Ditching High-Winged Aircraft

[seacue]

I've been a pax on many overwater flights in the Caribbean. Both American Eagle and LIAT exclusively use high winged aircraft.

It seems to me that survival of a ditching wouldn't be very likely. The cabin would be likely to fill with water as soon as the door was opened. Even if the plane floated for a while "one wing low" so a door on the high side could be opened, what would prevent it from tipping the other way?

To compound things, American Eagle has not carried life preservers (PFD), etc. on any flight I've taken. Not even on their old 2+ hour over-water flight from SJU to Tobago.

Any comments other than looking at the ditching off Palermo?

seacue

[CosmosSchwartz]

It seems to me that survival of a ditching wouldn't be very likely
Any comments other than looking at the ditching off Palermo

It's hard to comment without looking at Palermo, as this is presumably what prompted your question.

It seems to me that surviving the ditching is fairly likely, greater than 50/50 anyway seeing as over 20 people survived the Palermo accident.

In most cases, surviving the ditching may not be the difficult part. Staying afloat in wild seas/conscious in cold seas/avoiding sharks will probably be the real killers. I suspect the survival rate at Palermo is in no small way linked to the proximity of land and the quick arrival of SAR. Had this been in the mid-Atlantic and the pilots had ditched just as successfully I'd imagine the number of survivors would be greatly reduced.

[seacue]

Yes, the Palermo event triggered my posting, but I've been intending to post it for a number of years.

I'll still worry about the cabin on high-winged aircraft rapidly filling with water when a door is opened (and about the fact that Eagle didn't carry life jackets out of San Juan).

Years ago I broke my wrist just before returning from holiday. I was surprised that such a relatively minor break resulted in being unable to make much headway swimming. It was so minor I thought it was a serious sprain until I got home and went to a doc.

[Final 3 Greens]

and about the fact that Eagle didn't carry life jackets out of San Juan Are you sure about this?

[TopBunk]

Whilst you may be correct about the cabin filling more quickly in a high wing aircraft, I have been musing the last day or so as to whether the ditching itself is more controlable with high wings.

In a high wing aircraft the wings and therefore the engines are set higher, which means that the engines do not immediately act as giant scoops to potentially generate fatal deceleration as with low winged aircraft with underslung jet engines. The fact that it was a turboprop helps more, as does it having a lower stalling speed, and hence touchdown speed as well as just prop blades rather than a large cowling.

On balance, if I were to ditch, I think I would prefer to be in a high-winged turboprop.....once you have ditched then the problems you face are enormous, but you have to ditch successfully first whatever!

[skydriller]

the fact that Eagle didn't carry life jackets out of San Juan Are you sure about this?

Would that be one of those american operators where they say in the safety briefing "in an emergency your seat cushion may be used as a flotation device" in an uninterested south-western drawl......

[seacue]

I have been SLF on more than a dozen American Eagle roundtrips from San Juan. The most recent was less than 5 years ago. I always checked for a life jacket. There was never one and it wasn't mentioned on the safety card nor in the safety briefing. The briefing from San Juan is Hispanic English.

The argument apparently is that they are always within xx minutes of a suitable landing field.

I'd like to have a life jacket even if they ditched in 10 ft (3 m) of water just off a beach since injury could prevent effective swimming.

These days I go to St Maarten where most of American's flights are on oceanic-equiped 757s.

Out of curiousity, I usually check for a life jacket even on overland domestic flights within the USA. I find one more often than I would expect.

seacue

[WHBM]

I always find it strange that US operators do not have lifejackets on so much of their domestic fleet. Palermo accident apart, there have been very few ditchings from the cruise, most have been on approach to runways at the edge of the sea, places like San Francisco or La Guardia.

As a regular user of London City, I always go through the procedures in my mind on approach on how to get the lifejacket out and on in a few seconds. If I ever feel the aircraft departing the paved runway there I'll be donning it in an instant before there's even a call.

[Pax Vobiscum]

That sounds like very good advice, WHBM. Even at LHR, if the worst happens you could end up in the Staines reservoir.

I suppose the logic being used in the (continental) US is that, even over Lake Superior, you can't get more than 80 miles from dry land, so the chances of a controlled ditching are very slight.

[seacue]

East-Coast USA airports immediately adjacent to tidal water:

Boston, Providence, La Guardia, JFK, Philadelphia, Washington National (http://users.erols.com/rcarpen/DCAappr0507.jpg) (Reagan), Norfolk is close, Fort Lauderdale is perhaps a mile.

Maybe some others.