Added: 1 year ago
From: golfcharlie232
Views: 233,162
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (203)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • worthless video

  • The video doesn't seem to depict left rudder. I would bet that since the takeoff was videoed in its entirety, that this was a check ride. Skydiving dropzones have a lot of pilot turnover, which would be consistent with it being a check ride too.

  • its like a chopper taking off... :)

  • Shitty cameraman

  • Engine failure on takeoff - that's exactly one of the emergencies we pilots practice regularly during training and type rating. What's the big deal - the pilot dealt with the engine shutdown perfectly.

  • Even with the engine failure, I call that FSTO !

  • Comment removed

  • Twotter

  • Maybe it's the bourbon, but it could also be a visual effect, and not a failure.

  • @platterhof It's the bourbon. Notice the feathered propeller. Definitely an engine failure.

  • @hpshiker Yes you're right. I can see it now ;) We'll give the pilot the bourbon then :)

  • fuck you

  • @TheProGamerHW What? The plane did have an engine failure, you can hear it

  • For sure it became single...

  • 0:58

  • i have jumped out of this very plane many times when i holidayed in Gap. pity it aint there anymore

  • Yeah that take off looked like the they got airport prior to reaching VMC, i maybe wrong but if they did and it failed... bye bye...

  • Wow! Seems Twin Otters do quite well on one engine... 

  • nice bit of flying .they are built to fly on one engine if one does goo pop.

  • @Taildragger2411

    so are all planes >.<

  • I flew those birds, very very capable airplane. Whether it was failed as if on a checkride or just on the line, PIC flew very well indeed. Kept aircraft heading with left rudder and lowered pitch to preserve airspeed. Good work! hope the landing worked out !!

  • Looks like the auto feather was working. Would have been a lot uglier if it didn't feather.

  • @cfi2927087 PT6 engines rely on oil pressure to control blade pitch. Lose oil pressure and the engine feathers automatically.

  • @DC8Super72 - The Cheyenne I flew with PT-6' had a selectable switch for autofeather on or off. The Saab I flew had the same thing and we did negative auto feather V1 cuts. I would think the Twin Otter has the same thing.

  • i love the bird singing

  • I learned to skydive from this aircraft few years ago. Sadly, it was sold to Skydive Dubaï last year :(

  • not good

  • it does not blend

  • The beat frequency made the two motors speed difference stopped at the same time the engine appeared to stop. Also hard left rudder, and shallow climb. The pancake takeoff was weird.

  • nice! Does the twin otter automatically feather with a failure or do you need to pull that PCL to idle? Our T-34Cs need you pull the PCL to idle to clean up

  • Props do drop in rpm that fast if feathered. Thats the point of an engine going to feather after engine failure.. to stop it from windmilling. As the guy before said. Look at the rudder.

  • Uh, did you see how much left rudder was being applied just to keep his heading? That's not frame rate.

  • Comment removed

  • Personally I don't see how a propeller rpm could droop that fast even if the engine lost power. if you cut the engines at idle the engines usually take longer to slow down to that RPM. what everyone is calling the drop in RPM at 1:14 sounds more like the Doppler effect to me. I personally think it is just the frame rate.

  • @117nathanmyers

    not sure this isn't just training in which case the 'examiner' would affect the controls. And watch the pilot then perform.

    Pilot knows one engine 'will' fail. Check out flight.

  • To all who think its frame rate. at 1:14 you can hear one engine drop in rpm as the auto feather kickes in. the prop goes to full feather and slows but does not stop due to windmill effect.

  • @mstng100mph maybe, but if the prop was fully feathered then it would have stopped rotating completely.

  • @intrepidrock123 Its possible it wasnt in full feather but the engine did significantly drop in RPM. It was either a training thing or the engine lost power. I just dont buy the frame rate because the other engine isnt even close to the cameras frame rate and they should both be close in rpm during normal take off.

  • To me that looks more like a stroboscope effect between the rate or rotation of the propeller and the rate of the frames of the video that an engine failure. Just like, when driving by night on a highway illuminated by sodium bulbs at a certain speed, fence pickets or other car's wheels seem motionless or going backwards.

  • was it a procedure or what????????????????????

  • Curious. Seems like all the digital images, movies and stills, of propellers spinning shows the individual blades, unlike all the old film type cameras where the spinning prop is just a blur. It's just a blur here at the beginning as well. Something funny going on.

  • @cpergiel @cpergiel well its surely a continuous video, when video frame rate and propeller spin rate are the same it seems that the propeller is not spinning or spinning slow or even in opposite direction. its just an illusion. both the engine looked good to me.

  • Are you on a boat?

  • wow 3 seconds to get of the freakin ground?!?!?! mad quick

  • he put the number two engine( right one) in zero thrust simulating an engine failure after takeoff ( V1)

  • its a good job that things stall speed is fairly low , fair doos it lifts off really quick , i expect he made a safe circuit and landing ?

  • How did it take off at such an angle? I'm guessing that the runway must slope downward or something.

  • @bg11215 look how much flap he's got out

  • @ellzyss The long lens does it, like the funny looking cricket pitch (if u know what cricket is). I'm not being rude but if u are American u may not have seen cricket on TV.

  • @Justwantahover I'm Australian, I own cricket =)

  • @ellzyss I accidently commented the wrong person.

  • @bg11215 It's an illusion caused by the long lens like a cricket pitch sometimes looks odd when lens is zoomed up.

  • @Justwantahover And this illusion only happens on one engine? Clever lense to be selective on which propellor it applies the optical illusion to :)

    The right engine is definately feathered as the other engine looks perfect. Maybe a training flight or perhaps a real engine failure. Not an illusion though.

  • @darrindwp Are u saying it's crabbing? It appears to be nose-down (negative angle-of-attack), full-flap's are not that effective are they?

  • @Justwantahover flaps are behind the cg, so they create lift but at the same time make the plane nose down.

  • Goodness, was a heli taking off or what!

  • VMC is the calibrated airspeed at which, when the critical engine is suddenly made

    inoperative, it is possible to maintain control of the airplane with that engine still

    inoperative, and thereafter maintain straight flight at the same speed with an angle of

    bank of not more than 5 degrees. The method used to simulate critical engine failure

    must represent the most critical mode of powerplant failure expected in service with

    respect to controllability."

  • GOOD INFO ON FEATHERED PROPS.

  • hello... the first 1:00 of this vid is a waste

  • Does no one notice that the blades are feathered on the right engine????? Oh yea none of you idiots are pilots, He did a good job.

  • @NiceHarley Hello, aviation Newb here, what is a "feathered" prop signify?

  • @R5H4D0W When you feather a prop it changes the blade angle and lines up with the air flow so that the bad engine will stop turning. Also when it feathers it greatly reduces drag..

  • @NiceHarley This can be done remotely in the event of a midair engine failure?

  • @R5H4D0W You have to feather the prop in the event of an engine failure so that you reduce drag and the engine will stop turning. If you do not feather it, the engine will keep turning due to the flow over the blades and cause an eccesive amount of drag that you do not need with an engine failure. It makes no difference if it is on takeoff or in midair, if the engine fails you feather it to reduce drag.

  • Doubt that it is engine failure, more likely flash rate on the camera gives the impression that the engine is spinning slowly.

  • @mitsucanter247365 it's feathered... notice the extremely high pitch of the right prop.

  • ....yawn.....zzzzzzzz.

  • Oooops! hahaha LOL

  • Me fascina como despega con tant poco carreteo, es hermoso :D

  • I love the Twin Otter, such a brilliant aircraft. Slow speed handling is fantastic.

  • Must have the Canadian max gross weight if it requires a type rating.

  • @Dorisequador take a look after 1:30 and look at the difference of the two engines

  • Dude holding the camera was in a swing....

  • Seems ok to me.

  • skip to 1:02 for takeoff!

    

  • The short take off means that the plane is empty, so it's a pilot skill test training an after take off engine failure.

  • Hmmm. Must be nice to have turbines and not be piston engine multi in a lower FAR category. Now lets try that in an old piper apache . . . .

  • Comment removed

  • @maxou5757 guess how many people care?

  • Comment removed

  • good job mr pilot!

    dead foot... dead engine... airspeed...

  • wow it doesn't take much runway for that thing to take off

  • Great display of its STOL capabilities there, w/o the engine failure of course~

  • 0:48 why am i in love with that person for some reason

    Also, holy crap that was a short takeoff roll!!

  • There will be so much bullshit posted in the comments of a clip like this hahahaha

  • Dam that lifted fast.

  • STOL takeoff :)

  • Honestly, for attending the crash Air Caraïbes "Twin Otter" F-OGES in live from the port of Gustavia, the crews should be informed and trained to counterand threat as quickly as possible in-flight reverse.

  • @bombcat91 What ?????????

  • @newforestroadwarrior A voluntary in flight reverse by the crew. For a long time, and again today, pilots in St. Barths take the challenge to achieve the shortest landing on runway 10. And the best in this category is the Twin Otter. But to get there you must engage the reverse in flight during the final descent of 1000 feet to the runway. On 03/24/01 the crew of Air Caraïbes Twin Otter execute this, and when returning to a descent thrust one propeller remained in reverse mod, results: 20 deads.

  • @bombcat91 Same thing happened at detroit-metro in the late 80's commuter plane a casa 212, pilot knowingly engaged thrust reverser on approach and plane crashed on runway, nine killed.

  • Is that a parachute plane?

  • ...flaps go to 10, in case of eng failure when using 20 for TO

  • Very short takeoff.

  • this plane can do the wheelbarrow

  • You guys, the camera makes it looks like the engine stops, then engine doesn't actually stop :P

  • so annoying when u have to wait 60 secs before the fucking thing begins to roll

  • I'm amazed this procedure is approved much less performed.

  • well better to jump out of a bad aircraft than a perfectly good one!!:)

  • I'd have finished the flight like nothing happened.

  • (Birds chirping in background, the waxing din of an airplane) Look, Mummy! There's an aeroplane up in the sky...with only one engine running!

    Repects to Sir David Gilmour!

  • That's a wheelie in reverse!

  • I love the lurch it gives as it lifts off - like the Carribou wheelbarrow.

  • this just shows how awesome canadian aircraft are :)

  • Could have possibly edited out the first minute of this clip, and love how the rear wheels get airborne first.

  • why does the plane take off like a helicopter???

  • God Damnit - Youtube should be for amateurs to post videos shot by professionals.

  • Can you hold the camera steady. It's making me seasick.

  • Beautifull plane

  • Weird Taking Off... ran few meters and the back tires start flying first...

  • @gaberth That's because he/she was going against the limits of the plane and using full flap for take-off...dangerous pilot.

  • Full flap is used to give better lift so you can use a shorter runway...,

  • @wamb17 Uh no in the twin otter full flap causes you to wheel barrow down the runway, It is also unnecessary drag. There is NO need EVER to use full flap. I do off-strip flying out of strips that are 500'-1000' long...no need for full flap.

  • @wamb17 Your answer is not completely wrong. You are right that flaps increases lift. But there is something called a lift to drag ratio. Flaps that are set from 0 to 20 degrees will give you the most amount of lift and least amount of drag. As you increase your flap degree above this angle, the drag ratio increases exponentially and you end up with more drag than lift. Therefore any increase above the L/D Max ratio on takeoff is pointless and dangerous. Especially on a twin engine plane.

  • when was the engine failure?

  • Does anyone know why this person is taking off with full flap?

  • the engine was cut the second the wheels left. Sure it wasn't a v1 cut?

  • crap, a tree!

  • A very strange take-off attitude that plane had...

  • love the parachute guy just strolling past ;-)

  • You don't need a type rating for a Twin Otter. They gross @ 12,500 lbs. so they are below the weight limit. The new models will gross @ over 13,000 lbs. but they are still listed @ 12,500, so no type rating. Smart move on De Havilland's part.

  • @zuzupetals1999 You have to have a turbine type rating though

  • Looks like some kind of training.. controlled / simulated failure?

  • save gas....:o)

  • A one million shot.

  • the right engine just quit

  • who names an airplane after a water mammal...

  • @mharrop396 Canadians!

  • that was quite a short take off.

  • Do they really shit engines down for practice? seems super unsafe. I know of a crash where and FAA evaluator pulled power on one side of a Guppy and killed everyone on board. I'm not a pilot, but it seems a little risky of an evolution for just practice's sake you know?

  • Why was he taking off with full flap should be the important question.

  • @mrpilot102 Good question, and it makes me feel like I'd like to give the check pilot a little rant. Here he has set up the student that is going for the checkride up for everything you need for a VMC. With that amount of flaps set, you will surely be able to lift of before reaching your VMC Speed, meaning that if loosing an engine at that point, will surely make a bad day for you.. And when I read that he did the eng. cut on purpose, he's license should have been shredded.

  • @Norwegian737Project it's telling me the person in command of that aircraft doesn't know anything about it. Full flap in a DHC-6 is not only counter-productive it's dangerous.

  • @mrpilot102 Short track take-off's require flaps

  • @REZM1 Go read the DHC-6 AFM the MAX flap is 20 even for short field. Normal flap is 10 unless you operate on big wheels, skis, or floats. There is NO where in the AFM that talks about 37.5 take-offs.

  • @mrpilot102 True, but if you're experienced enough to pull it out like this guy, you can be a little show off. It's not the safest way to take-off since the plane is almost stalling though. Cheers!

  • @mrpilot102 Taking off with full flaps to demonstrate an Engine Failure in the worst situation. This was done as part of a type rating, training flight. Typically, going around with full flaps, low altitude, with an engine failure, gets you in the worst situation. This is what they tried to do here, learn how to handle the aircraft in the worst possible situation.

  • @golfcharlie232 hey was the worst possible situation?

  • @golfcharlie232 I might be a little rusty. It is quite a few years since my multi-engine checkride. During a single engine landing you put full flaps only when landing can be made even when the working engine failed. And you newer want to go-around single-engine. You make it right first time!!! They learned nothing but incorrect procedure.

  • @mrcnp1 If you flew a Seneca or the likes, yes you wouldn't go around with full flaps. That's why we have "commital height". It does work differently on some airplanes though, and in some cases you could have to go around while flaring a few feet above the ground. The plane featured in this video is now operating in Dubai. Those procedures might have been introduced for the flying in Africa, where you can well end up going around very low as an elephant is crossing the runway. Just a thought.

  • @mrcnp1 Second point: The engine failure can (and would more probably) happen after the go-around and not before. You are in landing configuration, low above the ground, decide to go around and then bang, engine failure.

  • @mrcnp1 During a single engine landing you never put in full flaps! If you do put in full flaps and have to go around you more than likely will not have enough power to go around and will become a greasy spot somewhere around the airport. You lose about %60-70 of your performace single engine. Full flaps produce more drag than lift.

  • @stoneagearcher You do put full flaps when LANDING or should I write COMMITED TO LAND. Short final or over the runway. Most multi-engine (two engine) airplanes below 12500lbs have single engine climb rate almost non existent in real world. Elephant? I would assume hot, less dense air. Performance of Cessna 310, Piper Seminole, Piper Seneca and similar would be so bad that I would not reject t/o when flaring. Let me put it this way. Wouldn't you prefer to hit the elephant decelerating.

  • @mrcnp1 What you're saying is true of light piston aircraft, turbine powered aircraft (more appropriately, a/c with lots of excess power with one or more engines being INOP) train to do single engine go arounds.

    I haven't flown the twotter, but I believe using full flaps is a method that some bush operators unofficially use to increase runway performance off of super short fields.

  • @golfcharlie232 I forgot to ask! If you are indeed a certified pilot where is it written that you are allowed to take off with full flaps? What QRH, POH or PTS allows you to do that? I would love to see it!

  • @stoneagearcher correct me if im mistaken but wouldn't the federal regulation be it?

    Canadian Air Reg 602.05

    (2) Every crew member on board an aircraft shall, during flight time, comply with the instructions of the pilot-in-command or of any person whom the pilot-in-command has authorized to act on behalf of the pilot-in-command.

  • @LethalHobo I might be wrong. I did read about what happened when the twotters flaps retracted from the "full" position involuntarily. George Neil (DHC-2 Production Test Pilot) said it could really sneak up on an unsuspecting pilot unless the problem was fixed. I also landed a Feisler Storch replica and definetly would think thrice about using full flap.

  • @LethalHobo Im not Canadian but I highly doubt that that regulation would allow any PIC to disregard the airplanes POH or QRH. I dont know of any plane where it is authorized to take off with full flaps.

  • Comment removed

  • @stoneagearcher to be honest I never heard of a plane unauthorized to takeoff with full flaps, but, sure enough, my Pa-24-250 manual under limitations says "Takeoff Flaps.. 0, 9, 18°" [out of 27°].

    However there's no limitation on full flap T/Os in my Pa-18-150 or C-172P Manual. I was actually instructed in my Tailwheel and Float ratings, to use full 40° in the super cub for short T/O and full 30° in the C172L & M seaplane in really rough water. I'll ask grandps about the DHC-2/-2T, and B200.

  • @golfcharlie232 Correction sir! The DHC-6 does NOT require a type rating. This was no type rating check ride.

    I formally was a DHC-6 captain for a commuter airline, and check pilot. This takeoff was inexcusable to say the least. Our SOP in the Twin Otter even forbids full flap landings, much less full flap takeoffs in training or otherwise. The reason for this is with full flaps, on approach, the deck angle to maintain a decent airspeed, is very steep. It is not comfortable for the PAXs.

  • @AW320 I am not a DHC-6 pilot, I was just filming the take-off and I don't intend to advocate for the pilot.

    This plane is not used as a commuter but solely as a skydive aircraft. SOPs? They probably don't have any.

    I can just guess they were trying to put the aircraft in the worst configuration for an engine failure.

    Safe, unsafe, allowed, not allowed, once again I was not the instructor onboard and I don't know what JAA regulations allow, besides manufacturer limitations.

  • @golfcharlie232 Thanks for your reply. Somehow I thought this takeoff was some commuter airline thing,

    The twin otter is a great aircraft and easy to fly. They are involved in a lot of accidents. This is probably due to the number of aircraft operating as well as to the type of operations they are involved with.

  • @AW320 That's great when you're operating off 4000+ foot runways, but twotters commonly fly to places that are less than 1500 feet.

    As far as the TR is concerned; varies by the governing authority. The type is restricted to 12500 lbs (therefore doesn't require a type). Though I have seen them loaded up to 17000 in the bush, and they can carry that load quite well. Others require a TR for every aircraft you fly (even a 172). Regardless, any operator will need to train every pilot TR or not.

  • @archer49d Correct, in NZ for example you need a type rating for every single new aircraft be it a 747 400 or a C152. Probably a far safer option

  • @kiwipilot84 Wouldn't call it safer, some planes are too small/simple for in depth type specific training to be of any benefit. There's not a lot of difference between a Piper and a Cessna other than where the wings are. A 757 and a 737, though similar in appearance, are two completely different animals.

  • @archer49d I think once you have a CPL license and some experience yes you can get away with it, on a centreline thrust aeroplane only. But even small aeroplanes handle and land differently, plus pipers and cessnas have very different fuel systems. When I have given a pilot a rating its the approach and stalling thats the main part they need to demo competence with. I def dont agree with a weight limit t/r for twins however. A T/R can only be a hour flight and some ground work if need be.

  • @golfcharlie232 Thats what simulators are for. Any dash simulator will do the job. The only thing this cowboy is demonstrating is how to be dead hero.

  • @mrpilot102 because it was a shortfield takeoff, you use full flaps when you want/need to lift off ASAP

  • @mrpilot102 also used for short Field take offs, and the otter can do full flaps and a Vy prety fast

  • @mrpilot102 remeber its STOL aircraft too but not technically its 50/50.

  • @mrpilot102 I fly this plane and he is not using full flap, he is using 20 degrees flaps. plane is configured for STOL take-off

  • @mrpilot102 Because the plane is design to do that? 

  • wdf and dude walks by with parachute

  • engine failure in short takeoff.... land ASAP and then cry.

  • max power, flap 10, 74 knots, check prop feathered.... yeah

  • @mandrakepiloto Vmc for that airplane is 74?!

  • @bronco8585.... NO, Vmc in twin otter acording Flight Safety and manual procedures are 64 Knots, but each 1000 lbs reduce the velocity 1 knots and depends of take off weight...