Engine out Interstate or Field

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,487
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Another video piper engine failure landing on a Interstate, so given the choice Interstate or Field to land off airport what is your pick.
 
Depends on a bunch of factors. For example, what are you flying? Tailwheel single? Pressurized piston twin? Turboprop TBM? Boeing? ;)
 
Not all fields are equal.
Also some interstates are packed and some are devoid of traffic.
It's certainly something that is assessed every (vmc) flight though.
 
Jmcmanna said:
I-29 in North Dakota or I-5 in San Diego? It depends.
Click to expand...
Not sure a open field down town San Diego is a option. Lets make the aircraft a Cessna 172 or Piper PA-28-140. Also landing on a Interstate not that many cars that would prevent a landing and or a field in a condition a safe landing could be made.
 
Last edited:
If there's not much traffic on the interstate, that would be my choice; the risk of damage to the average plane with small diameter landing gear wheels would be significantly greater landing in an open field.
 
It most certainly depends. I had just that choice, and chose the field over the NY Thruway. The field turned out to be a marsh with 5' tall grass, and the airplane cartwheeled with major damage (I walked away uninjured). But had I chosen the interstate, the airplane would probably still be flyable, or I might have collided with an 18 wheeler and been squished like a bug, or hurt somebody else. I still think I made the right decision.
 
Good landing Dana. And I agree with your choice. Hope the plane is repairable or replaceable.
 
Rice field or Soybean after this summer vs a interstate? I’d choose the interstate in a fixed gear.

Typically though I’d go with a field. But above is a good example to me that I’d go with the interstate.
 
I might be wrong but if you land on a interstate and cause cars behind you to crash you are at fault for that, and that might be expensive compared to landing in a field. If you land on the interstate you may have to have it taken apart and removed from the interstate, they may not let you take off even if it was running out of gas, landing in a field might have more options.
 
Last edited:
ARFlyer said:
We don’t have many ‘round these parts. So I’d assume wet or dry a cornfield would be fine?

State is mostly Rice, Soy, Wheat and a little corn.
Click to expand...

If you're trying to land in a cornfield you'd want to go parallel to the direction it was plowed. Also tall corn would get you stopped very quickly. I doubt there would be much usable in the airframe after a landing in tall corn.
 
Fields. They too, differ:

(I always thought a turf farm would be a good place, if you could avoid the implements and irrigation:

turffarm.jpg


A "field" near me:
wtxfield.jpg
 
Interstate or field...hmm... both have hazards especially here in MS. Every nice field has a power line running down the middle. But typically I think a field would likely be a better choice. But again depends on what is presented to me at that time. My DPE harped to never land on a road though.

And also if my engine dies the insurance company just bought it. Saving my plane to fly again would be the dead last thing I would think about. Life first plane last and if it is able to fly another day..bonus! Never understand why people to try save the plane.
 
Dana said:
It most certainly depends. I had just that choice, and chose the field over the NY Thruway. The field turned out to be a marsh with 5' tall grass, and the airplane cartwheeled with major damage (I walked away uninjured). But had I chosen the interstate, the airplane would probably still be flyable, or I might have collided with an 18 wheeler and been squished like a bug, or hurt somebody else. I still think I made the right decision.
Click to expand...
If nobody was injured and the insurance company paid off the aircraft then you made the right decision. Everything else is coulda-woulda-shoulda.
 
FormerHangie said:
If you're trying to land in a cornfield you'd want to go parallel to the direction it was plowed. Also tall corn would get you stopped very quickly. I doubt there would be much usable in the airframe after a landing in tall corn.
Click to expand...

Our flight school had a 152 land in a tall corn field once. Very little damage to the airplane and the pilots. It does stop you fast but the corn “gives”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Corn. (Hoping some farmers will come along with corrections.)

Landing on a corn field in early May, if it was not wet or otherwise too soft might be possible.

young corn.png

Mature corn (mid-summer) with 8' stalks and 1/3lb ears is going to beat up the plane but you'll probably live.

cornintassle.JPG

Drying corn; ie fall is very hard and still several feet tall.

drying corn.jpg

Corn stubble after harvest; not as clean or flat a field as you might think from the air.

cornstubble2.jpg

Biggest concern is flipping I'd think - and for the first and last 2 cases, that depends a lot on the tilling practices; how irregular the ground is.
 
Landing technique is also important. A true soft field attempt, minus the extra power is gonna do a lot better than letting your nosewheel hit early in a plowed field. One of the best reasons to stay proficient on your landings... and of course some airplanes are better than others. A T-tailed Arrow isn't going to be able to do the soft-field landing a Kitfox could.
 
Toll roads in South OC. Wide, somewhat lightly traveled, very few power lines.

I won't pay to drive on them, but they're wonderful emergency strips!! Almost had to use the 241 when the mechanical fuel pump failed several months back (fortunately, the engine runs nicely on just the boost pump).

7_mobiliy_ideas_vs_TollRoadSystem_020718_ZOOM_0.jpg
 
FormerHangie said:
If you're trying to land in a cornfield you'd want to go parallel to the direction it was plowed. Also tall corn would get you stopped very quickly. I doubt there would be much usable in the airframe after a landing in tall corn.
Click to expand...

I've dealt with aircraft that have been put into tall corn. Very little damage to the aircraft as long as the landing was done right. Here in Iowa we actually teach to go for corn versus soybeans. The bean plant is very stout and viney, and will snag your gear potentially sending you over. Corn makes for a nice cushion.
 
Some interesting observations on the overly broad question. And a nice session of Corn 101 :)

I know that I-680 in the Bay Area has been used for forced landings off of KCCR (Concord) numerous times.

It may be because we're tuned in to it more than non-aviators, but when we're in the car we always notice low planes. Seems that even the average distracted driver would notice a plane going ~80 mph and getting closer and closer to the ground. Landing at stall speed is still ~60 mph and should have enough non-powered taxi time to get to a side of the highway.

So. If you land on a highway, would you seek to "park" in the center median or on the right shoulder? For some highways the median may be preferable since it could allow more space for a repair and/or disassembly for shipment.

And if said median was wide enough, would you land on it or still opt for the pavement?
 
ARFlyer said:
We don’t have many ‘round these parts. So I’d assume wet or dry a cornfield would be fine?

State is mostly Rice, Soy, Wheat and a little corn.
Click to expand...

Whaaaaat? You never been to south AR!?!? You need to get south more........ we’ll.... um.... ok... theres nuthin there but corn, meth and rednecks so nevermind....


I’ll take a corn field over soy beans. More padding.
 
brien23 said:
I might be wrong but if you land on a interstate and cause cars behind you to crash you are at fault for that, and that might be expensive compared to landing in a field. If you land on the interstate you may have to have it taken apart and removed from the interstate, they may not let you take off even if it was running out of gas, landing in a field might have more options.
Click to expand...

Personally, when survival is at stake, crap like the above becomes irrelevant.

As others have said, I'd likely head for the Interstate, all the while looking for good options close to it. At the very least that would improve one's chances of the forced landing being seen, and put one closer to where rescue could get to you quickly.
 
Swampfox201 said:
Our flight school had a 152 land in a tall corn field once. Very little damage to the airplane and the pilots. It does stop you fast but the corn “gives”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I saw a local plane that landed in tall corn; the leading edge of both wings was hammered.
 
In my area of I-10 and I-20, there are long stretches of very lightly traveled service roads, (this is a one or two lane road paralleling the interstate; one-way or two-way sometimes on both sides) - might be a better idea than the busy interstate itself. (more obstacles however)
 
Field in my case would be a place that isn’t forested, so that’s either tundra or swamp. Roads have wires by them and often times across them. Hmmm.

Yep, it depends.
 
A guy landed a Cessna 150 on I-75 southbound in Taylor Mi (on my route home) during rush hour - just found a gap in traffic and merged. No muss, no fuss. Not many other options in the area.

On the other hand, I helped move a Navion down a nice quiet country two lane road from a not so hot so field to a private strip. Good thing the pilot elected to put it into the field and not on the road. Lots of signs, mailboxes, poles, thises and thatses to zig and zag around.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Not all fields are equal.
Also some interstates are packed and some are devoid of traffic.
It's certainly something that is assessed every (vmc) flight though.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

In the recent San Diego Piper video, they likely made the best call. Depending on where the engine failure occurred, there aren't a lot of open areas to put the plane down around Gillespie if you can't make the airport boundary. The interstate (if not rush hour) is actually pretty ideal as long as you are landing with the flow of traffic. It's not like trying to land on a beach full of people.

You just have to find the hole and observe the 2 second following distance….

In that particular example, it was a much better choice than putting it down in a neighborhood, city street or mountain side.
 
The one that always concerned me was departing from MYF to the west. If your engine quits on the climb out and its rush hour on the 163 or 805, you really don't have any options other than trying to put it on the side of the freeway.
 
Here in my part of AZ they seem to plow the furrows parallel to the short dimensions of the field. Perhaps they want to keep stray airplanes away ??
 
This is one of those "gotta be there before making the decision" times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top