Selecting appropriate field for PFL
 

Just starting instructors rating and wanted to have a look over my notes for PFL's.

I used to have a really good note on the best fields to select; their colour and the time of year etc. Unfortunatly i can't find it and its been a good while since i was practicing this type of thing that I have forgot.

Can anyone fill me in on this topic?

Thanks

I am a PPL student who was struggling with PFLs and I got advice on this forum which I found very helpful. If you search recent posts in the 'Private Flying' forum, using my name, you should find it. I don't know how to post a link. It included field selection (via another link as I recall).

Um well, assuming you are current, you really should know the answer - engines do really stop sometimes.

Are you doing your FI rating in Malta, or elsewhere? I guess the detailed answers will depend on local landscape. But basically I like to go with all the S words:
Size - is it big enough
Shape - round or square better than long and thin (gives more approach options)
Slope - flattish (land up hill if you have to land on a slope)
Surface - smooth as you can and short crop if possible, tractor wheelings roughly into wind so you can land along them
Stock - no animals
Shocks - no cables in field or on approach
Surroundings - some civilisation nearby so you can get help

and before you worry about any of these, only look at fields that you can be sure of reaching (know the glide performance of the aircraft, what the wind is doing and how high above the ground you are when the engine stops). Remember that a good approach into a poor field is better than a poor approach into a good field.

hope this helps

H

That is the essence of the whole thing, getting the aeroplane onto the ground safely, if you then go through the far hedge, well it is better to do that at 20 knots than hit the first hedge at 80kts.
When teaching PFLs, don't try to teach the student the whole thing in one lesson, get them used to selecting fields and setting up and flying glide approaches , then introduce the drills and radio calls , pax briefs etc.The aim is to stay alive, saving the aeroplane is a bonus

I agree with "all the S'es"

I always used this

Wind - don't forget that one!
Obstacles
Size
Shape
Stuff

Cheers everyone. I'm doing FI in the UK. I remember on CPL test I got a bollocking because i was not totally au fait with the various colours of fields and what they indicate (ploughed, grass etc); if anyone can give me help on that front it would be apprecited.

Basically if its rich green its likely to be crop or grass after a lot of rain or irrigation. The grass isnt always green! Its a good idea to keep an eye on the local situation in regard to crop and grass colours throughout the year.
Farmers dont usually irrigate grass but they do irrigate and feed crop so hence the richer colours. Grass in fact is the great survivor it can survive drought where as in the same field crop would soon die. As the grass experiences the high levels of sunlight of summer it goes yellowy brown when not irrigated.
Other crops such as rape and wheat will take on different colouts according to the season. One of the things not very often taken into consideration are crop furrows(ploughing furrows) some of which are quite deep and will take a nosewheel off straight away if you land across them.

Farmers don't put sheep in waterlogged fields!

If your not use to english countryside take a long walk in the various seasons, crop and terrain varies from month to month, august it could be hard groun and stubble, september it could be ploughed and soft, terrain can also be deceptive. Get yourself some boots and take a long walk, as you walk across fields, consider ther merits, winter everthing gets a bit soogy and soft. I have to say that from my experience, with students and skill test candidates, with a background in agriculture or gliding usually perform the best, in field selection, but it's not an exact science. On the other hand there are hundreds of disused airfileds in the UK which you should consider, if there within range

A successful forced landing is when everyone gets to walk away unhurt. The condition of the aircraft when the it comes to a safe stop is utterly irrelevant, therefore the condition of the landing surface is the least important consideration when conducting a forced landing.

A steady 9 Gee de-acceleration from 60 knots to stopped requires a run of about 25 feet. Now obviously there is little practical application for this interesting fact but it does go to show that once the aircraft is on the ground and slowing down at a steady rate you are pretty much home free. The killer accidents are the sudden stop, either as a result of hitting an obstacle while still airborne or hitting a solid immovable object like a stone wall or deep ditch on the landing roll.

When I teach the forced approach I place the majority of the emphasis on picking a field which is easily reachable, without any drastic manoevering, and has a clear approach. As long as the field is reasonably level without any significant immovable obstructions it is going to be good enough.

I have seen a lot paralysis by analysis from students as they tried to pick the field, which resulted in a botched result, as a result of too much emphasis being placed on field surface condition by their instructors

In any case the accident record shows that approximately 80 % of all engine failures are directly caused by the actions or inactions of the pilot, with fuel starvation/mismanagement/contamination and carb icing dis-proportionally represented. All are 100 % pilot preventable and so I think as a general comment flying schools should place more emphasis on not having the engine fail in the first place over complicated strategies to pick the best field after the engine stops.

So you would teach your students to land across deep ploughed furrows in a field,or in a flooded field?

It is always better to have a good approach ( ie with the aircraft stabilized on speed and with the flight path leading directly to the desired touchdown point) to a less than ideal field than have the a poor approach to a great field.

So with your respect to your question which ever field is going to be the easiest and simplest to make with the obvious caveat that it is better to land parallel to the furrows than across them.

PFL's in training should be caveated with the same disclaimer as those weight loss adverts "results are not typical". When a student does a PFL in training they generally know whats coming and many practice areas only offer a few fields so it often becomes a semi rote exercise. It is one thing to succeed in this environment, it is IMO a whole different matter if a year later the new PPL is going for a nice bimble on a sunny Sunday afternoon, and suddenly the engine just up and quits. I am a big believer in keeping it simple and a sucessful forced landing starts with flying the airplane. Picking a field can never get in the way of flying the aircraft and arriving at the desired touchdown point in good order. I never said the field conditions were unimportant I am simply asserting that they are less important than flying a good approach and therefore it is important have the student properly prioritize his/her actions. I feel that some schools do not do a very good job of this and instill overly dogmatic requirements on what constitutes the "right field" and therefore unnecessarily complicates an already demanding exercise

That beautiful flat smooth expanse of grass is no good if you get low and slow looking for it and then spin in on the final turn.

As for walking fields to learn the conditions......well IMO this is far over the top. The time used could IMO, be far more usefully spent learning about aircraft engines and systems. The Kas Thomas book "fly the engine" is a great place to start as are the excellent columns on engine management on the AVweb website. That way you are more likely to recognize a sick engine in time to avoid having to fly a forced approach at all.

Which is in fact taking the surface into consideration!

You didnt mention waterlogged fields either-ok with floats I suppose!

Pull what

In the water logged field, or across the furrows it doesn't matter because you are going to live, provided that the aircraft first actually makes the field and that it arrives at the chosen point with a low speed nose high touchdown in full control. That is the only point I was trying to make.

Thats the point you made and its incorrect.

Ok then where does the importance of field selection rate for you and what do you consider the order of precedence of the major considerations for the forced landing ?

note on Malta ...
 

Choice of fields are a bit limited there, chances are you will meet a hefty stone wall at some point.
If you are going to be doing S/E work on the islands, from experience I recommend making a visual note of workable landing areas from departure and along your "usual" training route, (usually to Gozo and back?) then fly so far as possible from one base leg position to the next base leg position according to the surface wind on the day.

It's also worth having a closer look from ground level for any surprises that are not too obvious from the air... wires, trenches that sort of thing.
If it all goes seriously pear shaped, a life jacket would be a definite asset, I always wore one !

I taught 'Big, open & flat'. I'd rather my student spend more attention to making the field than dithering over the minutae of selection considerations. In the brief I'd expand 'big, open, flat' to cover slope, surface and the other usual details but in the limited time available in the air then there are more important priorities.

A less than perfect field with the approach & landing flown well is better than a botched approach that crashes into obstacles next to a 4000m runway.

Pull what: This quote was directed at you, and since you challenged my earlier responses I think the courtesy of a reply is appropriate.....

A lifetime ago, I was given a simulated two-engined failure at height in a light twin over very inhospitable country and I chose the only vaguely suitable pinprick-sized landing area and configured for it. It was the steep side of a large hill and as I got lower I realised I would have to land cross-slope with significant crossed controls and I was likely to hit a wire stock fence. There was nowhere else to go as I was over heavy native forest. Assuming I was committed to carry out this approach and landing, where is the opportunity in dreamland for me to carry out a disciplined reconnoitre on my chosen field and its alternatives?

Likewise, when being instructed in low level work no emphasis is placed on the finer details of emergency landing areas; there is simply no time. With a simulated engine failure, a quick pull up to above treetop height, choose something on or just off the nose big, open & flat and use it. Trees can be avoided but sometimes there's a fence in the way. If so, go through it; you may even choose to go through a fence to assist deceleration.

Areas chosen by your flying schools for training PFL techniques are likely to have been specifically inspected and operationally approved but as PIC in the real world, you are not given that luxury. The previous two posts have come from wise old heads; you would do well to heed the advice you have asked for and been given.