Landing on a fwy- with or against traffic?

T

Tracey

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
825
Display Name
Display name:
tracey
I was driving on 95 today, noting how it's so nice and wide and smooth and I was thinking about emergency landings. If an emergency landing had to be made on a freeway, would you land with or against traffic?

If this is common knowledge already, I apologize for posting it. But in any event, I'm curious what everyone's thoughts are.

(Edited to take out my conclusion since it was so backwards). :nonod:
 
Last edited:
I'd land with traffic.

Highway speeds are high enough (in most places and most times) to allow a plane to "merge" with traffic. If the plane & car collide, the speed differential is small enough to minimize damage to the people. The people behind the plane will likely step on the brakes when the plane enters their field of view.

Landing against the traffic- most people don't look up and with the closing speed, there isn't a lot of time to react.
 
Well I'm glad I posted! This is good info and obviously, different from my conclusion. But your logic makes sense. Thanks.
 
I would land with traffic. Knowing how I drive (and text) it just takes that one split second to not see an airplane headed to me to make a bad day for many.
 
DavidWhite said:
What Jack said
Click to expand...

+1.............

Closure rates are in your favor... And as you fly low over same direction traffic hopefully there is a pilot in one of the cars/trucks you pass and they will block other traffic so you can clear the "active". :yesnod::wink2:.

Ben.
 
A few years ago a guy put a 150 down on I-75 on my route home during rush hour - he basically just found a gap and merged.

(I saw that traffic was stopped and didn't get on the freeway so I missed seeing it on the shoulder.)
 
I would pick the empty field next to the road.

Tracey said:
Well I'm glad I posted! This is good info and obviously, different from my conclusion. But your logic makes sense. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Just curious. Why what would the reasons be to land against traffic?
 
fgcason said:
I would pick the empty field next to the road.



Just curious. Why what would the reasons be to land against traffic?
Click to expand...
I meant if you had to land on the fwy, (no fields or what have you).

I thought if you landed with traffic, they wouldn't see you as easily and wouldn't get out of the way, if you landed against, they'd at least see you and move. Wrong way to think about it.
 
Tracey said:
I meant if you had to land on the fwy, (no fields or what have you).

I thought if you landed with traffic, they wouldn't see you as easily and wouldn't get out of the way, if you landed against, they'd at least see you and move. Wrong way to think about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah but if they hit you going with traffic, they hit you with what 5-15mph speed difference? As opposed to 140-150? Even the smallest modern car would turn a GA aircraft into scraps of tinfoil
 
Carrying this thought on a bit further, would you dive for airspeed as you approached over the freeway, so you could glide above traffic for some distance in the hope that those behind you would see and slow down?

I agree 100% though, going against traffic would just be asinine. Would you drive against traffic on the freeway? Same thing, risk of a head-on is just too large.

I would also pick an empty field next to the road, however in many cases we aren't afforded such luxuries.
 
eMKay said:
lol, cubs don't have carb heat?
Click to expand...

They do, but they can ice up in cruise. Hell I've had my 172 ice up in cruise (it didnt stop) but I had about a 200RPM drop.
 
My husband made an emergency landing once and had to land on a highway..1963 Normal landing with traffic. Pulled off onto the median. No problems
 
This guy

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/04/14/MNGGV64RA21.DTL

landed his Turbo Arrow on I-680, with the traffic. This is a freeway that tends to get congested. All didn't end well, as a little girl got her leg cut off when the plane collided with a minivan, but that was the only injury. Had he tried to land against traffic, things would have been a whole lot worse.

Personally, I would have risked a full stall landing in the hillside vs. doing what he did but I don't know what was going on in his mind, he probably saw an opening he didn't have.
 
fgcason said:
I would pick the empty field next to the road.



Just curious. Why what would the reasons be to land against traffic?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't, because having a head-on collision with an inattentive driver would ruin your day.

Traffic would probably be moving 70-80 mph, headed towards you, and you'd be moving 60 (?) mph moving towards them. At those speeds, it takes a surprising amount of space (and time) for an oncoming driver to see you and take action. More if s/he's texting, disciplining a child, applying makeup, adjusting the radio, talking on the phone, or eating a hamburger.

Of course, if it was rush hour, the lanes in your direction might be packed and your only option might be against traffic.
 
Last edited:
eMKay said:
Yeah but if they hit you going with traffic, they hit you with what 5-15mph speed difference? As opposed to 140-150? Even the smallest modern car would turn a GA aircraft into scraps of tinfoil
Click to expand...
That's why I said "wrong way to think about it." I realized my error and corrected it. Thanks.
 
MSPAviator said:
Does that plane have carb heat?


I would land with the flow of traffic.
Click to expand...
That's one of the planes I fly a lot, and yes, it does have carb heat...

The pilot, whom I know, was solo, so I suspect we'll never know the whole story. He may be 100% right for all I know and he's a "good stick."

I think a lot of the decision ends up being situation-dependent. If there is NO other decent spot, I'd go for the highway and if there is traffic in both lanes, I'd land with traffic, but any road landing is probably not my first choice if there's a decent field instead.

Oh, and the FAA guys here tried (unsuccessfully) to pin him with careless and reckless operation for landing on the highway... and I was told that one FAA guy said that he should have put it in the trees rather than endanger a member of the public.

Ryan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top