Precautionary Landings and Diversions

D

DCR

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
51
Display Name
Display name:
rudy
Recently came across a Canadian article describing a precautionary landing exercise. The exercise involves a 90 degree entree followed by a low pass before flying a normal circuit to and landing. This is apparently part of pilot certification north of the border (and some googling reveals it's a common maneuver also taught in New Zealand).

Does anyone practice this maneuver? Is this a common scenario on checkrides in the USA?

From the article:
1735852592278.png
 
I've been flying for a long time and have not heard of this as a specific maneuver.

If you have a non-engine-failure type issue that is creating the need for a precautionary landing at an off-field location, it seems to make sense.

Not really sure why this would require the need to demonstrate it for certification as it is just a series of standard procedures. I guess as a means to imprint the process in your mind would kind of make sense.

At least it would get you thinking about the appropriate considerations for an unanticipated off-field landing for precautionary reasons.
 
Precautionary landings get very little attention in the U.S. (too little, IMO) and I don’t see anything in the ACS that would directly lead to that discussion. Obviously the maneuver isn’t in the ACS.
 
DCR said:
Recently came across a Canadian article describing a precautionary landing exercise. The exercise involves a 90 degree entree followed by a low pass before flying a normal circuit to and landing. This is apparently part of pilot certification north of the border (and some googling reveals it's a common maneuver also taught in New Zealand).

Does anyone practice this maneuver? Is this a common scenario on checkrides in the USA?

From the article:
View attachment 136754
Click to expand...

My guess for why this isn't a thing in the US, is that for a large part of the US you are never more than 25 miles from the nearest airfield. While off airport landings happen, most are caused by engine failures or other emergencies that wouldn't allow the time for a precautionary off airport landing.
 
The only time I’ve done that is during the time of year that critters are likely to be wandering on the runway. Deer are the critters I worry about. I don’t know if you’d call that precautionary or not.
 
Last edited:
midwestpa24 said:
My guess for why this isn't a thing in the US, is that for a large part of the US you are never more than 25 miles from the nearest airfield. While off airport landings happen, most are caused by engine failures or other emergencies that wouldn't allow the time for a precautionary off airport landing.
Click to expand...
I’d be interested to know how it’s presented in Canadian training…land someplace, wait out the weather, and continue on?
 
Thanks for the responses! I forgot to mention it's also in the EPs section of the POH for the 172N.

I agree it makes more sense up north (or maybe some parts out west) where you might not always have a nice strip to divert to.
 
DCR said:
Thanks for the responses! I forgot to mention it's also in the EPs section of the POH for the 172N.

I agree it makes more sense up north (or maybe some parts out west) where you might not always have a nice strip to divert to.
Click to expand...
Given the number of VFR into IMC examples we see/hear about, I think it makes just as much sense here in the U.S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
Lots of scenarios. IMC, rough engine, icing, sick passengers, the actual reasons are not important to the lesson. The point is to see if you can recall certain procedures and follow them while "under pressure" and also still think about what you are doing. A lot of what happens up here is setup to test your thinking. I get a lot of random questions during my PPL training that made me wonder why are you asking a question like that and it was all to force you think and not just answer from memory.

For one of my pre exam practice what my CFI did was say it's icing, do a a precautionary please. As soon as I put in the flaps cause that's the normal "sick passenger" or other lesser emergencies full precautionary flow, he said "you just died". That point he was making was I could have stalled my tail and nosed in at low altitude. It also works in the exam like a build up of a series of questions like "you noticed your oil temp is rising" and the idea is you should go through your checks, and if the answers from the examiner for result of your checks indicates you should do a precautionary, you then do the precautionary. Remembering of course that different issues means different flow to the precautionary. If say you think your engine's going to die you don't do the the multiple pass, you just go for the landing.

BTW where I trained everyone did spins. And I did it like 3 different times because it took so darn long for Transport Canada to issue my medical he wanted me to redo spin before solo, and then again when he sent me off for my first solo XC. There's lots of belt and braces in how I was trained which was good but you know most people never had to experience the real deal hopefully.

P.S the precautionary flow is also the recommended flow for going into a private or unfamiliar aerodrome as a way to ensure that there's nothing like unexpected obstacles etc that could get you.
 
Last edited:
I don't think I would want to do a precautionary for a sick passenger. Rather fly to an airport where medical assistance is available. If you have a sick passenger and land on a field in the middle of nowhere, emergency services will take a lot longer to reach you.
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
I don't think I would want to do a precautionary for a sick passenger. Rather fly to an airport where medical assistance is available. If you have a sick passenger and land on a field in the middle of nowhere, emergency services will take a lot longer to reach you.
Click to expand...
The sick passenger is just an excuse for the exercise. And remember flow includes selecting a suitable location (remember proximity to civilization is one of the checks). Precautionary doesn't have to be off airport. In the oil temp rising scenario there are cases where you can determine it is a false reading and divert/precautionary into a aerodrome with services.
 
SebIp said:
The sick passenger is just an excuse for the exercise. And remember flow includes selecting a suitable location (remember proximity to civilization is one of the checks). Precautionary doesn't have to be off airport. In the oil temp rising scenario there are cases where you can determine it is a false reading and divert/precautionary into a aerodrome with services.
Click to expand...

My CFI's weren't that creative. It was always weather getting bad lol.
 
The maneuver is actually just a circuit and landing with two passes before one high and one low. It’s nothing you don’t know how to do by the time they teach it. The point really is to check your decision making.
 
LOL in training you don't actually do the landing. Training waiver lets you go down below 500 but it's worded in such a way that leaves a lot for Transport Canada to be the judge jury and executioner. So typically you only go under 500 AGL with your instructor on board. When I was sent solo to practice precautionary or forced I was always told to abort before 500 AGL. This is all over rural farm areas. There are also the striped paint pattern farms can use over noise sensitive buildings for live stocks and in those cases you stay away. In my examination she had me setup for a precautionary then we noticed the cattle in a pen by the end of the field I picked, so we side stepped it, no special paint job though on that barn.

That said still a lot of instances of noise complaints with 2 schools in the area. At times you feel like all you do is radio calls. One time I made a radio call to say I was doing practice runs at a mechanic's grass field so I was switching frequency to his field's, and someone came super close to me anyways on my circuits.
 
SebIp said:
The maneuver is actually just a circuit and landing with two passes before one high and one low. It’s nothing you don’t know how to do by the time they teach it. The point really is to check your decision making.
Click to expand...
By telling you to do a precautionary landing for something that probably wouldn’t warrant a precautionary landing?
 
The STOL guys frequently make multiple passes to evaluate their off airport landing selection. Seems like good medicine, eh?
 
MauleSkinner said:
By telling you to do a precautionary landing for something that probably wouldn’t warrant a precautionary landing?
Click to expand...
You also should never get into a spin but lots of people die from it. It’s a requirement to demonstrate in your flight test the precautionary. Transport Canada still insists on paper charts for training. Which can be argued for days on end but it is what it is. We also have a separate night rating you need to get after your PPL to fly at night.

Precautionary was also introduced for me anyways at a time when all the landings I did was at home field, which is towered. My instructor took that opportunity to toss in radio calls for uncontrolled fields. And of course we did it on a day when the forecast was updated for llws while I was buzzing some farmers field with lots of trees. Fun time and was maybe the day I put away the anxiety about bumps.

The reasons starts off as a laundry list of whatever. And then it got more specific when you are near your examination. Just like landings were genetic full flaps, and take offs were all normal ones, until you get further on and now you add in short, soft and over obstacles. They don’t over emphasize it to be honest and are more on you for the forced approach.

I get the sense also some people just wanted to talk because this isn’t what your training involves as well
 
SebIp said:
I get the sense also some people just wanted to talk because this isn’t what your training involves as well
Click to expand...

Sorry bout all the hate - I was really just curious haha!

SebIp said:
Training waiver lets you go down below 500 but it's worded in such a way that leaves a lot for Transport Canada to be the judge jury and executioner.
Click to expand...

This is very interesting. I don't know anything about Canada aviaion regs but I think the only time you can go below 500 AGL in the USA is for an actual emergency (91.3 and 91.119). However, I think I have heard of CFIs and DPEs asking students to demonstrate a forced landing approach below 500 AGL. Anyone know if this is legal in the states?
 
DCR said:
This is very interesting. I don't know anything about Canada aviaion regs but I think the only time you can go below 500 AGL in the USA is for an actual emergency (91.3 and 91.119). However, I think I have heard of CFIs and DPEs asking students to demonstrate a forced landing approach below 500 AGL. Anyone know if this is legal in the states?
Click to expand...
On my commercial checkride, I had to go down to maybe 20 AGL before he let me go around. :eek:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
On my commercial checkride, I had to go down to maybe 20 AGL before he let me go around. :eek:
Click to expand...

That sounds like a sick game of "chicken" haha. Wonder what they would say if you aborted saying you are PIC and don't feel this is safe to demonstrate.

I know there is a story of a CFI who regularly took students down very low for practice and ended up crashing doing said practice... can't seem to locate it right now.
 
DCR said:
That sounds like a sick game of "chicken" haha. Wonder what they would say if you aborted saying you are PIC and don't feel this is safe to demonstrate.
Click to expand...
Naah, DPE got me good...

I was doing the 8s on pylons so I was already low, and when he pulled the engine on me at about 600 AGL I was directly over the center of a circular cornfield (with irrigation) that was surrounded by trees. I couldn't glide past the trees, so I had to set up for a landing by flying out away from the center of the circle, doing a 180 back into the circle and setting up to land. Basically, the impossible turn except starting from 600 AGL over the middle of the field.

So, I flew straight, made the 180, and once the field wasn't blocked by my tail or my wing I started looking at it closer, only to realize there was also a power line about 1/3 of the way across the field. So I tightened up the turn a little, aimed for the closest part of the power line, and once I cleared it he said "All right, you finally convinced me that we're going to live. Go ahead and go around."

He was an older guy even then, if he were still alive today he'd be in his 90s. After the ride was over and we were debriefing, he talked about how we're not very good at engine outs because our engines are so reliable. Then he told me about *his* examiner, who had literally taken a checkride with one of the Wright brothers and flew air mail. He did Omaha to Des Moines every day and averaged two complete engine failures PER TRIP. He'd glide into a field, whip out the toolbox, fix the engine, and take back off and wait for it to quit again. :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
DCR said:
This is very interesting. I don't know anything about Canada aviaion regs but I think the only time you can go below 500 AGL in the USA is for an actual emergency (91.3 and 91.119). However, I think I have heard of CFIs and DPEs asking students to demonstrate a forced landing approach below 500 AGL. Anyone know if this is legal in the states?
Click to expand...
Read 91.119 more carefully…
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
Click to expand...
Over open water or “sparsely populated areas” you may descend below 500 feet as long as you maintain 500 feet from persons, vehicles, vessels, or structures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
DCR said:
t I think the only time you can go below 500 AGL in the USA is for an actual emergency (91.3 and 91.119).
Click to expand...

You can go as low as you want over open water or sparsely populated areas, as long as you remain at least 500 feet from any person, structure, vehicle, or vessel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
texasclouds said:
The STOL guys frequently make multiple passes to evaluate their off airport landing selection. Seems like good medicine, eh?
Click to expand...
If you land at some farmers field in my training area, chances are good you’d get a call.

Although it seems further away from big cities I hear and seen on YouTube people do that without issues.
DCR said:
Sorry bout all the hate - I was really just curious haha!



This is very interesting. I don't know anything about Canada aviaion regs but I think the only time you can go below 500 AGL in the USA is for an actual emergency (91.3 and 91.119). However, I think I have heard of CFIs and DPEs asking students to demonstrate a forced landing approach below 500 AGL. Anyone know if this is legal in the states?
Click to expand...
It's the same non build up area 500 feet from anyone or anything. The practice area are mostly farms but you stay 500 above unless you have your instructor basically. I was not sure how the actual waiver worked since half way through I stop flying the school planes and my instructor of cause came along with me cause I paid him the full school rate in cash. Good thing we never had to find out if the waiver was with the school or in general.

There's also the 1000 above the highest within 2000 feet unless you are landing. Something to remember if anyone transit over places like Toronto. You are not allowed to circle CN Tower! Although I heard ATC let people do that during COVID shutdown period oh well I missed it.
 
DCR said:
That sounds like a sick game of "chicken" haha. Wonder what they would say if you aborted saying you are PIC and don't feel this is safe to demonstrate.

I know there is a story of a CFI who regularly took students down very low for practice and ended up crashing doing said practice... can't seem to locate it right now.
Click to expand...
It's my opinion that if you're going to go around at 500 AGL, you might as well just go around at 1000 or 2000 AGL for all the good it does on learning how to estimate and adjust your touchdown point and glide ratio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
flyingcheesehead said:
On my commercial checkride, I had to go down to maybe 20 AGL before he let me go around. :eek:
Click to expand...
I’d fail before I did that. Sorry, but that is bad ADM and I’m not going to do it, even for an examiner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCR
Salty said:
I’d fail before I did that. Sorry, but that is bad ADM and I’m not going to do it, even for an examiner.
Click to expand...
My real failure was in choosing pylons that put me in that position in the first place. They were just by far the best ones in the area, and I wasn't paying attention to where the maneuver would put me. I think he did that to drive that point home. But if the engine had failed, well, we'd be alive in a cornfield. So, not that bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top