PA28 Single Door Safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA28 Single Door Safety
Hello,
I've been thinking about the single door design of the PA28, and have a question.
Apart from the convenience issue of having the door on the passenger's side, I've also been wondering about the safety aspect of it in case of an emergency or forced landing. Specifically, if the situation were ugly enough for the aircraft to have overturned or the only door to be blocked.
I was recently reading some of the CAA's 'Safety Sense' publications, and came across the following one:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/20130121SSL02.pdf
From page 4:
d) Advise passengers how to use any emergency exits. Tell them to kick or force out a window if the doors or canopy cannot be opened or if the aircraft has overturned.
I've never heard this advice before - is kicking out the windows feasible in an emergency situation in a PA28? Are they designed to separate when under force in such a scenario?
I have the choice to move onto the C172 or stay on a PA28 for my CPL hour building, and in my specific situation, they come to exactly the same price. I've therefore been trying to decide between the two on other factors and I've been giving a great deal of attention (perhaps not justifiably so) to the presence of only a single door on the PA28.
What do others think?
Odai.
I've been thinking about the single door design of the PA28, and have a question.
Apart from the convenience issue of having the door on the passenger's side, I've also been wondering about the safety aspect of it in case of an emergency or forced landing. Specifically, if the situation were ugly enough for the aircraft to have overturned or the only door to be blocked.
I was recently reading some of the CAA's 'Safety Sense' publications, and came across the following one:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/20130121SSL02.pdf
From page 4:
d) Advise passengers how to use any emergency exits. Tell them to kick or force out a window if the doors or canopy cannot be opened or if the aircraft has overturned.
I've never heard this advice before - is kicking out the windows feasible in an emergency situation in a PA28? Are they designed to separate when under force in such a scenario?
I have the choice to move onto the C172 or stay on a PA28 for my CPL hour building, and in my specific situation, they come to exactly the same price. I've therefore been trying to decide between the two on other factors and I've been giving a great deal of attention (perhaps not justifiably so) to the presence of only a single door on the PA28.
What do others think?
Odai.
Would be interesting to see how you could get your feet up to kick a window out and then if you did actually get your foot through the window you may risk getting cut by the plastic screen.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the flip side (if you'll excuse the pun):
If the occupants of a C172 are incapacitated post accident, then don't expect rescuers to be able to open doors that have been 'locked' from the inside. So they'll be kicking the windows in....
At least an internally 'locked' PA28 door can be opened from the outside.
If the occupants of a C172 are incapacitated post accident, then don't expect rescuers to be able to open doors that have been 'locked' from the inside. So they'll be kicking the windows in....
At least an internally 'locked' PA28 door can be opened from the outside.
If it concerns you that much, look at the effect of a crash landing in a C172 with the flaps down, where you land between 2 trees and the flaps cut the cabin in half! I think I'd stick with one door!
Having replaced all the glass on a C140, I am sure you could kick it out if semi-motivated yet not incapacitated. It may slip out of the channel prior to breaking. Not sure if the Cherokee is set up the same way, but I would guess it is.
Bryan
Bryan
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colchester
Age: 40
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA28 Single Door Safety
I flew both types, and enjoyed both. The only reason I took the 172 out more was that it was cheaper.
Maybe have a look through the database to see how the single door or doubles affected the situation post-landing.
On my passenger briefs, I always told my passengers that if they were slow to get the food open, then I'd be going through them anyway.
Maybe have a look through the database to see how the single door or doubles affected the situation post-landing.
On my passenger briefs, I always told my passengers that if they were slow to get the food open, then I'd be going through them anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Bucks
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA28's have been flying for what, 50+ years? How many accidents has anyone heard of where the door has been unavailable and the crew trapped? I suspect the blunt end of the fire extinguisher against the area near the DV window would work wonders.
I would suggest a trial flight in both planes and make your mind up afterwards.
I would suggest a trial flight in both planes and make your mind up afterwards.
I wouldn't consider it a factor in choosing a type to fly.
Frankly, if the aircraft has had a bingle serious enough to block the exit, it would seem to me that the occupants are likely to be a bit banged up, anyway, and probably incapable of crawling out of the rather small gap available if one was even able to remove a window. The crash axe would be the first attempt at this. It would be difficult. Imagine trying to swing it, upside down, perhaps dazed and confused, without hitting someone.
I'd consider more important factors to be the usability of the aircraft, overall, for the type of training you're carrying out. Which basically comes down to all the ingredients that go into answering the question: which to you find nicer to fly?
Frankly, if the aircraft has had a bingle serious enough to block the exit, it would seem to me that the occupants are likely to be a bit banged up, anyway, and probably incapable of crawling out of the rather small gap available if one was even able to remove a window. The crash axe would be the first attempt at this. It would be difficult. Imagine trying to swing it, upside down, perhaps dazed and confused, without hitting someone.
I'd consider more important factors to be the usability of the aircraft, overall, for the type of training you're carrying out. Which basically comes down to all the ingredients that go into answering the question: which to you find nicer to fly?
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: FL410
Age: 22
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some friends actually went off the end of the runway and into water after hitting the crest of a hill and bashing the gear all the way round into the bottom of the wing and deforming the PA28 door. They were in the surf, water filling, very cold and all badly bruised by the shoulder harness´. Nevertheless, they were able to kick the screens out and exit. All saved, no serious injuries.
I would not count on that though and so do what the "big" guys do and carry a crash ax. I had a regular ax with me in aircraft that were loaded and had doors in the back, like PA31s, 441s, 404s and PA46s. If need be, I was ready to go through the front.
That being said, I have flown a lot in both (12000hours +) and each has their advantages. I would not choose one on the basis of the doors. Personally, I prefer the Pipers. This is a discussion as old as the two models, there is no "right" answer....so pick the one YOU prefer, for what-ever reasons and enjoy it to the upmost!
In case you are thinking of asking why I like the Piper......having picked up many new ones from the factories, the Pipers always had fewer issues as new. I like that the wing is not in the way at the airport in the landing pattern. You get all that great visibility of the ground in cruise in the Cessna, then just when you want to see the ground at the airport, the wing is now suddenly in the way. I have often had to move a lot of things in airplanes, as I USED them. The Piper rear seats come right out, giving me a great place for tents, sleeping bags, bikes, cartons of tools, boxes of fish etc. If you don´t have these needs, then it might not be an issue.
A third choice and one that has always appealed to me, is the Grumman Tiger. It has the advantages of the Piper, yet is much faster than an Arrow, while on a fixed-pitch prop and fixed gear, making it far less expensive to run for great perfomance. Open the canopy on a warm day while taxi-ing out, rear seat can also disappear for you. But.......no nose wheel steering, so it takes a bit of getting used to.
Again....enjoy your choice!
I would not count on that though and so do what the "big" guys do and carry a crash ax. I had a regular ax with me in aircraft that were loaded and had doors in the back, like PA31s, 441s, 404s and PA46s. If need be, I was ready to go through the front.
That being said, I have flown a lot in both (12000hours +) and each has their advantages. I would not choose one on the basis of the doors. Personally, I prefer the Pipers. This is a discussion as old as the two models, there is no "right" answer....so pick the one YOU prefer, for what-ever reasons and enjoy it to the upmost!
In case you are thinking of asking why I like the Piper......having picked up many new ones from the factories, the Pipers always had fewer issues as new. I like that the wing is not in the way at the airport in the landing pattern. You get all that great visibility of the ground in cruise in the Cessna, then just when you want to see the ground at the airport, the wing is now suddenly in the way. I have often had to move a lot of things in airplanes, as I USED them. The Piper rear seats come right out, giving me a great place for tents, sleeping bags, bikes, cartons of tools, boxes of fish etc. If you don´t have these needs, then it might not be an issue.
A third choice and one that has always appealed to me, is the Grumman Tiger. It has the advantages of the Piper, yet is much faster than an Arrow, while on a fixed-pitch prop and fixed gear, making it far less expensive to run for great perfomance. Open the canopy on a warm day while taxi-ing out, rear seat can also disappear for you. But.......no nose wheel steering, so it takes a bit of getting used to.
Again....enjoy your choice!
Go for the C172. Not for doors, or Cessna is better than Piper, or anything like that. Do it so that you broaden your experience base. The more of the common types you fly the better for if & when you're looking for a job and the company operates 'x' instead of 'y'.
Last edited by Tinstaafl; 14th Jun 2013 at 02:48.
Moderator
The single door is not beyond consideration. I would not say it's a big issue, but it is not none either. A fellow I knew was killed in a Bonanza, as he could not exit through the single door before it burned. He was the very experienced owner of that aircraft, so if he could not get out, a person new to the type would have more problem.
Some windows can be kicked out, but do not assume it will be easy. And, yes, broken acrylic plastic can be rather sharp.
Some windows can be kicked out, but do not assume it will be easy. And, yes, broken acrylic plastic can be rather sharp.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No right answer, as others have said. Two doors reduce the feeling of claustrophobia but, that said, I was incredibly impressed at the integrity of the passenger capsule in a PA24 which had a CFIT accident. It was pretty clear that at least some of the strength came from the singe-door design choice. Still, my personal inclination leans to the easy-exit (2 door) arrangement.
My present Sunday afternoon machine is a little Tecnam P2002JF, with a sliding canopy (like the Grummans). It was deliberately chosen for the roll-bar arrangement (and impressive crush-test video) but I admit to being sceptical about the little hammer clipped to the hat shelf. It might just about be possible to reach the hammer, break the perspex and exit the aeroplane in an orderly fashion. Then again.....
My present Sunday afternoon machine is a little Tecnam P2002JF, with a sliding canopy (like the Grummans). It was deliberately chosen for the roll-bar arrangement (and impressive crush-test video) but I admit to being sceptical about the little hammer clipped to the hat shelf. It might just about be possible to reach the hammer, break the perspex and exit the aeroplane in an orderly fashion. Then again.....
Last edited by tecman; 14th Jun 2013 at 13:15.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: The Wild Blue Yonder
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you an hire both for the same cost, given the ubiquitous nature of both aircraft, why not split the hours you'll be doing over both?
They fly slightly differently, so why not build up experience on both.
TPP
They fly slightly differently, so why not build up experience on both.
TPP
I've never liked the Pa28 series because of that single door.
Fortunately as an Instructor it has always been on my side
Lots of low wing aircraft have two doors, TB 10/20 series, Commander 112/114 even that miserable POS Tomahawk had two doors.
So its just being cheap on Piper's side.
Fortunately as an Instructor it has always been on my side
Lots of low wing aircraft have two doors, TB 10/20 series, Commander 112/114 even that miserable POS Tomahawk had two doors.
So its just being cheap on Piper's side.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I;ve nothing to add here other than to say, I've flown both types a reasonable amount but the PA28 wins hands down for me, gorgeous plane to fly and it looks like a plane. No matter how kind, the Cessna looks like a shed with wings ...