Pilot makes emergency landing on road

[av8trflying]

A LIGHT plane has made an emergency landing on a highway in rural NSW.
Minutes after taking off from Hillston, in the state's west at about 2.30pm (AEST) , the twin-engined Cessna carrying a pilot and two passengers was forced to land about 10km north of the town on Kidman Way.
"The plane landed without problems. However, fuel was seen leaking from the aircraft after landing," police said in a statement.
"One lane of the highway was blocked but traffic was able to move around the aircraft."
There are no reports of injuries as a result of the emergency landing.


Twin Engined - Interesting.

[Trojan1981]

Hilston, at least there would be no worries finding a spot to land:}

[tmpffisch]

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6714118,00.jpg

VH-NFW Cessna 337 by the looks of the pic. I don't know much about Push/Pull, any reason why a single engine failure would result in not being able to maintain height? (or lack of undercarriage?)

[Ultralights]

"The plane landed without problems. However:ugh:

gear up alone is enough of a problem...

[Arnold E]

Front engine failure is more of a problem than rear engine failure:eek:

[FL170]

:eek: Someone forgot their BUMFISH checks :}

[the wizard of auz]

The older 337s had the hydrolic pump on the front engine. probably the reason for the gear up. is definitely better to lose the front engine than the back. they push better than they pull.

[Dog One]

From my memory, the C337 had better performance on the rear engine than the front engine, by about 150 ft/min.

If an engine failed prior to gear retraction, the U/c was left down, as the drag of the gear doors opening reduced the s/e rate of climb to minus 250 ft/min.

From the photo, I see that the gear is retracted, which if retracted during the engine failure would have no doubt contributed to the road landing.

It was always interesting endorsing people who had other conventional twins experience, the need to get the gear up with a engine failure was ingrained.