Engine Failure! ...pick a landing spot

Roads can be great if there is little traffic, quite a few planes have landed and been able to take back off from roads, but traffic and wires are a huge factor.

A beach can be a great option, depending on the type of beach and plane, I've landed on beaches before just to land on them, wet sand is hard enough it feels like a normal runway.

Wetlands, figure you're going to flip, that stuff is SOO soft, I could see a flip, semi sink and drown situation.

Trees would be my last option.
 
Start noticing highways. They have a lot of signs near the edge of the road. If each lane is 12' and the signs are 5' off the edge of the lane, that is 34'. A Cessna has a 36' wingspan.

A 1000' long field would be hard to nail perfectly. In my plane I need about 500' to stop, so I have 500' to spare. I can do it at my airport, engine out, but I would be lucky to nail it in an emergency situaltion. The tendency is to overshoot. Still, its not a bad option.

Ive landed on a beach, if no one is on it, it would be my first choice. Land where the sand is black near the water. That sand is harder because it gets wet. Further up its usually deeper softer sand.

I cut the power and glide in power off landing just about every landing. Keeps me up on my off field emergency drill.
 
My take home so far... beaches and short fields are the best bet.
Trees and ponds are kind of a toss up - not great options, but survivable.
Roads are not a great option, unless you want to risk public lives.
Wetlands are the kiss of death.

Just learned today that the property my work facility is on used to be an airfield back in the 1920s. Came across this old map...
Capture.jpg


What we need to compliment sectional charts is an overlay of the ground surface marked up... "good landing," "fair landing," "rough landing," "YOU WILL DIE HERE", etc.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
My take home so far... beaches and short fields are the best bet.
Trees and ponds are kind of a toss up - not great options, but survivable.
Roads are not a great option, unless you want to risk public lives.
Wetlands are the kiss of death.

Just learned today that the property my work facility is on used to be an airfield back in the 1920s. Came across this old map...
Capture.jpg


What we need to compliment sectional charts is an overlay of the ground surface marked up... "good landing," "fair landing," "rough landing," "YOU WILL DIE HERE", etc.
Click to expand...

Wonder if that's an old spelling of Worcester (Map shows Worchester Rd)
 
GRG55 said:
Choice 1 means you are deliberately using solid objects to slow yourself down from best glide speed (highest forward velocity)
Click to expand...

You don't have to hit the trees at best glide, get down and skim above the tops and bleed down to near stall speed, then slowly lower the plane into the canopy. This may depend somewhat on the plane. In the Mooney I'm surrounded by a CrMo cage, it may hold up a lot better than most into the trees.

mooney-roll-cage.jpg
 
Surviving the landing is only step 1 of the process.
Also need to consider what happens afterward, As already discussed in water landings.
Trees and water, How long until someone is going to noticed you crashed?
Interstate/hwy, they will notice pretty quickly and the fire and ambulance will be there in a hurry, even if you don't land directly on the road, due to traffic.

Brian
 
I'd continue on up to the Hudson River and ditch by Manhattan, lots of ferry boats there. :D
 
Somedudeintn said:
I really hope that's not even a thought when your life and the lives of others are on the line.
Click to expand...

It matters. Also, can I log the engine-out time as PIC glider time, even if I don't have a glider rating? Someone has to be PIC.
 
In a retract, I will take the pond or the beach with gear up. The field would likely be number three.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Step 1 was carb heat........... I don't follow the "correct" procedure and let the exhaust cool down so carb heat doesn't work.
Click to expand...

That there. Many engine "failures" are nothing more than carb ice. AOPA once had an article saying that ice was the single biggest cause of failure, well ahead of fuel exhaustion or anything else. And the reason for that? Not that we have carbs, but that pilots too often don't understand it, not even many instructors, and don't know what causes it or when to expect it and how to handle it and why.
 
Given the above (non) choices I would pick two trees about 20 feet apart on the edge of that field and put the plane right between them 6 inches off the ground and as slow as I can without stalling. Grab a seat cushion and hold it in front of you. Get your feet off the rudder pedals.
Intoning, "I'll be bahck" in a thick european accent just as you raise the nose, is optional.
 
C-172? Any surface about 30 feet long (or longer, of course); a good sized driveway will do. Especially if it's a rental. Your body can tolerate a LOT of horizontal G. Honestly, I'll probably just pick a spot somewhere withing 30 degrees or so of my heading at failure time. To answer, as asked:

1. The tree lined field (I'm good at spot landings)
2. Beach (there might be a boardwalk with good fries)
3. Interstate with heavy traffic (neat experience, and I'd like to test the theory about traffic braking as you pass over them, creating a space for you. Or, if there is a median, just using that).

I don't like getting wet with my clothes on, being impaled by tree branches, or hit by cars. Or free-falling from a height.

Seriously, I want a location where the first impact (after touchdown) is on the surface, at under 40 knots or so, and almost ALL the force is distributed horizontally. Your tree-lined field fills the bill.
 
Find the "softest" flattest spot and FTFA. Try to land with the lowest energy possible under the conditions tail low. Granted the sailplane is a tail dragger, but I've put it into some small spots when I had to.

Interestingly enough LS did some actual ditching tests back in the 70s in Finland to see whether it was better to ditch a sailplane gear up or gear down. Turns out gear down was much better.
 
vontresc said:
Interestingly enough LS did some actual ditching tests back in the 70s in Finland to see whether it was better to ditch a sailplane gear up or gear down. Turns out gear down was much better.
Click to expand...
...and if the water is fairly smooth, touching down with brakes applied will keep you hydro planing to a slower speed, so you'll have less energy when you finally do sink in.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Just learned today that the property my work facility is on used to be an airfield back in the 1920s. Came across this old map...
Capture.jpg


What we need to compliment sectional charts is an overlay of the ground surface marked up... "good landing," "fair landing," "rough landing," "YOU WILL DIE HERE", etc.
Click to expand...

I have a sectional from the 50s of the local area. On the back it has a detailed list and diagrams of what to do if you have to land off airport. It even has diagrams of ground signals, if you just need a mechanic or fuel. By looking at the back, it would seem that survivable off airport landings were a lot more common back in the 40s/50s. It could also be that they just had fore-thought in designing the sectionals.
 
ARFlyer said:
I have a sectional from the 50s of the local area. On the back it has a detailed list and diagrams of what to do if you have to land off airport. It even has diagrams of ground signals, if you just need a mechanic or fuel. By looking at the back, it would seem that survivable off airport landings were a lot more common back in the 40s/50s. It could also be that they just had fore-thought in designing the sectionals.
Click to expand...

I just finished reading Lindberghs' "Spirit of St. Louis" book. Amazing book. He begins it from when he got the idea while flying "air Mail" for a company. During the course of learning how he devised a plan (he was an unknown really, no connections, it was an amazing story from start to finish) to get backers, he talked a lot about the air mail planes, flying at night, etc. Just in that book he talked about at least 9-10 (maybe more) forced landings he himself had to take, including a few as a military pilot. He also recounts several other pilots he knew took most survived, but a few fatal.

It was told pretty matter-of-fact (I know, pilots often aren't given to excess in these matters maybe) but also as just part of flying. In those days, engine problems seem more common, as well as other mechanical. They flew at night as well, and often landed in fields. Some of his barnstorming stories also. Fascinating book!

I'm just starting (some months of theory, had my first flight lesson last friday) so I am a newbie, and I know this is not necessarily representative, but through this forum I've seen two different videos that have come up a few times here. I don't have a link, but one was a pilot that apparently had icing in the carb, and his whole family. It was a high-wing Cessna (172, or 152, I think 172) and he landed in snow and after the crash you see on the video what looked like about (guessing) 15-20 feet before the plan overturned, landed upside down. Nobody seemed hurt but I was very curious if it was just snow or he was unluck and hit something under the snow that caused the plane to tumble.

Another that I saw had a students first solo (gulp...) where he seemed very obsessed with Gopro cameras he mounted under, and in the cockpit, and he did a pattern and just lost altitude into a tree. He ended up some feet off the ground, and appeared also unhurt or lightly hurt (wrist I think). Looked like he just wasn't paying attention. He was focused on the cameras even after the crash. He had hit the tree coming down from above, and a ways up the tree.
I couldn't see how much damage the plane had though.
 
Last edited:
LongRoadBob said:
Another that I saw had a students first solo (gulp...) where he seemed very obsessed with Gopro cameras he mounted under, and in the cockpit, and he did a pattern and just lost altitude into a tree. He ended up some feet off the ground, and appeared also unhurt or lightly hurt (wrist I think). Looked like he just wasn't paying attention. He was focused on the cameras even after the crash. He had hit the tree coming down from above, and a ways up the tree.
I couldn't see how much damage the plane had though.
Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise me at all. :rolleyes:
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
It’s 60 degrees, sunny and the winds are calm. Just as you are thinking about what a perfect day it is to fly, your engine fails. After the 5 second "OMG, THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING!" moment of panic, you get yourself together and pitch for best glide speed..
Click to expand...

May want to start without assuming you get that much time to sort it through.. :)
 
LongRoadBob said:
Another that I saw had a students first solo (gulp...) where he seemed very obsessed with Gopro cameras he mounted under, and in the cockpit, and he did a pattern and just lost altitude into a tree. He ended up some feet off the ground, and appeared also unhurt or lightly hurt (wrist I think). Looked like he just wasn't paying attention. He was focused on the cameras even after the crash. He had hit the tree coming down from above, and a ways up the tree.
I couldn't see how much damage the plane had though.
Click to expand...
This one?
I'm not clear on why setting up a couple cameras before starting the engine would have caused the power loss.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
This one?
I'm not clear on why setting up a couple cameras before starting the engine would have caused the power loss.
Click to expand...

From what I've read of reactions, not sure either that it is fair. My dad was a pilot though, he's passed away, I know for sure if he had instructed me, and I was messing around with cameras to record my first solo, he'd have been on me like "that", letting me know in no uncertain terms that I was splitting my focus, and to get my mind in the game. Again, I'm not saying it had anything to do with it. his attitude (but maybe that was adrenalin talking) after it doesn't seem to be "right" in that he seems occupied with talking to the camera, to his "fans" rather than being a little more contrite about just crashing someone elses plane into a tree. I don't know. That just doesn't seem like he has a real good sense about the seriousness of flying or the plane, etc.

In fact, I don't even care if it had anyting to do with it or if he was inappropriate, I am VERY curious though to hear what any experienced pilot thinks happened here? It may be there is too little to go on, but just reasonable theories on what might have happened. Could he have corrected by lowering the nose, and if so when should he have started? Or simply using ailerons to get level and abort the bank? When should he have realized he needed to do something? Was it simple too little power on the bank?

Did he overfly the final, and use the rudder to try and get back in line with the runway?Was he too low to begin with to even bank at that angle? I don't know and again just a hearing what others with experience think would be interesting.

Youtube comments are pretty worthless, but I'd hope that here maybe a more objective analysis, what is going on, why, what he should have done could be really instructive. Also, as a newbie, I was amazed at how little damage happened when landing into a tree!

Also, I just realized I may be "hijacking" this thread. What is the general etiquette here? Should I start a different thread, or is it ok do talk about this since it seems he did make a successfull crash landing, so maybe it is on topic after all?
 
Last edited:
LongRoadBob said:
Also, I just realized I may be "hijacking" this thread. What is the general etiquette here? Should I start a different thread, or is it ok do talk about this since it seems he did make a successfull crash landing, so maybe it is on topic after all?
Click to expand...

I haven't run into any etiquette police on here.

Watching the video I have two comments :

1) The engine didn't sound great at start, initial climb performance was abysmal, and then the engine started sounding worse and the descent began. From my point of view root cause is lack of engine power. It'd have been nice if he noticed that during the takeoff roll.

2) At the end I'm not sure why he chose to land in a tree vs. all those wide open green spaces. Even at the very end, It looked like he was lined up with a field straight ahead but instead turned right to hit a tree. Flipside is I wasn't there, video might not show all that he was seeing, and he came away without a scratch. Nice job not panicking and dying!
 
LongRoadBob said:
Also, I just realized I may be "hijacking" this thread. What is the general etiquette here? Should I start a different thread, or is it ok do talk about this since it seems he did make a successfull crash landing, so maybe it is on topic after all?
Click to expand...

As the PIC of this thread, I just squawked 7500. I'll go back to 1200 when the video debate concludes.

Regarding the video - yeah, it bothers me too how the first thing he did upon landing was worry about his camera. BUT, he was likely in shock from what just happened. And I'm not going to sit on a high horse judging the guy when I wasn't there and don't know the realities of his situation. Something caused him to have to make an emergency landing. He landed in the trees, but he walked away with his life. Sounds like a success story to me.
 
Last edited:
noobJohn said:
I haven't run into any etiquette police on here.

Watching the video I have two comments :

1) The engine didn't sound great at start, initial climb performance was abysmal, and then the engine started sounding worse and the descent began. From my point of view root cause is lack of engine power. It'd have been nice if he noticed that during the takeoff roll.

2) At the end I'm not sure why he chose to land in a tree vs. all those wide open green spaces. Even at the very end, It looked like he was lined up with a field straight ahead but instead turned right to hit a tree. Flipside is I wasn't there, video might not show all that he was seeing, and he came away without a scratch. Nice job not panicking and dying!
Click to expand...

I suspect he hadn't either realized or accepted that he was going down, so he hadn't put much into picking a spot. Hey, he didn't yank and stall/spin in, have to give him that. Sure sounds like loss of power, wonder if it was mechanical or mixture.

People deal with stress in different ways, I can't really judge his reaction.
 
The airplane I train in (my poor baby) had a catastrophic engine failure and landed on a Long Island beach. I wasn't aboard, but it was a CFI I don't know who has some crazy amount of hours (10,000?), and a student pilot ON HIS FIRST TRAINING FLIGHT. Whoops. The CFI had time to fly a proper pattern towards the beach, landed in the firmer sand near the water, then at the end of rollout turned it up the beach so it wouldn't end up under water at high tide. I guess now I know one reason that our practice areas are both over beaches. I'd definitely take that over any Long Island road, if the opportunity was available. Especially thinking about how wide the wings are, compared to the lanes of a road.

Link to the news story: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/03/11/emergency-aircraft-landing-sunken-meadow/
 
Even when I am driving, I will play the 'where to land if it quits here' game. I think it is pretty useful exercise.
Block out other thoughts for a moment (except for those needed for safe driving) and look around. The contours of the land appear much more prominently when you are on the surface than aloft, esp in hilly country such as some of my local terrain. Yesterday I was in a small valley with only one flat, 1500' section. The rest was pretty steep but having flown over it, I know you wouldn't realize it til down low. I like to try to decide, Where do I want to be when I am 1000' and 500'agl in my plane? Where is the flattest clearest space, where are the wires and ditches? What are the consequences of being too short or overrunning? How would a strong wind affect the process?
 
I'm landing by chute in case of engine failure.

It doesn't matter much, but water is probably worst followed by trees. So I'd prefer to pull over:
Short, tree-lined field on uneven terrain,
followed by Minor highway,
followed by Major interstate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top