Forced landing on water or on trees ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forced landing on water or on trees ?
If you had only 2 options, do a forced landing on water or on trees ? What is the best kind to survive ?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hanging around Barton
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: heathrow
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
As a point of interest that is were the rule on booking out originated from.
Always chose the softest, cheapest option!
Professional Student
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Varig 254
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.
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.
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 49
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
I would have turned towards a coast no matter how far away it might have been.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Deepest Darkest
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditching may seem to be the softest option, but with a fixed undercart the chances of cartwheeling upon contact with water are very high
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.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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 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?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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???