And the thinking enunciated by Cloud Basher - that if you get away with it, it is automatically OK - is why people try to do stupid things and end up dead. Good luck with that.
Well actually the thinking by Cloudbasher was that
perhaps this guy is much better than a lot here and was a good enough pilot to be able to get the most out of his aircraft and the energy avialable to him, in order to make the only suitable landing spot within cooee of Bankstown. The fact the aircraft had bugger all energy left at the end means he used EVERYTHING available to him in order to survive, and the FACT remains he DID survive, so
perhaps his skill level is well above that of a lot of us out there purporting to be pilots.
Perhaps, he was as skillful as CAPT Sully.
Perhaps he could give Bob Hoover a run for his money. All of this is assumption, except the difference is my assumptions are assuming the cup is half full, not half empty. I prefer to take positive lesson out of something like this. Do we not want to arrive with the absolute minimum amount of energy if we have a forced landing? In this case isn't this close to textbook? Not perfect mind you, as can be seen by the drop from about five feet, but he still had enough airflow over the wings to level them prior to touchdown, so he used everything he had to to get to his intended landing spot safely. Bravo Zulu.
It is that very last part of the glide where it is incredibly critical to keep the aircraft flying, and not be tempted to raise that nose - yet so many get it wrong trying to stretch the glide or turn too steeply.
glekichi,
I agree 100% with this statement, as I am sure would every other aviator. i was always taught to fly the aircraft ALL the way to the ground. What I don't agree with is your next part as he did level his wings, he did land the aircraft, it may have been harder than normal, but he did it and it worked.
Maybe it could have been done better, the fact of this is that WE DO NOT KNOW!!!!!!! We weren't there, we weren't in the pilots seat and we are basing all our ideas on a couple of radio calls and five seconds of footage.
The FACTS are:
1. He and his pax survived.
3. He made the airfield area (if not the runway but it was a "suitable" landing area, much moreso than any other options surrounding Bankstown)
2. The aircraft is (probably) reuseable.
We can play what-ifs all day saying he is lucky he didn't catch a wingtip, he is lucky he stalled it so close to the ground etc etc, all I am saying is give the guy the benefit of the doubt due to the fact that he made it in one piece!
I am all for learning from this but we can do this in a positive way without assumptions, not in the negative way that seems to infect so many on this forum.
Over here, a guy recently had high oil temps and pressures in a twin with smoke coming from the engine. (I previously posted a pic of the pot here when the engineers had removed it from the engine). He was 8 miles from an airport and as the engine was still making partial power he elected to use everything in that engine in order to make the field. He made it, the engine is stuffed but he, his student and the aircraft are all safe and in one piece. We debriefed this and I would have shut the engine down and secured it in this instance, however he chose not to for a number of reasons all of them valid to him! During the debrief some people said they would do the same as him, others said they would have shut it down. The point is, at the end of the debrief, he was patted on the back with a job well done. I learnt a lot out of it, and so did he and his student as well as the instructors at the school and the other pilots in attendance. Whilst some may disagree with his descision to keep it running, no-one was nasty about it as are people here, there was no mention of luck, and everyopne went away thinking, 1. Glad it wasn't me, 2. I have some more tools in my tool box now if a similar situation occurs. People here appear all high and mighty and say this and that and appear to have closed minds and don't want to learn, they would rather throw rocks. Very sad indeed.
If we are to play what-ifs do it in a way that doesn't drag this pilot into a hypothetical saying "he is lucky, he stuffed it completely, I could have done it oh-so-much-better" when the
facts PROVE different and you have NOTHING to back up how you would have handled it any better. YOU (and me!) may have put it into a child care centre and killed 15 0-4 year olds! We simply don't know.
I guess it also comes down to the type of people that are attracted to aviation. Most are type A personalities, control freaks. We are always the best pilots, we can always do it better than the next guy. All I am asking is perhaps we can all learn a lot out of this, perhaps it could have been done better.
Gelkichi, rather than phrasing this like you did:
That is the reason that so many here are being critical. I don't think anyone is trying to tear him a new one, but it is a pretty good example of how NOT to manage the last part of a forced landing, and people need to recognise that and learn from it.
This guy was VERY lucky. Great job of getting it there, but had the wing dropped a second earlier, or god forbid, the other way, it would have been very messy - and for no good reason.
Use of the flaps at the right moment may have helped, also.
Once again, a great outcome, but not a video to show people as an example of how it should be done.
Perhaps we could say somethign along the lines of:
"In a simliar situation you have the choice of flaps in order to provide a slower approach speed, but remember they shorten your glide distance, causing your touchdown point the be closer to you than your previous non-flap touchdown point. You need to way this up in your mind (in an instant!) It may cause you to put it down in the areas before the runway which may have a fence you might need to go through but you will achieve a more controlled landing (the area before the fence is I believe clear for 100 or so metres IIRC), This may be a valid option to ensure absolute positive control of the aircraft right to touchdown, however you then accept the damage that will result to the airframe due to the chain link boundary fence. This may cause other issues, but needs to be in your thought process. Also you don't necessarily need to land on a runway as was shown by this pilot. You could land directly across the runways or in whatever direction (preferably into wind) that will allow you to get on the ground, don't be a sucker for thinking you have to land in the same direction as the runway or you absolutely have to land into wind.
The pilot in this case appeared to stall the aircraft immediately before touchdown. In this instance it worked as he had levelled the wings and the distance above the ground was such that a wingdrop, even if it did occur would not have resulted in an issue because he was only a couple of feet off the ground. Your decision to make as the PIC, whether to accept maybe going through a fence and the damage that may result to you and your passenger or the possible risk of a stall just before landing. If you stall it too far above the ground and a wing drops your wing could dig in and the aircraft cartwheel. If this happens you are definitely a passenger and at the mercy of the crashworthiness of the aircraft you are flying. Always fly the aircraft onto the ground. The pilot in this instance from the five seconds of video we have, appears to have used every bit of energy available to him so he arrived with the minimum amount of energy. This shoudl always be a goal, especially where the landing area is small! It obviously worked and he survived. Whatever happens we need to unsure that we touchdown wings level, preferably with little sideslip as that can also cause a cartwheel.
Great job to the pilot, glad you walked away, tailwinds and blue skies to you".
This to me is much more valuable, much more positive and gives points for pilots to ponder over and discuss, rather than saying he was lucky, he was hopeless pilot, his descision making was flawed, etc.
What I find really amusing is that if there was no video of this incident poeple would have nothing but praise for this pilot for safely putting down his aircraft, surviving and not putting anyone else on the ground in danger. Instead we must now second guess his every move and descision. He was successful, take what you want from the video, I myself take away from this that in this instance he did the
main things right, touched down wings level, with absolute minimum airspeed on a suitable area. It wasn't pretty but he walked away.
Cheers
CB