Precautionary off-field landing

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
No. The video does the whole dramatic countdown on how long you have to live with the ever faster heartbeat and the camera jerking back and forth, now you have 20 seconds, the world is spinning faster...

All based on a bogus statistic.
Click to expand...
Not the video I posted. "That 178 second thing" was the baseline for the study, not the result of the study. The "dramatic countdown" video by itself is completely out of context. It's like showing doing a study where the control group was given placebos, and then producing a video about how placebos kill you without saying anything about the drug that's actually being tested.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Not the video I posted. "That 178 second thing" was the baseline for the study, not the result of the study. The "dramatic countdown" video by itself is completely out of context. It's like showing doing a study where the control group was given placebos, and then producing a video about how placebos kill you without saying anything about the drug that's actually being tested.
Click to expand...
FWIW, This is the original report.
 
DanWilkins said:
What kind of airplane?
Click to expand...
I like this question. . .you can walk away from a forced landing in a Starbucks drive-thru, in a 172; in a heavier, faster plane, not so much. So go low, stay visual, scoot for the airport. Forget the rules, they don't matter anymore - you can do a NASA report later.

I think you'll die in a fairly gruesome fashion soon after entering IMC. Certainly riskier than hitting something if you stay visual.
 
If I could fly lower and lower and maintain visibility, I would do that to a non controlled field and land. If I got caught in IMC I would call ATC, fess up, and get guided in. I do have a wing leveler which I would use. I would turn it off just briefly to make turns.

So, how much trouble would one get into with the FAA for being a dumb Arse?
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
County roads are a bad idea in general. Lots of stuff to hit.
If the private strips are mud/snow then so will the farm field. No advantage to the field.
For me, clouds are out on account of what I ain't got not gyros at all.
1) Slow down.
2) Head south / westish to hit the RR tracks - follow south then east to Peterson airport (at the intersection of the tracks / road.
3) If you get to the rail road crossing, you went too far - back track just a bit staying north of the tracks to avoid the towers.

Or, follow the powerline east to the tracks, south to Arthur.

Towers are not built in the middle of roads / railroads.

Airports are built next to roads.

Easy peasy.
Click to expand...

A long time ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth and young people didn't know much better. I knew this student pilot once who was on a lesson flying under the hood when the instructor said you can take the hood off you can't see much anyway. A heavy snow squall had come up and they could see the ground OK but not much else. So they did exactly as described flew north following a road until they hit the railroad tracks that ran parallel and within a 1/10th of a mile of the airport. Followed the tracks to the airport and landed no issue. Of course this was back when cell towers were not so prevalent but as stated towers are not built in the middle of a set of tracks or a road.

If I were in the stated situation at the beginning of the post I would hopefully have avoided the situation in the first place but given the circumstances I think I would do as @Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe suggests over putting it in a muddy snow covered field. Presumably there are fields closer to the airport as well in the event things got worse.
 
Last edited:
With two miles visibility and based on a little bit of chart knowledge, I'd stay just north of the power lines, descend to 1000', then fly 5 miles west to the Page airport and land. If I couldn't find it, I'd land in a field near a house. Page is just north of the road on the chart and power lines, so I probably have a decent chance of finding it.

To grade myself, I looked the airport up on Google maps..it would be somewhat hard to spot, it looks like a road. The only real clues are the small lake south of the road and the house/hangar where the airport is.

Once on the ground, I would call my CFI, confess to royally screwing up and ask if he could come get me and chew my butt on the ride home.

chart1.JPG

This is roughly what it looks like - estimated 3/4 mile away. This is at a point just north of the small lake and looking to the NW.
chart1.JPG
 
Is it just me, or are a lot of the responses about trying to get to an airport based on the assumption that the visibility and ceiling are going to stay at 800 and 2 miles? If it went from 2500/4 miles down to 800/2 miles, why should it stop now just because you want to go home? Suppose it gets to where you can just about follow the road. But if you're not seeing a decent landing option, and you have to turn around, now you have to leave the safety of the road and maybe hit a tower. Or the road could just turn away from you before you can follow it. I'm sure lots of people who fly into IMC think about it rationally and decide that they can go back if they need too. That's exactly what the guy in the video who crashed in Utah kept saying. He crashed doing exactly that (a 180 turn.)

I think most people feel that they wouldn't take off in these conditions. But they would choose to continue flying if they were already in the air, even though they don't have to. Why? OK, that's a bit rhetorical - I know most people gave their reasons, but I wonder if they've thought about it this way.

Also, how often do off-airport landings result in a serious accident, statistically?
 
WannFly said:
  1. land on the field below him - deal with the farmer later OR land on a county road and deal with the rest later
Click to expand...

If you land in a field right now you are going to flip. Farmer wont care much until he has standing crop you can damage (most damage ks going to be from the retrieval effort).

If you land on a county or township road, nobody will give you a problem. Heck some guy landed a Taylorcraft on I94 in a snow squall and pulled off onto an exit ramp. State patrol blocked the interstate and he took back off when visibility improved. FSDO comment at the time was that they rather have someone land on the road than having to go out to an accident scene.
 
bflynn said:
With two miles visibility and based on a little bit of chart knowledge, I'd stay just north of the power lines, descend to 1000', then fly 5 miles west to the Page airport and land. If I couldn't find it, I'd land in a field near a house. Page is just north of the road on the chart and power lines, so I probably have a decent chance of finding it.

To grade myself, I looked the airport up on Google maps..it would be somewhat hard to spot, it looks like a road. The only real clues are the small lake south of the road and the house/hangar where the airport is.

Once on the ground, I would call my CFI, confess to royally screwing up and ask if he could come get me and chew my butt on the ride home.

View attachment 61313

This is roughly what it looks like - estimated 3/4 mile away. This is at a point just north of the small lake and looking to the NW.
View attachment 61314
Click to expand...

actually most places look like this now, so good luck finding a non plowed air field

upload_2018-3-27_8-41-26.png

I agree with @weilke thought with all melting snow around here, a farmland might be a bad idea at time.
 
I think most VFR into IMC accidents occur not because the people are trying to get on the ground fast (as in, the nearest airport) but mainly occur because the pilot is trying to get to his originally planned destination. (Obviously not ALL VFR into IMC accidents, but most). In this scenario I think I would: a) slow the plane down, b) descend to 650 feet or lower, c) head to that 700' ceiling field and land.
 
injb said:
Is it just me, or are a lot of the responses about trying to get to an airport based on the assumption that the visibility and ceiling are going to stay at 800 and 2 miles? If it went from 2500/4 miles down to 800/2 miles, why should it stop now just because you want to go home? Suppose it gets to where you can just about follow the road. But if you're not seeing a decent landing option, and you have to turn around, now you have to leave the safety of the road and maybe hit a tower. Or the road could just turn away from you before you can follow it. I'm sure lots of people who fly into IMC think about it rationally and decide that they can go back if they need too. That's exactly what the guy in the video who crashed in Utah kept saying. He crashed doing exactly that (a 180 turn.)

I think most people feel that they wouldn't take off in these conditions. But they would choose to continue flying if they were already in the air, even though they don't have to. Why? OK, that's a bit rhetorical - I know most people gave their reasons, but I wonder if they've thought about it this way.

Also, how often do off-airport landings result in a serious accident, statistically?
Click to expand...

am with you, apart from handful most of said they will carry on based on the assumption that the WX will stay the same. may be they are instrument rated and this is just another day, but a low time VFR pilot, I think am gonna land and think about rest later
 
yup....been there, done it. It worked....and we lived....but it wasn't painless and the plane was a total loss.
 
If things are good enough to make it to an airport, fine. But I'd rather land than allow wx to force me down to where I might be hitting cell towers or their guy wires. Way better to land in mud than crash into a tower. Way better not to launch into such conditions in the first place. Indeed, with today's technology there is no excuse whatsoever to fly into such conditions. Weather forecasts are better than they've ever been, and for a thousand dollars you can have in cockpit weather.

Back in the day it would be pretty understandable if someone got so trapped. Forecasts sucked, lots of places didn't have dependable ones, and once you launched you had nothing but Flight Watch. Now its way different.
 
Last edited:
WannFly said:
actually most places look like this now, so good luck finding a non plowed air field
Click to expand...

So in addition to our wayward pilot getting in over his head in with clouds, he's doing it in sub freezing temperatures too. It's 29 in Fargo right now. I don't suppose there is any hope he is flying a FIKI aircraft or knows how to use it?

All the more reason to get down quickly. No idea what Page would look like in the snow, but at least it's a (private) runway. Maybe the owner was up flying yesterday and plowed it.
 
bflynn said:
So in addition to our wayward pilot getting in over his head in with clouds, he's doing it in sub freezing temperatures too. It's 29 in Fargo right now. I don't suppose there is any hope he is flying a FIKI aircraft or knows how to use it?

All the more reason to get down quickly. No idea what Page would look like in the snow, but at least it's a (private) runway. Maybe the owner was up flying yesterday and plowed it.
Click to expand...

ha ha ha ... nopes most private field that he can find is covered with snow and hidden (haven't checked Page though). nopes he is not flying FIKI, so yes, all the more reason not to wander around in rain/mist
 
WannFly said:
would you do a precautionary off field landing?
  • there are some private grass strips out there, but they are covered in mud/snow
What will a POA-er do?
Click to expand...

If the private fields are covered in mud & snow, the farm fields will be worse. Head for Richtsmeier or Arthur post haste, where the ground will be nicer, set her down and deal with the rest later.

Whatchu even flying in the pattern for, much less wanderin' away like that???
 
Hank S said:
If the private fields are covered in mud & snow, the farm fields will be worse. Head for Richtsmeier or Arthur post haste, where the ground will be nicer, set her down and deal with the rest later.

Whatchu even flying in the pattern for, much less wanderin' away like that???
Click to expand...
I'll say that it's good practice to go fly the pattern when the weather is iffy but within limits. As long as the pilot is proficient and lands before the weather goes below minimums (or above maximums) then the pilot gets experience operating near the aircraft, regulatory, and/or skill limits.
 
Haven't taken his course, however I have heard good things, and I'm sure the experience would change some people's views of landing "off field".

Well worth the investment

http://bush-air.com/usabase.htm
 
Clark1961 said:
I'll say that it's good practice to go fly the pattern when the weather is iffy but within limits. As long as the pilot is proficient and lands before the weather goes below minimums (or above maximums) then the pilot gets experience operating near the aircraft, regulatory, and/or skill limits.
Click to expand...

My personal mins for pattern in ovc 020, there are 3 runways I can land on if things get out of hand. If it’s 025 I will go either to D54 or KJKJ, anything further in the practice area 030. For XC alone, 060 min. With pax, clear and a mil.... until I get IR


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top