Safety Spotlight: The runway behind you

Initial NTSB reports indicate the pilot of the Bonanza attempted a turnback with disastrous results.

Opponents of the turnback argue that it’s impossible in some aircraft, and near impossible in the rest. Even with a glide ratio that makes a turnback technically possible, they say, the difficulty of the maneuver, close proximity to the ground, a startle factor, and the stress of life-or-death consequences all conspire against a successful outcome.

Proponents argue that turnbacks are a viable option for some pilots, in some aircraft, under some circumstances (see “Proficient Pilot: Unintended Consequences”). The FAA cautions that CFIs should train single-engine pilots not to attempt a turnback unless “altitude, best glide performance and pilot skill allow for a safe return.”

In April, the AOPA Air Safety Institute flew profiles at Martinsburg, West Virginia’s (MRB) 8,800-foot-long, 150-foot-wide runway to determine the feasibility of turnbacks. We will release a video on our YouTube channel in June to document the results and our conclusions.

The profile involved climbing between V_X and V_Y with full power to a predetermined altitude, cutting power to idle, delaying three seconds to simulate a startle period, then pushing to best glide while entering a 45-degree-bank turn back to the runway. Our lineup included me in my 150-horsepower, 1993 Piper PA–18 Super Cub with full gas; Editor at Large Dave Hirschman solo in his Van’s RV–4 fully fueled; Hirschman and AOPA Vice President of Flight Operations Dave Roy in a 1972 Beechcraft Bonanza A36 with a 300-horsepower Continental IO-550, full gas, and 40 pounds of baggage; and AOPA Director of Flight Operations Luz Beattie alone in a fully fueled 1978 Cessna 172N.

Prior to the exercise, we all climbed to altitude and practiced stalls, including stalls in 45 degrees of bank, to calibrate the actual stall speeds at play during our turnback exercise. We then established our minimum required turnback altitude using airline pilot and CFI Brian Schiff’s technique. We set a climb profile, cut the power to idle, and began an idle power, 45-degree-bank turn at best glide for 360 degrees, noting the altitude lost.

With stall numbers and expected turnback altitude requirements freshly established, we each flew three profiles in near-perfect conditions: cool, sunny morning, light winds, low density altitude. The Super Cub returned to the runway in all three turnback attempts, one at 500 feet agl and two at 300 feet agl.

Beattie made her turnbacks at 1,000 feet agl, 800 feet agl, and 600 feet agl. She comfortably made the runway each time. Both Beattie and I may have benefited from some idle thrust, with engines still running, but experts such as Catherine Cavagnaro advised that the light thrust we might have received at idle power was somewhat offset by drag from the moving propeller, so the advantages of an engine in idle are believed to be minimal.

Hirschman initiated turnbacks at 1,000 feet agl in his RV–4. He made it back, barely, two out of three times. The third time would have resulted in a landing short of the runway. Hirschman’s RV–4 has a three-blade, constant-speed propeller that creates far more drag at the high-rpm setting than a fixed-pitch prop.

Perhaps most startling were the results in the Bonanza. Turning back at 1,000 feet agl and varying speeds from best glide (110 KIAS) to 95 KIAS (to reduce the turn radius), and propeller settings from high to low rpm, the pilots didn’t come close to making it back to the runway in any attempt. Even in an optimum glide configuration with landing gear and flaps up, the Bonanza would have come down well short of the runway.

Our takeaway is that in certain aircraft with good climb rates and glide ratios, flown by proficient pilots who’ve trained for the maneuver, a turnback is a viable option. Aircraft with poor power-off glide performance in a turn are unlikely to make a turnback at any altitude. Pilots flying these aircraft using typical departure and climbout profiles should eliminate turnbacks as an option for engine failure on takeoff.

Variables like wind, temperature, density altitude, and technique could affect these results, but not enough to substantially improve our outcomes. Please don’t fly this exercise solo in an attempt to prove us wrong or confirm our results. We’ve lost pilots training in these maneuvers due to the high potential for an uncoordinated stall and spin in the turnback. Fly with a CFI, at altitude first and determine your strategy in the event of an engine failure on takeoff. Go fly.

Email [email protected]