Whatever we call it ............ its the same thing
 

It seems to me that this precautioary landing is because pilots are forced into the situation so what we call it is not the issue.

The bigest problem is that most pilots dont use the option until they are totaly backed into a corner and wait until it has to be done RIGHT NOW.

This is when the trouble starts and it becomes less and less like EX17 (not the one that some places teach down to 500ft) and more like a panic measure.

No one landing like this is going to be quite like another so a wide range of courses of action need considering, Much like what is happening on this thread but this has to be done in the cold light of day, not when backed into a corner.

Those who teach Ex17 down to 500 ft and then just tick the boxes on the student training record are just ripping the student off and setting the student up for an accident rather than an inccident should the student subsequently be backed into a corner as well as making life more dangerous for those on the ground.
There are undoubtedly occations when a student selects a field that will result in a 500 ft rule infringment and that practice has to be discontinued. This does not represent a satisfactory completion of EX17, it just indicates that it will have to be repeated until the student demonstrates the ability to perform to the required standard.

Just out of curiosity, if you do have to perform a forced landing in a field somewhere for weather or another reason, what do you do afterwards?

Can you take off from the same field when the weather is better or do you have to get the plane out by road? Can all planes have their wings removed etc for this purpose?

Forgive me if its a daft question.

Depends whose plane it is. Where I rent the flying order book says "phone the club and tell them you've landed in a field; in due course a decision will be made as to whether the aircraft can be flown out by an instructor".

So there's nothing "regulation wise" stopping you from flying out of a random field? I assumed that you could only fly out of designated "airfields".

Would you need to inform the CAA of your intent to take off?

So is there anything to stop a farmer buying his own plane and regularly flying out of his field?

Apologies for all the questions!

You may upset the neighbours, you may upset the planning authorities if they think that a field has magically become an aerodrome, you may upset passers by who thought you'd crashed and you may upset the livestock.

On the other hand, tens (hundreds?) of farmers in the UK do land and take off perfectly legally from their own land without telling anyone.

I don't know why but i think that's great!

Maybe it's because when you're learning to fly, everything seems so restrictive/prohibitively expensive that you just assume there would be some massive red tape or cost stopping you from doing this.

Sorry for hijacking the thread! Thanks!

Most GA types have wings which can be removed with modest work, though there will be more effort to reinstall and rig them. Cherokee types are more likely to suffer damage during this work than strut braced Cessnas. There are a few types I know of, for which removing the wings is not possible = problem. An off airport landing has been more successful if that place affords a takeoff path.

One of the challenges of off airport landing place selection will be that in other than dead flat countryside, the surface you've picked will be not as flat on final approach, as it appeared to be from above. That will mean a more challenging landing, and greater risk that that nice field you picked from above, and landed in, is not suitable for a takeoff at all.

Sometimes a whole aircraft can be taken by road to a place where a takeoff is possible, or it could be slung out by helicopter. The only time I have forced landed into a field from which I could not takeoff, with a bit of fence fiddling, I was able to tow the aircraft to a field from which I could takeoff safely. Only time, no cost :)

In any case, this is why it's really good to not leave this until the last opportunity. The early decision that you cannot continue gives more choice of landing sites, and more opportunity to validate their suitability, or better, just to divert to a different aerodrome! Early awareness means more time to deal with the situation, and better choices.

When I was doing EASA Part.FCL PPL this kind of precautionary landings was part of the training and we did quite some of them. Procedure was as described, fly a simulated rectangular pattern and let down to 50-100ft. If I remember correctly, you had to present a FI signoff for at least 3(?) of them to qualify for exam. There was a standardized report on board, where the FI filled in location and time for recording the violations of § something go below minimum height. I don't know wether this changed with the ATO thing, but it was a regular exercise when I learned and they told us it would be allowed even later for training purposes, as long as it is proper documented. Some of the §§§ guys around, is this still true?

I asked this in the other thread and ask again now!

Has anyone ever landed a Group A (or whatever they are called now) aeroplane in a field due to bad weather? Or heard of anyone who has? Well? In many years, Ive never heard of anyone doing it.

There is not an unsubstantial risk involved both with the landing and any subsequent take off. Therefore I would expect to see some accident reports. There are none, that I know of.

Maybe one ought to be asking why pilots appear to avoid it, possibly at any costs. I assume they try to get to an airfield, sometimes with tragic consequences.

So lets try and find out why, few if any, pilots actually go ahead and carry out a forced landing with power in a field?

I do not include helos, gliders, or microlights in this discussion.

Chickenhouse
 

The UK CAA has made it clear that it will not support a prosecution of a flying instructor under Rule 5 (500 ft rule) if the instructor is carrying out training of forced landings (with ot without power) as long as resonable care has been taken to not infringe rule 5.

So I see this being if you fly less than 500 ft from a farm house you will get busted, if you fly nearer that 500 ft to some walkers who had been hidden by a hedge while approaching an otherwise empty field you will not get busted.

This was as a result of a failed prosecution of a flying instructor who was carrying EAFTO training. Any wise instructor will keep a record of this training just incase a low flying complaint is made.

UV I have known it to happen, if you get it right you just fly the aircraft out of the field so no need for any fuss, after all most grass airfields are just fields that people put the word "air" in front of to tell you that aircraft regularly use it.

The Takeoff is more Problematic than the Landing
 

A considerable number of aircraft that were successfully landed in fields or roads have been written off in the subsequent takeoff.

At a nearby field a pilot landed after it turned out his fuel calculations were a bit short.

He snagged his gear on the fence taking off:=

Farmers can mow a takeoff lane and take down fences and posts once compensation is agreed, usually at a price well below the cost of dismantling and putting things back together;)

I know of one 16m glider that was pushed out of a field and 2 miles down a gravel road.

A Pa28-161 rented from Highland Flying Services was landed by a PPL on the beach near Fort William due to weather, and flown out by the CFI with no damage.
A Pa28 touring from England was landed in a field SW of Inverness, due to weather, and successfully flown out by the pilot when weather improved.

The emphasis in training seems to be on a procedure, rather than a successful landing, whether with or without power. A friend who didn't do his SEP paperwork in time, and had to sit a test, was given a PFL. He positioned to land on a microlight strip, to a certainty of success, but was failed as he did not fly a circuit.
As regards choosing a field, in my home area, at present, I cannot predict the softness of grass/stubble fields until my boot sinks in.

I have certainly landed in a few "rough strips", lakes (seaplane) and frozen lakes I knew, on both wheels and skis to prevent having to fly onward into deteriorating or unknown weather. I once landed an ultralight in a field due to fog enroute. But I do avoid unknown surfaces/areas for no good reason, and so far so good.

Those darn walkers, what nerve! I can just picture the Monty Python skit of walkers springing out of the hedge to take note of registrations of unsuspecting low flying planes [or galleons]!

No, no, no. They would be Cardinals. "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

Here's some forced landings that were successful

Happy End: photographs of miraculous aeroplane crashes where everyone survived - Telegraph

NZ has designated Low Flying Zones, where flight below 500 feet is legal under certain conditions, namely dual instruction.

I don't know anyone personally who has landed in a field because of bad weather/deteriorating light etc, but I did land once when our engine ran rough because of water in one of the tanks. Fortunately we were high enough to be within gliding distance of a nearby airfield so I landed there.

Try landing a Boeing in a short field.....
 

In October, 1960, a Pan American Boeing 707 landed at Northolt, instead of Heathrow, by mistake.....was looking out for the gasometer landmark and got muddled up a bit. Managed to stop before hitting the far hedge...

They had to unload EVERYTHING to fly it out the next day...with a different pilot. But didn't have to take the wings off....

Dunnit two times. First was my first longer mountain flight, clouds came down and down until I found myself in a valley with all hill tops in clouds, so I circled and landed at a small wet cow meadow of a farm (the only place to let down). The farmer took me by tractor to my destination airfield, was only about 3 miles behind the hills and next day I took off again in blue sky and after a fabulous breakfast at the farmers house. He became a very good friend of mine. Second time I was x-country with blue skies prognosis when a cold front mangled weather laundry and carb icing over a lake in 1.000ft forced me to land at nearest possible gras. I spent the night in the tent I had and took off next morning without seeing anybody.

When I did a flight test to obtain a NZ licence on the strength of my Canadian one, I did practice forced landings with and without power down to 50' in the Tauranga LFZ. My instructor also had me doing steep turns at 200', partly over the sea and partly over land (with 50' trees :eek: ).

Low-flying and decision making in simulated poor visibility is a requirement in NZ for PPL issue and BFRs:

http://www.caa.govt.nz/pilots/Instru..._PPL_RPL_A.pdf

That's waaaaay too far about the trees for some approaches into "interesting" lakes! Would expect NZ training to be more into bush flying than that :-)