294]

Thanks for concise professional information your added insights and particulars, such as density altitude illustrations, are informative and life-saving. thumbs up

[@rickmaudlin2160]

Well explained. Great educational details. Thanks !

[@Sometungsten]

Perhaps the correct response with a loss of thrust when outside the limits for sing!e engine flight is to operate as a single. Pull both throttles to idle and aviate

[@dks13827]

Lost the engine Cessna 24 Mike. And ATC always alwars says: Say again please ?

[@armondbalayan6620]

RIP Dr. Sherman, I will always remember the constructive words and teachings, those were not just for the residents, but for the rest of the surgical team.

[@glenmartin2437]

Thank you, Juan. Condolences to family and friends.

[@airwolf12999]

I seen 310 and my heart sank thinking Jimmy. R.I.P. to that pilot.

[@dousiastailfeather9454]

Me too!

[@terrycarraway4095]

Nice report, but you need to get the proper numbers. The ASN reports shows it as T310R. T as in Turbo, so higher single engine ceiling and better single engine climb performance at higher altitudes. Also, the ADSB altitudes are GSP altitudes, not pressure altitudes, so you need to convert based on altimeter setting to determine actual altitude.

[@billybud9557]

"I'm gonna try to get some altitude" with only one IO-520 running at 6400ft is very risky....but at only 51 ft AGL there was little time to think. Condolences to family. RIP.

[@johnwhitehead5457]

Excellent technical report. You're doing a great job. Keep it up.

[@dereksmith1803]

Dang! Such a shame this just seems to keep happening way too much. It seems to me that every 3rd to 4th video you put out is about a crash. And many of those seem to be for senseless reasons. So sad. Condolences to friends and family of the pilot.

[@tjwilliams7246]

Thanks again Juan, excellent job as usual. As a fellow 310 pilot I am constantly thinking and running scenarios procedures. The other thing about the box you were talking about is also the frequency we fly and train in these twins. I am due up for some recurrent and always have a list of things to freshen up and new to learn. That is a tough tough situation and I am sorry for the pilots family and friends. Take care.

[@kristensorensen2219]

Great report!👍❤

[@timothybuck6860]

Excellent analysis.

[@brianhaygood183]

One of the most surprising things I learned when entering aviation was that a lot of twin engine planes are kind of garbage. A considerable portion of the time if one engine quits you are, I'm told, best off just to throttle down the good one rather than risk exactly this kind of maneuver. Something like a Turbo Skymaster can apparently kick butt on one engine, but even the original O-2 was maxed at 8,000ft on one.

[@wayneschenk5512]

Did a lot of hours in the 310 R and truly capable to fly away one engine but good technique required. Lots of safety briefs straight ahead and treat it like a single engine aeroplane.

[@richc47us]

thanks Juan...I need to repeat this video and learn from it.

[@Jezeppi1]

Sad to hear it Juan Thank you 😢

[@maxcorder2211]

It will be interesting to find out what his most recent training and flight review covered. In this type airplane, flying from this airport, in these high DA conditions, it would seem imperative that pilots respect the possibility of losing an engine on takeoff and train for it and review constantly. Thinking about the potential of the worst thing that can happen and knowing for certain what you are going to have to do (either have enough altitude and airspeed to land on a runway or in the desert) should be top of mind in every flight prep. This pilot sounded reasonably calm when announcing his engine failure (twice). I don't know about this pilot, but I do know that complacency kills. RIP to this man. Hopefully, his crash will result in saving lives through making more pilots aware of their need for training.

[@hoosierplowboy5299]

A friend's Dad was a pilot. Said he didn't care for flying a twin, said there were four times as many things to go wrong...sorry to lose another avaitor...😔🙏