As a former Air Force technician who spent three years maintaining the Twin with 440 Squadron in Yellowknife, NWT, I can attest to its incredible level of indestructibility. You don’t know true terror until you’ve experienced a take-off on skis, using a runway of jagged Arctic Ocean sea ice. I’m not sure if it was the ungodly loud bangs, truly impossible level of wing flex, repeated fifteen foot jumps, or the multiple falling interior ceiling panels that convinced me that we were certainly going to die. What I do know, it that forty plus year old plane somehow survived that take-off, the same way it had hundreds of times before, and many times since. The DeHavilland Twin Otter. Quite simply the best bush plane that has ever, or likely will ever exist.
@@fiveoboy01 I’m assuming you have first-hand knowledge and experience? Or, have you simply watched the number of videos required to confirm one’s personal beliefs? Try to remember the importance of payload capacity in a plane intended for difficult terrain, and impossibly short, or non-existent landing strips. We used to haul a four man team, complete with their arctic kit, enough provisions to last them a full week, two pilot crew w/FE, as well as a full-size Arctic Cat snowmobile, without losing the aircraft’s ability to perform take-offs and landings on one of the endless available microscopic gravel islands found in Canada’s high, high north, without the convenience of a landing strip.
@@FuckThatYo Yawn. Another youtube expert. I have logged time in the twin otter as well as multiple single engine bush planes. My comment had nothing to do with useful load. Lots more to a bush plane than that. Get lost.
Twin Otters are very safe planes to fly. I've flown them as passengers many times. Quite a cramped space though, but amazing STOL capability. ALM and later WinAir have operated them for decades.
More amazing is how this video shows the immense lift generated at such low speeds by this aircraft, no wonder it is a bush and temp airstrip favourite !!
It’s empty , jumpers all out , maybe a load or two of fuel , I’ve seen them take off in the distance to skid across a taxiway like that on a windy day !
This is a great portrayal of outstanding airmanship and I think a lot of people missed it. The engine fail came after the V1 phase and even though the otter was ready to leave the ground, the pilot promptly put it into a nose-level attitude to build speed and eventually initiate a shallow climb. Yea this may have looked like an unusual takeoff pitch but it was a safe one. Other pilots sometimes panic in situations like this and keep the plane nose-high, which is a great way to get killed. Again bravo to this pilot. It may seem like a small detail but it was by the book.
@jmr604 The engine failure was part of the type rating on the Twin Otter. He did a dozen of them like that one. The shutdown can clearly be heard, indeed.
Probably just zero thrust setting. No sane person would intentionally do a shut down that close to the ground. The faa tells us to use zero setting instead
The take-off appears to be a technique used by "Air America" using more than 10 degrees flap setting. This is a technique for short or :"offstrip" takeoffs and has more risk than normal Twin Otter takeoffs. I noticed that the strip is paved and longer than required. I would have used the standard 10 degrees flap setting recommended by DeHavilland for these occasions. When using more than 10 degrees flap setting the pilot must anticipate the nose low attitude on take-off and initial takeoff.
@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.
@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.
Your explanations are half truths Ricky.. This engine produces no drag. It is s free turbine. Look up PT 6 design. It's only propeller drag trying to be reduced here...
@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.
STOL aircraft have lift devices (fancy flaps and leading edge slats), so that at take-off they have to fly nose down. Very soon after lift-off the right engine was cut, and very quickly feathered; my call, a check flight, the instructor cut the power and the student reacted by feathering the prop and using left rudder.
+glishskiii I noticed. It autofeathered as soon as the torque came off, really quick. Does anyone know what caused the failure? FOD is unlikely with the engines that far off the ground.
As many have said, the Tw'otter is likely the most amazing STOL transport ever designed. Go Canada! I (as a passenger) have landed on water, on tundra, on short strips, whatever, for 30 years, never an issue, 100% relaible, thanks to the engineers back at base. Seeing the TO land was like, yes, I get to go home, and never failed. Had to rope start a single Otter once! :)
Also note the flaps on this plane are directly behind the engines. In that configuration the prop wash hitting the flaps is going to cause a LOT of lift at high throttle settings...it's almost like vectoring the prop thrust down towards the ground. Don't even need to pitch up to climb.
Either this pilot was right on the ball or it was (more likely) a training exercise judging by a) the quick reaction in feathering the prop b) time spent at the threshold (having a briefing?) and c) The way the flaps went up immediately the prop was feathered. Classic 'this is what I'm gonna do if....' I reckon the instructor/check pilot just pulled the power back to flight idle.
the Dehaviland DHC-6 Twin Otter did suffer a engine failure on take off. If you watch the blade, the pilot feathers the prop out so there is less aerodynamic drag so he doesn't stall out. when a engine does fail, it doesn't stop immediately (unless something blocked its path), it will continue to spin itself.
Glad to see somebody else saw it feather. When PT6A fails it automatically goes into feathered pitch so there is no action on the part of the pilot to feather it. It requires oil pressure to overcome counter weight and spring tension to bring the blades to a low pitch. That's why when they are shut down all PT6's will have the prop in the feathered position.
Yeah, good call... capture rate of cameras is an illusion; pay close attention to the angle of the blades though. It was an engine failure... Otters are pretty safe aircraft. Good job to the crew.
When I did my training, the above situation was known as 'wheelbarrowing' , and was to be avoided as it puts a lot of stress on the nosewheel which doesn't have the structural strength to cope with too much of it. In fact, my instructors counted it as bad piloting. The Otter is a fine aircraft tho' and a very reliable one too.
The Twin Otter nose gear is more than strong enough. It’s designed for bush operations plus to attach skis and floats. It’s not like a regular aircraft where the nose wheel is designed as light as possible to only support the front of the aircraft.
@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.
Twin Otters can take off like that at certain weights and flap settings. About 1:17 if you listen closely you can hear something that sounds like a turbine spooling down followed by an abrupt change in the prop sound as the plane passes the camera. That was some nice handling by the crew, fast reactions to get the engine shut down and feathering.
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.
They're probably training. Only a rookie would "wheel-barrow" the airplane? In northern Canada, where the DHC-6 was designed to operate, (and I flew it) I personally know of two instances where Twin Otters, empty of cabin load and with minimal fuel, were taken off single engine after landing at an isolated strip due to an engine issue. It's far easier to do that and fly to a maintenance base than to fly in the equipment and personnel to change an engine in the field. Of course in the Arctic you usually have low density-altitudes and generally flat terrain in most places. Still, I've always loved the Twin Otter for its capabilities. It wasn't an exceptional commuter airplane, as most people have encountered it, but in the environment for which it was designed? Awesome.
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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
I did not know that this version of the aircraft had auto-feather, hence the rapid response to the engine failure. In retrospect, I think that it was real a failure. Have a look at the strobe effects as power is applied, the right engine is slow to spin-up. The aircraft veers right on the runway, corrected by left rudder, before lift-off. The power loss seems small, did the auto-feather kick-in too soon? Either way the pilot in control, did good.
I agree. It looked like was using 20 or 30. At the operation I work at the only time we really use more than flaps 10 is on our seaplanes. Luckily it looked like he was pretty light.
This Aircraft seem to be owned by CERPS, Gap Tallard,that is a sky diving company. This aircraft is still in active service :) Last seen as flight "JUMP4" April 4th 2013. It have had alot of regs.. it started with CF-WZH ,N501BA,RP-C1776, D-IDHB and then F-GKHM :)It is based at Gap Tallard Aerodrome :)
I ground run these aircraft regularly...when it 'autofeathers' in test mode, it goes in and out of feather while continuing to turn under power, but if the engine failed during the take-off, it would certainly have started to slow down very quickly. This one seems to keep turning! But I agree with you, it could have some kind of problem like the beta back up switch causing an unwanted auto-feather. Surely they could have been training too...I have been many tests flights where they do that.
@CaNgARO0 It could, but it wasn't. The left prop was running properly, however as the pilot was on Type Rating, he did a douzen of different types of engine failures and that one was just a routine training procedure ...
@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.
Impressive takeoff. I wish I could have seen the cockpit action. When I was training for an ME ticket in '76 in a '64 Beachcraft Baron it was not nearly as smooth as this when the instructor pulled the mixture to simulate failure AND I KNEW it was coming.
No. varies by plane 20 deg max on this plane as per flight manual Rumor is sometimes float guys use 30 but its not legal. Landing flap settings I.e. More flaps mean more drag. Not what you want on your way up
@CaNgARO0 It was actually failed or shut-down on purpose.. you can see the other prop still turning at full power and you can hear the shutdown as well.
If that’s the same plane they just jumped from, then they didn’t jump from a perfectly good airplane ✈️ I love skydiving but corona has my DZ shut down now.
@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.
I been in LOTS of Twin Otters, like thats the only plane that comes to my town. Tuktoyaktuk, Canada so thier really safe and smooth. The airline is called Aklak Air. Its a really nice Airline
No es la primera vez que veo un twin con emergencia de motor, aun así sigue siendo un avión muy confiable debido a su configuración inclusive con un motor y siempre será uno de mis favoritos, versátil y de gran prestación.
The aircraft in the video is a Twin Otter turboprop. The original Otter is a single piston-engined aircraft with a tail-dragger landing gear. Google "DHC-3 Otter website" and you'll see that it's a completely different aircraft
@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.
@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..
This engine is a Free Turbine. There is NO engine/ propeller connection other than some linkage rods to the propeller governor. Unlike a reciprocating engine, who cares what the engine does as long as the propeller can be feathered to reduce PROPELLER drag...
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
Like the old saying goes. The propeller(s) have 2 functions. #1. Pull the aircraft gracefully through the air. #2. Keep us pilots cool, calm & collected. If you think those reasons are not true, watch what happens if any one propeller stops or slows way down!!
@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.
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.
1:26 does. It’s not a lot. Very brave doing engine failure training right after takeoff. This is an at altitude or in the sim thing for me and most people.
What was up with the weird rotation? The rear gear left the ground first and it looked like it was about to touch back down nose first. I’ve not witnessed anything like that fixed wing before other than a harrier maybe
@koutsoskk Its a simulated engine failure. Look again at the rudder and both props. Right engine failure. Look at the rate of climb, very reduced for a plane with no people. The pilot will maintain VySE and carry out the appropriate emergency procedures.
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.
@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.
The flaps were extended, not sure what full extension is on an Otter, I'm guessing that for a short take off they were full depending on the weight and balance figures. They came up just as they cleared the trees.
Just left it on the runway for too long, so speed was lifting the wings (right above the mains) before angle of attack was.. In very simple terms its called a wheelbarrow. The description says 'twin otter type rating' so thats fairly normal for someone to do who's not used to the acceleration of a new type
If you take off with more than 10 flap on a twin otter it climbs in a level/nose down attitude. This looks like 20, maybe 30 flap takeoff which accounts for the nose low attitude
Brandon No it doesn't. 22 skydivers, 15 degrees of flap 500lbs of fuel x 2 tanks ; TAKE OFF TRIM SET ( I suspect it was not in the correct range) and nose wheel comes up first .... at least it did for me... over thirty times a day...
@@peastew62 well i spose it depends on the pilot..any good pilot knows that a stol aircraft like the otter can easly get offa the ground with flaps down..a small header wind and a little updraft..and the rear wheels lift first because of that combo..and alla that with one engin out no problem though this engin went out just after leaving the ground..a point of danger for most aircraft but np at all for this bird..peace ✌😉
@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.
G8 piloting ....1 immediately identifid problem 2 kept nose low otherwise would've certainly tip stalled 3 immediately applied leftward aeleron roll to prevent wing drop 4 & countered the yow finally with left rudder
Textbook worst case engine failure but looks like a pretty much non-event. Now if anything failed with the feathering then you'd be in trouble. Based on that takeoff roll (even for a twin otter) it looks like he was very light so that helps.
This actually looked like a not-by-the-book full-flap takeoff (main gear lift the ground first). The pilot correctly only accelerates, i.e. does not start climbing much until he reaches Vmc (minimum single-engine control speed). THEN he starts to retract flaps and climb, only in this case his right engine failed and feathered automatically so he does not climb much - the aircraft probably had a considerable load on board.
Actually, no. If the auto-feather fails, the propeller windmills with the blades in fine pitch which creates a lot of drag (but no discernible engine vibration) and you will not climb much until the prop has been manually feathered. The slower airflow over the wing directly behind the prop disc might cause buffeting at slow speeds, but Vmc and possibly negative climb would be the main concern, not vibration.
Halfdan Ingolfsson I thought most have instant auto feather on torque / power loss? Are you sure? I feel like that would make almost any engine-out scenario essentially deadly.
The DHC-6 auto-feather is a double-edged sword. You arm it before takeoff, and disarm it once you are at a safe altitude. The reason: The prop torque is measured using engine oil pressure, and with a-f armed, a drop in torque pressure will trigger feathering of that prop. If you hit a violent downdraft with the a-f armed (momentary negative G) the engine oil pressure may drop momentarily and the auto-feather may trigger erraneously - with the engine at full power! This will grossly over-torque and over-temp the engine. The prop will unfeather slowly once you have positive G, but the engine may require major attention or replacement.
A regular DHC-6 300 auto-feather is very quick. When a flew a few Swiss-registered DHC-6's in Africa 25 years ago, some of the engines had a 2-second auto-feather delay to prevent instant auto-feathering due to momentary negative G. An auto-feather check was always done before the first flight of the day, and before EVERY flight if you had the 4-blade Raisbeck mod props. The funny thing was that some of the aircraft had the delay on one engine, but not the other!
Big wheels are really useful mainly on the Canadian Arctic islands, where the cold have leveled and smoothed out everything and you can land everywhere with the big wheels, even on top of mesas...
Fast reaction from the pilot to quickly feather the prop on the failed engine. Good power from the remaining engine that the aircraft can still climb on one engine.
chtiguillaume Don't know about France but in the USA, skydiving operations are operated under FAR Part 91. Therefore, In the Twin Otters I flew there was often a little placard " Inoperative " It prepared me for the Lear 25 D later. Thrust Reversers could be "fixed" that way too, even under FAR Part 135. Who needs reversers on ice covered runways in Canada... certainly not the management in Florida....
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 78 | คู่เอก "ปกรณ์ vs ฟาบิโอ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LSOmgl0Th2c/mqdefault.jpg)
As a former Air Force technician who spent three years maintaining the Twin with 440 Squadron in Yellowknife, NWT, I can attest to its incredible level of indestructibility. You don’t know true terror until you’ve experienced a take-off on skis, using a runway of jagged Arctic Ocean sea ice.
I’m not sure if it was the ungodly loud bangs, truly impossible level of wing flex, repeated fifteen foot jumps, or the multiple falling interior ceiling panels that convinced me that we were certainly going to die. What I do know, it that forty plus year old plane somehow survived that take-off, the same way it had hundreds of times before, and many times since.
The DeHavilland Twin Otter. Quite simply the best bush plane that has ever, or likely will ever exist.
And, joined by its big brother, the Buffalo!
Or anything made by Britten Norman
Wrong, tons of better single engine bush planes out there.
@@fiveoboy01 I’m assuming you have first-hand knowledge and experience? Or, have you simply watched the number of videos required to confirm one’s personal beliefs?
Try to remember the importance of payload capacity in a plane intended for difficult terrain, and impossibly short, or non-existent landing strips. We used to haul a four man team, complete with their arctic kit, enough provisions to last them a full week, two pilot crew w/FE, as well as a full-size Arctic Cat snowmobile, without losing the aircraft’s ability to perform take-offs and landings on one of the endless available microscopic gravel islands found in Canada’s high, high north, without the convenience of a landing strip.
@@FuckThatYo Yawn. Another youtube expert. I have logged time in the twin otter as well as multiple single engine bush planes. My comment had nothing to do with useful load. Lots more to a bush plane than that. Get lost.
If one engine fails, use the Otter engine.
Just curious here...are you a dad?
@@guilelme Yeah, sounded like a "dad" joke!!! LOL
Such Humour - You'll have to prop us up at this rate.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
boooooooo
Twin Otters are very safe planes to fly. I've flown them as passengers many times. Quite a cramped space though, but amazing STOL capability.
ALM and later WinAir have operated them for decades.
More amazing is how this video shows the immense lift generated at such low speeds by this aircraft, no wonder it is a bush and temp airstrip favourite !!
It’s empty , jumpers all out , maybe a load or two of fuel , I’ve seen them take off in the distance to skid across a taxiway like that on a windy day !
@@leefithian3704 add floats and a full load up to Rivers' INlet to take big Chinook salmon. what a plane! half a century old, too.
Supercritical wings and a overpowered engines for its size would do that.
These planes are hilarious. Love the nose down lift off 😂
You have to love the Twin Otter! I flew in one hundreds of times with my job in Alaska. What a great ride.
Saw one take off across a single-carriageway road, once. Heck of a headwind, though...
This is a great portrayal of outstanding airmanship and I think a lot of people missed it. The engine fail came after the V1 phase and even though the otter was ready to leave the ground, the pilot promptly put it into a nose-level attitude to build speed and eventually initiate a shallow climb. Yea this may have looked like an unusual takeoff pitch but it was a safe one. Other pilots sometimes panic in situations like this and keep the plane nose-high, which is a great way to get killed.
Again bravo to this pilot. It may seem like a small detail but it was by the book.
You can easily see and hear the right prop going into feather. Very distinctive sound if you have heard it before.
Hopelessand Forlorn yep, taking a big bite out of the air
johnny llooddte Yes you can.
johnny llooddte You can see the right prop is feathered as it goes by the camera.
@jmr604 The engine failure was part of the type rating on the Twin Otter. He did a dozen of them like that one. The shutdown can clearly be heard, indeed.
Probably just zero thrust setting. No sane person would intentionally do a shut down that close to the ground. The faa tells us to use zero setting instead
I've never seen the mains leave the ground before the nosewheel before.
Took off like a fucking helicopter lol
weird isn't it.
You should watch videos of the de Havilland Caribou in action. Do a search for Caribou and Wheelbarrow maneuver.
Captain Wolfsburg B52G models rear wheels often unstick before the front also.
Oldskool Funk you can hear number two fail at 1:16
The take-off appears to be a technique used by "Air America" using more than 10 degrees flap setting. This is a technique for short or :"offstrip" takeoffs and has more risk than normal Twin Otter takeoffs. I noticed that the strip is paved and longer than required. I would have used the standard 10 degrees flap setting recommended by DeHavilland for these occasions. When using more than 10 degrees flap setting the pilot must anticipate the nose low attitude on take-off and initial takeoff.
@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.
@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.
Your explanations are half truths Ricky..
This engine produces no drag. It is s free turbine.
Look up PT 6 design. It's only propeller drag trying to be reduced here...
@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.
STOL aircraft have lift devices (fancy flaps and leading edge slats), so that at take-off they have to fly nose down. Very soon after lift-off the right engine was cut, and very quickly feathered; my call, a check flight, the instructor cut the power and the student reacted by feathering the prop and using left rudder.
That bird was trying to warn them but nobody would listen.
I ran the bird’s words through google translate, and I can confirm this is true.
Plane starts moving at 0:57
Thank you! The lack of video stabilization is worse than an engine failure...
My man
Its more like 0:59 actually
thaaaank youuuu!
Thank You i saved almost 1 minute of my life.
auto feather for the win
+glishskiii I noticed. It autofeathered as soon as the torque came off, really quick. Does anyone know what caused the failure? FOD is unlikely with the engines that far off the ground.
Variable pitch?
@@igot99problemsbutmyaltaint81 Absolutely with a turbine.
The feather wasn't pilot initiated? Interesting feature if it was auto.
@@mikecooper8462 The Twin has an auto-feather yeah.
As many have said, the Tw'otter is likely the most amazing STOL transport ever designed. Go Canada! I (as a passenger) have landed on water, on tundra, on short strips, whatever, for 30 years, never an issue, 100% relaible, thanks to the engineers back at base. Seeing the TO land was like, yes, I get to go home, and never failed. Had to rope start a single Otter once! :)
Pilatus enters the room…
Also note the flaps on this plane are directly behind the engines. In that configuration the prop wash hitting the flaps is going to cause a LOT of lift at high throttle settings...it's almost like vectoring the prop thrust down towards the ground. Don't even need to pitch up to climb.
Either this pilot was right on the ball or it was (more likely) a training exercise judging by a) the quick reaction in feathering the prop b) time spent at the threshold (having a briefing?) and c) The way the flaps went up immediately the prop was feathered. Classic 'this is what I'm gonna do if....' I reckon the instructor/check pilot just pulled the power back to flight idle.
the Dehaviland DHC-6 Twin Otter did suffer a engine failure on take off. If you watch the blade, the pilot feathers the prop out so there is less aerodynamic drag so he doesn't stall out. when a engine does fail, it doesn't stop immediately (unless something blocked its path), it will continue to spin itself.
Glad to see somebody else saw it feather. When PT6A fails it automatically goes into feathered pitch so there is no action on the part of the pilot to feather it. It requires oil pressure to overcome counter weight and spring tension to bring the blades to a low pitch. That's why when they are shut down all PT6's will have the prop in the feathered position.
Co-pilot: 'What happened?"
Pilot: "Nothing".
I remember taking off behind a Twin Otter when I was in a Cherokee. The guy barely used any runway, it just jumped into the air. Awesome plane :-)
Yeah, good call... capture rate of cameras is an illusion; pay close attention to the angle of the blades though. It was an engine failure... Otters are pretty safe aircraft. Good job to the crew.
When I did my training, the above situation was known as 'wheelbarrowing' , and was to be avoided as it puts a lot of stress on the nosewheel which doesn't have the structural strength to cope with too much of it. In fact, my instructors counted it as bad piloting. The Otter is a fine aircraft tho' and a very reliable one too.
The Twin Otter nose gear is more than strong enough.
It’s designed for bush operations plus to attach skis and floats. It’s not like a regular aircraft where the nose wheel is designed as light as possible to only support the front of the aircraft.
I think the beautiful sounds of the songbird were the best part of this video.
Passenger: How far can we fly on one engine?
Pilot: All the way to the crash site.
😁
We’re making good time...should get there about 10 minutes before the rescue crews.
@@rickgermain7802 We're haulin' ass
The advatage of having a second engine is that you can crash further away.
@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.
Twin Otters can take off like that at certain weights and flap settings. About 1:17 if you listen closely you can hear something that sounds like a turbine spooling down followed by an abrupt change in the prop sound as the plane passes the camera. That was some nice handling by the crew, fast reactions to get the engine shut down and feathering.
@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
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.
I love the Twin Otter, such a brilliant aircraft. Slow speed handling is fantastic.
They're probably training. Only a rookie would "wheel-barrow" the airplane? In northern Canada, where the DHC-6 was designed to operate, (and I flew it) I personally know of two instances where Twin Otters, empty of cabin load and with minimal fuel, were taken off single engine after landing at an isolated strip due to an engine issue. It's far easier to do that and fly to a maintenance base than to fly in the equipment and personnel to change an engine in the field. Of course in the Arctic you usually have low density-altitudes and generally flat terrain in most places. Still, I've always loved the Twin Otter for its capabilities. It wasn't an exceptional commuter airplane, as most people have encountered it, but in the environment for which it was designed? Awesome.
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.
I learned to skydive from this aircraft few years ago. Sadly, it was sold to Skydive Dubaï last year :(
Nicely done. You could see the rudder in the hard left position to compensate for the loss of the right power plant.
@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.
@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.
@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.
Wrong !!, VMC and Stall Speed are BOTH reduced equally relative to % of flaps applied.
I did not know that this version of the aircraft had auto-feather, hence the rapid response to the engine failure.
In retrospect, I think that it was real a failure. Have a look at the strobe effects as power is applied, the right engine is slow to spin-up. The aircraft veers right on the runway, corrected by left rudder, before lift-off. The power loss seems small, did the auto-feather kick-in too soon?
Either way the pilot in control, did good.
I agree. It looked like was using 20 or 30. At the operation I work at the only time we really use more than flaps 10 is on our seaplanes. Luckily it looked like he was pretty light.
This Aircraft seem to be owned by CERPS, Gap Tallard,that is a sky diving company. This aircraft is still in active service :) Last seen as flight "JUMP4" April 4th 2013. It have had alot of regs.. it started with CF-WZH ,N501BA,RP-C1776, D-IDHB and then F-GKHM :)It is based at Gap Tallard Aerodrome :)
I ground run these aircraft regularly...when it 'autofeathers' in test mode, it goes in and out of feather while continuing to turn under power, but if the engine failed during the take-off, it would certainly have started to slow down very quickly. This one seems to keep turning! But I agree with you, it could have some kind of problem like the beta back up switch causing an unwanted auto-feather. Surely they could have been training too...I have been many tests flights where they do that.
@CaNgARO0 It could, but it wasn't. The left prop was running properly, however as the pilot was on Type Rating, he did a douzen of different types of engine failures and that one was just a routine training procedure ...
Kinda Knew it was a Training Flight.😇
No, it's a twin otter - they woulda been fine if they lost both engines.
why did the video stop right at the interesting part. What happened next ? did he come back around and land ?
+dave jones Trust me. It was uneventful. That aircraft has plenty of power on just one engine to get around the pattern.
This is old but yes..the pilot just continues because the otter flies for no reason at all..one engin easly flies this stol baby 👍😉
Nice job! That was a STOL take off! Mains come off just before the nose.
That was bizarre. It lifted off like it had a STOL kit, nose-low. Interesting about the flap settings.
@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.
@cfi2927087 PT6 engines rely on oil pressure to control blade pitch. Lose oil pressure and the engine feathers automatically.
Impressive takeoff. I wish I could have seen the cockpit action. When I was training for an ME ticket in '76 in a '64 Beachcraft Baron it was not nearly as smooth as this when the instructor pulled the mixture to simulate failure AND I KNEW it was coming.
Ray well your problem was that you were flying a baron lol.
Bailey Davis
Ha. A pilot who has actually seen one of those ancient birds.
@mrpilot102 because it was a shortfield takeoff, you use full flaps when you want/need to lift off ASAP
No. varies by plane 20 deg max on this plane as per flight manual Rumor is sometimes float guys use 30 but its not legal. Landing flap settings I.e. More flaps mean more drag. Not what you want on your way up
@Justwantahover flaps are behind the cg, so they create lift but at the same time make the plane nose down.
@CaNgARO0 It was actually failed or shut-down on purpose.. you can see the other prop still turning at full power and you can hear the shutdown as well.
0:48 why am i in love with that person for some reason
Also, holy crap that was a short takeoff roll!!
That's a Twin Otter....
If that’s the same plane they just jumped from, then they didn’t jump from a perfectly good airplane ✈️ I love skydiving but corona has my DZ shut down now.
It’s an STOL plane, can land and take off basically anywhere.
@bg11215 It's an illusion caused by the long lens like a cricket pitch sometimes looks odd when lens is zoomed up.
@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
@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.
I been in LOTS of Twin Otters, like thats the only plane that comes to my town. Tuktoyaktuk, Canada so thier really safe and smooth. The airline is called Aklak Air. Its a really nice Airline
I'm not sure if it took off or the ground fell off it's landing gear wheels!
No es la primera vez que veo un twin con emergencia de motor, aun así sigue siendo un avión muy confiable debido a su configuración inclusive con un motor y siempre será uno de mis favoritos, versátil y de gran prestación.
Good multi-engine training, practices that situation over and over again. Rotate, then engine out.
The aircraft in the video is a Twin Otter turboprop. The original Otter is a single piston-engined aircraft with a tail-dragger landing gear.
Google "DHC-3 Otter website" and you'll see that it's a completely different aircraft
@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.
En cuánto terreno despega?. Ha de ser muy corto.
Yay auto-feather!! Love it when stuff works the way it's supposed to.
except for the engine....
When auto feather engages the only acceptable pilot response is "Well shit" we're not making that PPR time in Fairbanks.
@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..
This engine is a Free Turbine. There is NO engine/ propeller connection other than some linkage rods to the propeller governor. Unlike a reciprocating engine, who cares what the engine does as long as the propeller can be feathered to reduce PROPELLER drag...
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
Like the old saying goes. The propeller(s) have 2 functions.
#1. Pull the aircraft gracefully through the air.
#2. Keep us pilots cool, calm & collected.
If you think those reasons are not true, watch what happens if any one propeller stops or slows way down!!
@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.
@mrpilot102 also used for short Field take offs, and the otter can do full flaps and a Vy prety fast
good job mr pilot!
dead foot... dead engine... airspeed...
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.
1:26 does. It’s not a lot.
Very brave doing engine failure training right after takeoff. This is an at altitude or in the sim thing for me and most people.
What was up with the weird rotation? The rear gear left the ground first and it looked like it was about to touch back down nose first. I’ve not witnessed anything like that fixed wing before other than a harrier maybe
I love the lurch it gives as it lifts off - like the Carribou wheelbarrow.
@koutsoskk Its a simulated engine failure. Look again at the rudder and both props. Right engine failure. Look at the rate of climb, very reduced for a plane with no people. The pilot will maintain VySE and carry out the appropriate emergency procedures.
Wow! Seems Twin Otters do quite well on one engine...
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.
@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.
@charlieechovictor No, just the U.S. and America have over 500,000,000 English speakers
Too much flaps when taking off? Never did see an otter lift the rear tires prior to the nose gear.
The flaps were extended, not sure what full extension is on an Otter, I'm guessing that for a short take off they were full depending on the weight and balance figures. They came up just as they cleared the trees.
I’m wondering if the video is really all about what shutter speeds do to the perceived rotation speed of the props?
Twin Otter type rating. So I assume the failure was instructor induced?
No Type Rating needed. MATOGW is 12,500lbs
that looked like a very odd take off as the rear landing gear lifted off first instead of the nosewheel
Just left it on the runway for too long, so speed was lifting the wings (right above the mains) before angle of attack was.. In very simple terms its called a wheelbarrow. The description says 'twin otter type rating' so thats fairly normal for someone to do who's not used to the acceleration of a new type
If you take off with more than 10 flap on a twin otter it climbs in a level/nose down attitude. This looks like 20, maybe 30 flap takeoff which accounts for the nose low attitude
Joe a little too much flap was set on take off. No biggie
Brandon
No it doesn't. 22 skydivers, 15 degrees of flap 500lbs of fuel x 2 tanks ; TAKE OFF TRIM SET ( I suspect it was not in the correct range) and nose wheel comes up first .... at least it did for me... over thirty times a day...
@@peastew62 well i spose it depends on the pilot..any good pilot knows that a stol aircraft like the otter can easly get offa the ground with flaps down..a small header wind and a little updraft..and the rear wheels lift first because of that combo..and alla that with one engin out no problem though this engin went out just after leaving the ground..a point of danger for most aircraft but np at all for this bird..peace ✌😉
@golfcharlie232 That and you can clearly see the right hand prop blades are feathered.
@mrpilot102 remeber its STOL aircraft too but not technically its 50/50.
cut the first 58 seconds off. the take off roll begins after 0:58
Otter and Beavers,the workhorses of the North.
@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.
Weird how the pilot wheelbarrowed it off of the ground during TO - a short TO procedure in the twin otter?
Well, what happened.......? Did it crash, RTB......what.....?
Whoa! Must've had a rear upwind! Nice capture!
Not really, they've rotated at a much higher speed. That attitude (negative angle of attack or negative pitch) is due to the excess of lift.
G8 piloting ....1 immediately identifid problem 2 kept nose low otherwise would've certainly tip stalled 3 immediately applied leftward aeleron roll to prevent wing drop 4 & countered the yow finally with left rudder
Textbook worst case engine failure but looks like a pretty much non-event. Now if anything failed with the feathering then you'd be in trouble. Based on that takeoff roll (even for a twin otter) it looks like he was very light so that helps.
This actually looked like a not-by-the-book full-flap takeoff (main gear lift the ground first). The pilot correctly only accelerates, i.e. does not start climbing much until he reaches Vmc (minimum single-engine control speed). THEN he starts to retract flaps and climb, only in this case his right engine failed and feathered automatically so he does not climb much - the aircraft probably had a considerable load on board.
Actually, no. If the auto-feather fails, the propeller windmills with the blades in fine pitch which creates a lot of drag (but no discernible engine vibration) and you will not climb much until the prop has been manually feathered. The slower airflow over the wing directly behind the prop disc might cause buffeting at slow speeds, but Vmc and possibly negative climb would be the main concern, not vibration.
Halfdan Ingolfsson I thought most have instant auto feather on torque / power loss? Are you sure? I feel like that would make almost any engine-out scenario essentially deadly.
The DHC-6 auto-feather is a double-edged sword. You arm it before takeoff, and disarm it once you are at a safe altitude. The reason: The prop torque is measured using engine oil pressure, and with a-f armed, a drop in torque pressure will trigger feathering of that prop. If you hit a violent downdraft with the a-f armed (momentary negative G) the engine oil pressure may drop momentarily and the auto-feather may trigger erraneously - with the engine at full power! This will grossly over-torque and over-temp the engine. The prop will unfeather slowly once you have positive G, but the engine may require major attention or replacement.
A regular DHC-6 300 auto-feather is very quick.
When a flew a few Swiss-registered DHC-6's in Africa 25 years ago, some of the engines had a 2-second auto-feather delay to prevent instant auto-feathering due to momentary negative G. An auto-feather check was always done before the first flight of the day, and before EVERY flight if you had the 4-blade Raisbeck mod props.
The funny thing was that some of the aircraft had the delay on one engine, but not the other!
always remember: The dead engine is always on the side where you do not need your foot on the rudder pedal. Or: dead foot - dead engine.
Tell that to Bob Hoover ;)
@@RotorHead2652 RIP Bob Hoover.
Very clever. Thanks
I always told myself to stand on the good engine when it came to engine out on a multi.
@@daveluttinen2547 that works very well too.
Big wheels are really useful mainly on the Canadian Arctic islands, where the cold have leveled and smoothed out everything and you can land everywhere with the big wheels, even on top of mesas...
Great poster telling us when the plane actually takes off thanks man!
Fast reaction from the pilot to quickly feather the prop on the failed engine. Good power from the remaining engine that the aircraft can still climb on one engine.
The autofeather was an option on the Series 200 and 300, but I believe most planes going out of the factory were equipped.
chtiguillaume
Don't know about France but in the USA, skydiving operations are operated under FAR Part 91. Therefore, In the Twin Otters I flew there was often a little placard " Inoperative "
It prepared me for the Lear 25 D later. Thrust Reversers could be "fixed" that way too, even under FAR Part 135. Who needs reversers on ice covered runways in Canada... certainly not the management in Florida....
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 ?