Would you ever risk someone else's life?

[vabsie]

to save your own?

Hi All ..

I know this sounds very selfish - and this may be a weird question (sorry if it is).

Here is the hypothetical scenario:

You fly a Cessna 152 or similar (so fixed gear). You are about 700ft when your engine quits. There is a small area of beach below you just about big enough to make a successful landing if carried out properly. The problem is the beach and shallow water have a few people present - not many, but let's say if you attempt a beach landing there could be a 1% or less chance of you hitting someone.

The rest of the terrain that is within gliding distance is very hilly with lots of buildings so not really an option.

To me .. A beach landing would have a better chance of survival than ditching in the sea (deep water where there is nobody), but would not be worth it if I ended up killing someone or chop a child's arm off - so it would have to be ditching.

What do you think?

Vabsie

[Jan Olieslagers]

That's a question every pilot should consider BEFORE flying at such a place at such an altitude.

[Obi_Wan]

So you've got hills and offices all around, and a stretch of beach in the middle. Are the people in the water or on the beach - if they're in the water they've got less chance of hearing you and you've got less chance of seeing them.:confused:

If there's that few of them on the beach, you should be able to miss them. If there's that many of them, they should see you coming and clear a perfect path just like all the Hollywood stunt men and women do!:ugh:

How exactly are you going to sacrifice one life to save another. If you mean sacrifice one beach goer to save yours, you've miss judged it. You won't miss them and kill yourself, you'll probably just die trying, and still wipe them out.:{

[vabsie]

Jan ..True, and I can probably imagine the best answer. Thanks

But the question remains as I have seen a few pilots who have probably not considered this question and have taken the decision to trust their engine for another 5 minutes while going to "check something out" quickly.

Vabsie

[gasax]

Actually - if you've done it - before landing up a hill is pretty easy. In many cases landing on an uphill slope is likely to be the most survivable option.

The 'ground roll' is very short - done well you can literally 'spot' the aircraft.

As for hazarding some poor sap who is minding his own business - no way. Landing in shallow water or close to shore is highly unlikely to do anything but get you wet.

From personal experience the one thing you cannot count on is people on the ground understanding that moving out of the way is the correct course of action......

[vabsie]

Obi Wan ..

You have a few people swimming in the shallow water and a few on the beach.

So as I see it your options are either attempt a landing on the beach (small chance of risking someone's life) or ditch in the deeper water where there is nobody.

Why the crying?:}

Vabsie

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can create all sorts of scenarios, but personally I think the answer is always the same.

The only life you have a right to risk is your own.

An aeroplane can get written off, and most of us can swim. If you can't, either learn, accept the risk, or don't fly over water.

That said a tiny risk of hitting somebody on a quiet beach, when I can steer the aeroplane until it's stopped, it acceptable. I'm simply trusting to my own skill. That I do every time I fly.

G

[vabsie]

Gengis .. Thanks for your answer.

I realise it's a very hypothetical scenario. Your answer however is exactly why I'm asking the question.

I think you are almost saying that you would be OK with a beach landing if the risk of hitting someone is very small because you will trust your own skill.

Based on your advice of only having the right to risk your own life, should ditching in deeper water not always be the default regardless of your skill level to ensure that the risk to others is zero?

Vabsie

[Obi_Wan]

Vabsie,

The crying was because you assumed you were able to save others by taking some extreme measure to land the aircraft and have to sacrifice your life, and probably wipe them out anyway.

As Genghis said "The only life you have a right to risk is your own. An aeroplane can get written off, and most of us can swim. If you can't, either learn, accept the risk, or don't fly over water."

Unless you can use The Force :ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

But risk is technically never zero is it. There are people somewhere near the runway almost every time I fly. A beach shifts responsibility for avoidance more onto me, but it's always there anyhow.

G

[vabsie]

Obi Wan - I think you misunderstood, but I should have been clearer.

The only "extreme" measure I was considering was landing in deep water with the hope to save those on the beach or those in shallow water.

All good though.

Vabsie

[vabsie]

Edited my post to state I'm referring to deep water as an alternative landing. Not the shallow water where people are swimming.

[CharlieDeltaUK]

I think that's what every stduent does when they fly with an instructor:}
I met a commercial pilot who moved to airlines after instructing and said he was fed up with flying with people who seemed determined to kill him.

Still, I suppose they consent to take the risk.

[clearblueskyy]

Thats an interesting scenario, I've done most ofmy training flight down in Miami and would always fly up to Fort Pierce on cross country flights . Midway along the route ATC would give us an option to either fly at /above 2500 ft or below 1000 ft . A lot of the guys would descend down to 500 ft just to get the thrill of being so close over the water and of course South Beach and all that jazz. Personally for me I always chose the higher altitude incase the engine just quit , constantly reminding myself of a plan of action if Lady Luck decided to part ways.The answer to this really depends on how populated the beach/water is the basic idea would be to steer clear of as many people possible before making the landing. As an afterthought ditching somewhere in the deep would be another option if I could swim to save my life , else I'd be worried about sand in my eyes.

cheers !

['India-Mike]

Not hypothetical I'm afraid...

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/DHC-1%20Chipmunk%2022A,%20G-AORW%2008-06.pdf

Been there, seen it, done it.:(

[MichaelJP59]

I would say most pilots would never be thinking in terms of 10% risk of killing someone, 20% risk, etc. you just can't calculate precise probabilities like that. You would simply think; is there a risk of hitting someone if I land on the beach? If yes, then put down somewhere else.

[Pace]

There is a risk to others every time you set foot in a car !
Really it's something you would need to assess if it ever happened.
If I had selected the only field available and getting closer realised that field was full of kids playing I would turn towards a less suitable landing site even if it added risk to myself.
You have to live with the consequences after!
If I determined the chances of hitting someone was as you said 1% (negligable) I would use my skills, landing spot, direction etc to avoid the person even if by doing so I shortened my landing distance available!
A fairly populated beach and I would put down 100 metres off shore!
We have a responsibility to those on the ground and if I knowingly killed a kid to save my own bacon that would be hard to chew!
It's a judgement you would have to take given what was in front of you on the day !

Pace

[abgd]

There's no such thing as an absolute. If you fly at night, have an engine failure, and aim for the middle of a black area you may still end up flying into somebody in their bed. If you're flying straight and level at 2000 feet over somebody out for a walk, you may have a first cardiac event and plow directly into them with no control. Both scenarios are unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

In a hang-glider or paraglider, they say that you should consider a ditching to be unsurvivable and I suspect the same might be true for some fixed wing aircraft and flexwings. That said, in the scenario you describe the aircraft is worthless and I would risk first of all the aircraft, then secondly my own life, to avoid killing or hurting other people. That might include crashing the nosewheel into the beach (i.e. aircraft stop faster without a nosewheel) in order to attain a shorter ground roll.

I've often wondered what a 'fly on the wall' landing would be like in a 152. One for the simulator tonight, I think.

[patowalker]

In a hang-glider or paraglider, they say that you should consider a ditching to be unsurvivable

Nonsense. I survived a ditching in a hang-glider, but nearly died of embarrassment. You can't blame it on engine failure.

[abgd]

Well, I'm glad.

There certainly have been a lot of fatalities related to ditching though. Cold water shock; wires everywhere; heavy boots etc... My instructor used to compete in the birdman competitions and his view was that the uninitiated would be lucky to make it out.

I can't find the statistics at present, but I do remember reading in a BHPA magazine that drowning was the largest single mode of death in fatal hang-gliding accidents.

[gasax]

In the paraglider context that cannot be true. My neighbours attended an 'extreme' paragliding course. Intention canopy collapses, spinning etc. All done over the sea on the basis that many fewer injuries occured....

[Pace]

ABDG

I understand your argument re night flight and what would be an accident out of your control ! That's a different matter.
To take to a field with a number of kids and a reasonable chance of hitting one is in your control!
It's a risk you would make a desicion on to save yourself.
That is very different to loosing an engine at night and hitting a house or people on the ground who you did nor know were there. That is an accident out if your control.

Pace

[abgd]

In the paraglider context that cannot be true. My neighbours attended an 'extreme' paragliding course. Intention canopy collapses, spinning etc. All done over the sea on the basis that many fewer injuries occured.... If you go on one of these courses there are support boats on hand to fish you out pronto. It could be that paragliders are safer, in that you may benefit from wearing a buoyancy aid. In a hang-glider you would risk getting stuck under the wing. However, it's a very different situation from an unplanned ditching.

The other difference here is that during paraglider aerobatics, one of the risks is of the canopy collapsing into a bag of washing. It's the paraglider equivalent of a stall-spin accident whilst turning final. It doesn't really compare with your average forced landing in a tree scenario.

If you crash a glider on land, it's common to survive fairly serious injuries including being knocked unconscious; multiple broken limbs etc.... If you crash in the water something simple like a stuck harness strap or being winded can prove fatal.

I suspect there are a lot of unreported incidents of gliders ditching, as they're likely to be the sort of accidents where you either die or survive without injury. However, it's not a risk to be trifled with.

[abgd]

I understand your argument re night flight and what would be an accident out of your control !

The night flying accident is within your control - simply don't fly at night.

The difference is partly one of the degree of risk, which we class as acceptably low. Also, you choose to subject other people to the risk on takeoff (when everything seems normal) rather than later on in the emergency situation when I agree that it's out of your control.

['India-Mike]

A number of years ago 120 Sqdn at RAF Kinloss ran a weekend survival course for civilian pilots, mainly aimed at PPLs. Their view was that unless fully-prepared in goon-suit, LSJ, locator etc, then ditching was a last resort. Crash on land rather than ditch was the suggestion. It was in their view a matter of water survival rather than the mechanics of surviving the forced landing on water

[Genghis the Engineer]

A number of years ago 120 Sqdn at RAF Kinloss ran a weekend survival course for civilian pilots, mainly aimed at PPLs. Their view was that unless fully-prepared in goon-suit, LSJ, locator etc, then ditching was a last resort. Crash on land rather than ditch was the suggestion. It was in their view a matter of water survival rather than the mechanics of surviving the forced landing on water

Although the edge of a beach is an interesting mid-ground. Most swimmers don't go into water more than about 6ft deep, and many beaches are deserted.

G

[mary meagher]

abgd, could you possibly, to avoid misunderstanding, reword your statement: that says, "If you crash a glider on land, it's common to survive fairly serious injuries...." o dear. seems to imply it's common to have serious injuries!"

How about, "when doing a field landing in a glider, it is rare to either damange the glider or yourself!"

BUT. I will share with you a famous water landing made in December, in Wales. Gets dark pretty quick in December, and the glider had not returned from soaring the Black Mountains. All at the club were concerned, sent out the tow plane to search, no luck. Thinking perhaps there has been a fatality....

Fairly dark, about 9 or 10 that evening, the phone rang. The pilot said I'm OK, but there is probably damage to the glider.....I'm at a farmhouse, and the farmer will give me a lift back to the club.

Next day, they hitched up the K18 trailer to a Landrover, and set out off over the hills, and on the other side, there was the Reservoir, and there, undulating in the water, was the glider......

The pilot said later that he couldn't get back over the mountain, so had a choice between a tree landing or a water landing, so chose the reservoir. Then he had a choice betwen the shallow end, or the deep end, so he landed at the shallow end, unlatching his canopy as he touched down. However, the canopy burst open, the water flooded in and SANK the glider, and the pilot was underwater, held down by his straps! which he did manage to undo, and also his parachute straps, and waded to the shore, and through the snow to the only light he could find, the farmhouse.

They managed to fish out the glider, floppy wings and all (the glue had melted overnight) and take it back to the club, and a year or so later it was rebuilt.
The pilot (this was his third unfortunate landing, he had written off two other club gliders elsewhere) then bought his own private glider, which never came to grief. The pilot did well to enjoy hia exciting life, for he passed away a few years later from natural causes.....

So to return to the original question: crowded beach? same ethical problem, you wouldn't land in a school playground either. So ditch in the water; if it is too cold to survive the ditching, there won't be a lot of people in the water anyhow, so close to shore should improve your chances.

[The500man]

In a C152 with the engine out I think anyone on the ground will be able to get out of the way by walking at a fairly leisurely pace in more or less any direction. ;)

How many times have we all picked a field for a PFL only to discover that when we're closer there are sheep or cows in it? You wouldn't pick the sea over the field. If the cows or sheep were a few people walking a dog does that change anything? Obviously you're going to try not to hit them, and they'll be busy trying not to get hit! I think you'd find it harder to hit one of them on purpose than not hit any of them at all.

Crash on land rather than ditch was the suggestion.

I'd rather do that too!

[abgd]

Mary, perhaps I could have made it clearer, but I was talking about hang gliders and paragliders in my earlier posts. Both of these can land in places that even your gliders would fear to tread, but pilots of both of them are occasionally forced to crash land on unsuitable terrain.

Anyway, I feel shy that I have probably led the thread astray somewhat. Ideally, we all want to save our own skin whilst not injuring anybody else either. Foot-launch aircraft are obviously very different from class A aircraft, and I just wanted to point out that ditching is actually a big decision, and perhaps provoke some further discussion of the subject.

Perhaps a good ploy for this scenario would be to fly along the water's edge and turn out to sea if, as you get closer, the beach turns out to be more crowded than it initially appeared.

[mary meagher]

When landing a floatplane in the US, the rule is that anything and anyone on or in the water has the right of way, because they don't understand your requirements; this implies no emergency, like nil engine; but just as you can't rely on a sheep not to jump up when your glider floats overhead, you couldn't rely on children to get out of your way when landing on a crowded beach. Golf course should be OK though.....

[Pace]

ABDG

That would be good situational awareness and a mind that is always ahead of the game and adjusting the aircraft accordingly.
I would hazard a guess that some would not even be aware of the cows or kids in the playground and would land regardless frozen on their target landing spot?

Pace

[The500man]

I would hazard a guess that some would not even be aware of the cows or kids in the playground and would land regardless frozen on their target landing spot?In a real engine out scenario I would be surprised if that didn't include everyone to some extent. I'd be surprised if everyone managed to land on their target as well.

[Pace]

I'd be surprised if everyone managed to land on their target as well.

So would I :{ hence why you bring up a good point! Never be fixated on one possible landing point but always keep alternate options open and be aware of those.
Again its called spatial awareness and keeping ahead of the game.
The Sea is a pretty big landing point anyway and might be a better option than a 400 metre stretch of beach :E
No I do not think all pilots are spatially aware or ahead of the game!!! Some are more than others.

Pace

[B2N2]

Go for the water:

Plane kills jogger in S.C. beach emergency landing - USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-16-plane-kills-jogger_N.htm)

ADM = Aeronautical decision making, you made the decision to fly there you deal with it........

[AfricanEagle]

A non question IMHO. Head for any space void of people, even if it means breaking the aeroplane and hurting yourself.

[Legalapproach]

Obvious - spiral down inland, trim at minimum descent glide speed steer out to sea crossing the coast at about 20 feet, once coasting out exit aircraft, half pike dive into sea (by now over suitable depth) and swim to shore. Can't see what the issue is.
:ok:

[Maoraigh1]

A number of years ago 120 Sqdn at RAF Kinloss ran a weekend survival course for civilian pilots, mainly aimed at PPLs.
I don't recall hearing about this. I've been flying from Inverness since 1987.
I always wear a lifejacket, but my only non wet suit experience in winter was dinghy sailing in the 60s and canoeing till the mid 80s. The effect of being in cold water, wearing warm "ordinary" clothing, varies very much from person to person. I'm optimistic.

[avi8ors]

After a loud explosion from the single engined Cessna woke up my sole passenger, I tried to gain additional height and continue flight to my refuelling destination (the closest airstrip around but still another 20 minutes of flying away!) while flying pretty well parallel to the highway below. While “cruising”, I considered my emergency landing options, and the thought of landing besides the highway on the rough, sandy & scrubby terrain didn’t appeal very much, especially considering there was a stretch of bitumen all the way to the airport. I asked Flight Service if I could land on the highway if I had to. There was a pause, but they answered “yes”! I’ll bet a lot of you don’t believe that, but this was in Outback Australia a long time ago.

Now, if I HAD to have landed before getting to my airport, then I would’ve tried to land on the highway in between cars and trucks. In those daze, there wasn’t a lot of traffic on Outback roads! If that wasn’t possible then I would’ve landed besides the highway. And possibly, no, probably have flipped the thing.

BTW, I arrived at my destination a good 4,000’ above the aerodrome. I wasn’t giving away ANY of my height away until I was absolutely positively sure I could circle around and glide if the prop blades stopped suddenly. As it turned out, the head of a cylinder blew off, held on by one bolt, fuel line and spark plug lead, looking like a can with the lid only partially opened.

[fattony]

Earlier, Pace said:

We have a responsibility to those on the ground and if I knowingly killed a kid to save my own bacon that would be hard to chew!

I agree with this (and the other similar sentiments). I would risk myself over someone on the ground. But what if you had three passengers in the aircraft with you? You have a responsibility to those passengers too. Is it ever acceptable to put someone on the ground in jeopardy in order to minimise risk to your passengers? Or do you fully explain to your passengers the risks involved before they enter the aircraft, including that in the event of an emergency you would put them in jeopardy in order to avoid harm to someone on the ground?

Not trying to be controversial...just found this a thought provoking thread.

[abgd]

I agree with this (and the other similar sentiments). I would risk myself over someone on the ground. But what if you had three passengers in the aircraft with you? You have a responsibility to those passengers too./

A good point... Also, people trying to swim to the rescue sometimes drown.

Most beaches I can think of in the UK are empty enough that I would aim to get the aircraft down on the beach rather than in the water.

At my local beach, I know the aircraft would sink in and it could well be impossible to get it moved to safety before the tide came in, so 'saving the plane' really would be a secondary issue. I'm also aware that swimming there is quasi-suicidal at the best of times due to complicated currents.

[Genghis the Engineer]

A major point that has not really been mentioned so far.

The important thing is not so much what you do in this situation, as not getting into this situation in the first place.

If the engine stops at 600ft over a beach, your options are extremely limited, and may as the OP points out have a bit of a dilemma about how to act.

But there is absolute choice whilst the engine was running - you do not need to be at 600ft over a crowded beach. We're all taught to think constantly about "what if", particularly with the engine in a single engined aeroplane. You don't need to fly anywhere in particular, at any particular height - because in extremis we have the choice to not take off.

G

[mary meagher]

Speaking of landing on roads - I know it's a few years back that an item turned up on YouTube, entitled "DC10 Lands on Top of a Car".....

I don't know how to post this so you can access it directly, perhaps someone else can help; but it is DEFINITELY not one to miss!

[Piper.Classique]

Gengis, you are of course correct. We don't need to take off.

But sometimes we take off and then have an unexpected (despite full preparation and best planning) change in the weather or a mechanical problem. I well remember a flight from inland France to Calais with a sudden and unexpected change in the weather which led to us moving our flightpath offshore as there was less to hit at the low altitude forced on us in a vfr aircraft. So, yes I was at 600 feet over the beach, with the airport as the best option and the beach as a backup. A 180 turn was not an option, that was closing in faster than in front....as the engine kept turning all was eventually well and we landed at Calais and spent the night there.

Forecasting is still a black art. This was in the days when one could talk to the met man, who had advised us that the incoming frontal system would not arrive before late evening. By 15.00 we got thoroughly caught out as the crud formed around us.

I had a similar experience last week dodging round rain showers, until I could dodge no more as a wall of black cloud blocked my way. That resulted in a scurry back to my departure field and some more waiting as the muck came through.

Sh*t happens, and whilst we should be able to avoid such situations sometimes we do get into difficult corners.
It's an interesting thread, but some of the people posting here are a good deal more altruistic than seems feasible. I don't know if I would be thinking that clearly in the circumstances described, I suspect self preservation would be operating on all four cylinders.

What was it about starting with a full bag of luck and an empty bag of experience? How many of us have about half a bag of each by now?

[vabsie]

Thanks all for your posts .. Appreciate all your thoughts!

[Mechta]

In a C152 with the engine out I think anyone on the ground will be able to get out of the way by walking at a fairly leisurely pace in more or less any direction. That is assuming they know you are coming and see you. From gliding (sailplane) experience, as you will be coming from downwind, unless its almost flat calm, anyone up wind won't hear you with a stopped engine. I have sometimes wondered whether gliders should be fitted with horns to let people know they are coming!:)

With regard to hang gliders landing in the water, the wing will hold you under with no airspace in which to breathe. Usual advice is:



climb into the 'A' frame with plenty of height (they can still be controlled by moving your bodyweight), and undo your carabiner, then just before the glider makes contact with the water, jump clear.
fly with a single carabiner
use either a 1/4 turn carabiner or one which just springs shut
and most importantly, don't fly coastal sites with distant bottom landings in marginal conditions

A friend of mine lost his girlfriend who drowned as a result of a water landing, so they are definitely to be avoided.

[ShyTorque]

As far as the UK is concerned, the rules for the London Heli-lanes are a good indicator of how the CAA view this. Some of the routes involve flying over the River Thames. If the engine stops, the designated forced landing area is between the high and low water marks. If you choose to fly a single engined helicopter when the tide's in, it's your choice and no-one else's responsibility. But you must ditch! Floats are a good idea...

[The500man]

I know there are some on here with a sea plane rating so I'd like to ask them whether they believe their experience of water landings would give them more confidence in ditching, and thus make them more likely to ditch instead of making the best of unsuitable terrain? I know that probably seems like a bit of a silly question but what I'm getting at is do those in the know have extra respect for the sea that perhaps isn't obvious to everyone else?

Personally I don't fancy ditching because I know the sea is not the big "cushion" I'd like to think it is. Impacts can be hard and there is a good chance of going under nose first, and let's face it a good number of GA aircraft have really poor egress to get out in a hurry while underwater.

[Flylogical]

Genghis

Being able to swim is not the point. Surviving a ditching (especially in the cold waters around the UK) is more about being able to deal with "swim shock" -- fighting the urge to breath in, triggered by the cold water on the nervous system. Most people can manage about 6 seconds before they give in (even if they can hold their breath under water for minutes in controlled conditions). This means you need to get out of the aircraft and get your head out of the water within those few seconds. Also, if you are in fixed-gear tricycle undercarriage aircraft, there is a high chance the aircraft will flip over when it hits the water. You are then faced with being inverted, possibly sinking, and then having to manage a safe exit from the cockpit without giving in to the urge to breath in....If you are enlightened enough to be wearing an immersion suit, you actually have the added problem of being buoyant inside the aircraft as it sinks inverted i.e., you may be pinned against the floor. Net: as much as I would hate the prospect, the best bet would be to abandon the aircraft and not attempt to ditch it. That's what the RAF taught me, and that's why I wear an immersion-suit, life-jacket with attached dinghy-pack, plus parachute, whenever I fly over open water...which I do most times I fly since I live on an island.

So, in this philosophical debate, I would suggest the solution is to point the aircraft out to sea (to avoid the bystanders, as you rightly assert), and abandon above a safe altitude (if you have the appropriate kit to do so, which you should have).