Forced landing on water or on trees ?

[sternone]

If you had only 2 options, do a forced landing on water or on trees ? What is the best kind to survive ?

[gcolyer]

I would go for water as close to the coast/land as possible.

[LateFinals]

I'd go for water as I reckon It would give me more chance.

Some years ago a friend of mine ditched his Wassmer (wooden low wing French ) plane half-way between Alderney and the Needles, he had 16 minutes of gliding before he hit the deck and was lucky that it was a flatish day and the chopper was launched before he even ditched. (It had just come out of an annual and the engineer had forgotten to replace an oil seal apparently.)

( He then found out that his secretary had forgotten to send off his insurance cheque but thats another story and he was grateful to be alive ...)

LF

[BackPacker]

Me too.

Although woods could be survivable too, particularly if the trees are small. If faced with woods consisting of multi-100 year old oak, if possible, aim between two trunks, let the trunks rip the wings off and thereby dissipate a lot of energy.

[Major Major]

If faced with woods consisting of multi-100 year old oak, if possible, aim between two trunks, let the trunks rip the wings off and thereby dissipate a lot of energy.

Good grief, I hope I can think that clearly - I think I'd be a gibbering wreck if it actually happened.

[ab33t]

Why would you want to do that ......

[gcolyer]

Why would you want to do that ......


Yeah why would you want to be a gibbering wreck:eek:

[BackPacker]

Yeah why would you want to be a gibbering wreck?

Because it saves you from having to make tough choices, and flying the plane as far into the crash as possible?

[llanfairpg]

The comedian Michale Bentines son tried it in the New Forest in a Piper Cub, it took two weeks to find the aircraft and the bodies.

As a point of interest that is were the rule on booking out originated from.

Always chose the softest, cheapest option!

[hobbit1983]

Wasn't there an old RAF saying that went something along the lines of "If a prang is inevitable, endeavour to strike the softest object within range as slowly as possible"?

On that basis I would go for the water. Especially as since you have a choice between water & trees - which must mean you're able to land near, or if it's a suitable beach, on the edge of the water.

[chornedsnorkack]

Take the example of Varig 254.

It was a 737-200. They got lost over jungle and discovered that they no longer had fuel to reach an airport.

They then kept flying till the fuel ran out, in order to burn off their fuel and prevent postcrash fire, they deployed their flaps (partly, because the failing hydraulic prevented full extension) and they came down in treetops at night.

Out of 54 souls on board, 6 crew and 48 passengers, 13 died and 41 lived. It took a couple of days before some of the survivors could walk through the jungle to a farm and call for help.

[gcolyer]

The pilots of Varig 254 must have had balls the size of planets to bring it down over a jungle in the dark!

I would have turned towards a coast no matter how far away it might have been.

[PCentR]

Good article on the subject.
http://www.equipped.com/watertrees.htm

[tegwin]

Depends where you are in the world...

If its tightly packed coniforous woodland I was always taught to stall the aircraft onto the canopy of the trees.....

If your flying over the Florida swamps you DO NOT want to land in the water....there be crocs!

[DSAA]

It sounds a matter of picking the lesser of two evils -

Ditching may seem to be the softest option, but with a fixed undercart the chances of cartwheeling upon contact with water are very high - if your aircraft stalls out at around 65kts you're introducing three high drag points of contact to the water at about the same speed you cruise along a motorway (if ditching in calm wind), it would be a miracle to still be upright once you've lost all inertia.

Forced landings on to woodland doesn't sound too peachy either though, the chances of loosing one, or both, wings and turning the fuselage in to a falling brick appears to be quite high.

Pop along to Woodvale if you're ever able and have a look at the EFATO forced landing options - it certainly opens the eyes to being caught between a rock and a hard place should the worse occur at low speed and altitude.

[BackPacker]

Ditching may seem to be the softest option, but with a fixed undercart the chances of cartwheeling upon contact with water are very high

DSAA, where did you get that data? Because the data I have seen seem to indicate that cartwheeling or flipping over when ditching is very rare. In fact, ditching seems to be very survivable:

http://www.equippedtosurvive.com/ditchingmyths.htm

As for wood vs. water, here's what they have to say:

http://www.equippedtosurvive.com/watertrees.htm

Lots more articles on that site, and it seems to be based on solid reasoning, backed up by statistics from the NTSB database.

[davidatter708]

if u r going to ditch and have undercarrige why not invert in the air so when u land and flip you will be right side up

[BackPacker]

if u r going to ditch and have undercarrige why not invert in the air so when u land and flip you will be right side up

Because flying inverted is HARD and most pilots have never done it?
Because you lose a lot of height in becoming inverted, unless you have an aerobatics capable aircraft with a decent roll rate?
Because in most aircraft the stall speed and the drag is significantly higher when flying inverted?
Because instead of the gear, it is now the windscreen that has to take the initial impact?
Because the chances of flipping over are less than 50%, meaning that if you impact inverted, you will most likely stay inverted, making egress harder?
Because all the gear (and dirt) that's loose in the aircraft will not be held in place by seatbacks etc, but will slide forward freely on the roof?

Need I go on?

[jammydonut]

The comedian Michale Bentines son tried it in the New Forest in a Piper Cub, it took two weeks to find the aircraft and the bodies.
Crashed near Peterfield after failing to book out, body was found months later after leaves fell from trees. He had survived the crash and was only yards from a footpath.

[mm_flynn]

The comedian Michale Bentines son tried it in the New Forest in a Piper Cub, it took two weeks to find the aircraft and the bodies.
Crashed near Peterfield after failing to book out, body was found months later after leaves fell from trees. He had survived the crash and was only yards from a footpath. And resulted in a silly system where you bookout but still need a responsible person to notice you haven't arrived and have a parallel flight plan system that doesn't do anything if you don't close your flight plan, so is not very useful for achieving the SAR goal.

Everywhere else in the world seems to work fine using flightplans as a basis for overdue action. Some places mandate its use (which I personally don't agree with but Such Is..) Some places recommend and allow individuals to make their own risk assessments. It is only the UK that sets up its own 'sort of mandated' special system???

[rosti]

Neither, I would deploy my BRS rocket parachute, call up the rescue services on VHF or on my mobile as I floated gently down, after touchdown step out side and either walk or swim to the nearest pub...

[llanfairpg]

More on the 'silly systym'

His body, together with that of the pilot and aircraft were found on 31st Oct 1971, the plane had been missing for just over nine weeks. Bentine's subsequent investigation into regulations governing private airfields resulted in him writing a report for the Special Branch of the British police into the use of personal aircraft in smuggling operations. He fictionalised much of the material in his novel Lord of the Levels

[charliegolf]

The assumption seems to be that for 'water', read 'water right next to the shoreline'.

If no, then around Britain, the shock of your 'soft' landing will aid your succumbing to hypothermia pretty quickly for much of the year.

If yes, then it's water for me, 'cos I can swim, and have (more than once) been dumped in water, rolled upside down strapped in and survived.

It's very disorientating.

CG

[bjornhall]

Water if it's reasonably warm, or we're talking about a small forrest lake.

Trees in the winter.

[IO540]

Water every time.

The time of the year doesn't matter much. You will probably die of hypothermia before they will get to you if you can't get into a liferaft.

Of course with a Cirrus you just pull the chute :)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

An instructor on Vancouver Island told me to go for the trees, on the grounds that people do strange things when suddenly immersed in freezing water.

Having once been suddenly immersed in freezing water (a dinghy capsize in the Blackwater estuary in winter) I didn't disagree with him. I couldn't breathe, and my brain stopped working ... and that was wearing cold weather gear and a lifejacket, which I wasn't in the aircraft. I made it to the rescue boat under my own steam, four or five yards away, but I doubt I could have done much more; I don't remember how I got out of the water but I must have been pulled out, there's no way I could have got out by myself.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There is no one answer, there are just to many different factors to take into consideration such as what are you flying and where are you at what time of the year.

Generally speaking though my last choice would be the water unless I was flying a sea plane.....for one thing I can breathe hanging from a tree while awaiting rescue far longer than I can under water.

I live on Vancouver Island and own a sail boat, when I'm out in my boat I often wonder how it would be to have just landed in a wheel equipped airplane and be out there in all that water hoping someone would be able to find me.....

[Fg Off Max Stout]

Just to give the military spin on things, the answer would be neither. In single engine aircraft (rotary and fixed wing (but not Harriers!)) the RAF teach that you should not overfly water, woodland, built up areas etc except at a height at which you can glide/autorotate clear. Good route planning means that such areas can almost always be avoided and en-route you should always be looking for a decent field.

It basically boils down to what level of risk you wish to personally accept. You can fly across the English Channel in a C152 and you probably won't have an engine failure. However, if you do, there's a pretty good chance that it'll kill you, if not in the ditching, in the egress or sea survival situations. Where do you draw your own flight safety line?

[BeechNut]

I had an instructor ask me this 27 years ago when I was doing my PPL. I picked the trees. When he asked me to rationalize my choice, I said quite simply: "I can't swim worth a $h!t!".

He replied "good answer, in that case go for the trees".

Of course, from late December 'till about late March in these parts, the "water" is actually ice (enough to drive across in a car), and that rather changes the game!

Either way though, if you survive a crash in an area where your only choice is trees or water, and it is any time from late spring to early autumn, the flies will likely get you, or at least drive you nuts, if you survive. Insect repellant is actually a pretty important part of your survival kit in these circumstances.

Beech

[sternone]

Thanks for the loads of answers, the reason i asked was i was reading a text from Bob Martens who stated:

"Water versus trees: my personal sense is that water is not user friendly. In most water landings, the aircraft will not stay upright, leading to injuries and an immediate survival situation. Tree landings with the aircraft flown under control into the treetops are very survivable, often with only minor or no injuries to occupants. I’ve been associated with hundreds of accidents by way
of investigation and review, and the ones where the fatalities and serious injuries occur are when the aircraft hits the ground out of control -- stall spins, striking solid objects -- the outcomes are very, very sad and tragic. "


Now i also tought water was better, but this bloke claims the opposite!!!

[chornedsnorkack]

Ditching may seem to be the softest option, but with a fixed undercart the chances of cartwheeling upon contact with water are very high - if your aircraft stalls out at around 65kts you're introducing three high drag points of contact to the water at about the same speed you cruise along a motorway (if ditching in calm wind), it would be a miracle to still be upright once you've lost all inertia.

Look at the JAL DC-8. They had a retractable undercarriage and underwing jets, but they carried out an unplanned water impact with the undercarriage extended - they got lost and thought it was San Francisco runway underneath them, instead it was San Francisco Bay. The plane did NOT cartwheel - it came to rest with wheels in the shallow bottom of the bay and water up to doorsills. Everyone was unhurt, the plane was fished out and flew again.

[hobbit1983]

Look at the JAL DC-8. They had a retractable undercarriage and underwing jets, but they carried out an unplanned water impact with the undercarriage extended - they got lost and thought it was San Francisco runway underneath them, instead it was San Francisco Bay. The plane did NOT cartwheel - it came to rest with wheels in the shallow bottom of the bay and water up to doorsills. Everyone was unhurt, the plane was fished out and flew again.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the physics of ditching a large, heavy jetliner differ greatly from a light, small SEP aircraft? There's a lot less inertia for a start, surely.

[llanfairpg]

Quite correct Hobbit, there is also a lot more area to be supported by the canopy gap and other trees.

The only example in the UK i know of is Bentines quoted above and he and his pax died. Thre have been many sucessful ditchings around the UK over the years.

sternone--is that book by an American if it is my advice is try and get the local charity shop to take it

[sternone]

sternone--is that book by an American if it is my advice is try and get the local charity shop to take it

It's from pilotworkshop.com ...

[bjornhall]

The time of the year doesn't matter much. You will probably die of hypothermia before they will get to you if you can't get into a liferaft.

Haven't we already done this? ;)

True if you're ditching during an open water crossing, I'd imagine. In my case, if I were to ditch it would be
a) in the sea, very close to the coast or in between the islands, in an area that is full of pleasure craft and other boats and at least +15 deg in the summer, totally empty and at most +4 deg in the winter
b) in a small lake or river, within swimming distance from the shore and with similar difference in water temperatures

In those circumstances I do think the season matters.

I guess the only sensible answer is "it depends", but what a boring discussion that would be... :E