Why does a lot of pilots fear flying over water?

[Dr. O]

My wife is nervous going across the Great Lakes while I am nervous going across the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.
I have vastly more fear of a forest of 80 foot pine trees than I do of a wave.

 

[bullwinkle]

Ditto, over water I can bring a liferaft to mitigate the risk, how do I lessen the risk over the mountains?

Ballistic parachute. Even then you'd have to pick your spot. I have a BRS and would choose mountains over water, but I'd choose the deployment area carefully if I could.

 

[Ted]

One typical point for twins is that over water is often preferable to over mountains. Over mountains, many piston twins (naturally aspirated) don't have the service ceiling to clear mountain tops in case of an engine failure. Meanwhile, over water all you technically need is 1 MSL.

 

[Sac Arrow]

I wouldn't.

You can survive forced landings even on mountainsides if done correctly -- there was even a case of a student pilot doing just that a year or so ago after getting lost in the mountains and running out of performance.

If you ditch in even moderately cold water without a survival suit that you are wearing at all times, you aren't likely to survive. I find it amazing that people think they will be able to pull a raft out of cargo with an airplane upside down and sinking. Don't bother taking it unless it is ON YOU. Otherwise, it's going down with the plane. A PFD is a much better choice than a raft…but only if you're wearing it. And you need a survival suit any time useful consciousness is shorter than expected rescue time.

Ditchings in San Francisco Bay (which happen every once in a while due to the low Class B floor) are too often fatal, due to hypothermia. That's less than 5 miles wide.

That doesn't mean we don't do it. It's hard to approach any of the bayside airports without flying over the Bay from some directions. But it does mean we get nervous. Fly over the bay with as much speed and as much altitude as you can. And pick a narrow spot. I like to start crossings at Train Bridge and make for Cooley Landing at PAO, above 2000 and at best forward speed until the far shore is within gliding distance. Class B floor is 2500, and there ain't no clearances over the Bay unless you're on approach to KSFO, or very high.

I think as a general statement that's true but I have flown over stretches of the Desolation Wilderness where a forced landing would have been completely unsurvivable. I'm talking near vertical granite pinnacles approaching 12K with no flat land whatsoever at the bases for a 50 NM +/- stretch. One of those never again moments. I've always used the passes since.

 

[FloridaPilot]

There is a guy that crossed the Atlantic in a Mooney:

Ice cold water, icebergs, mountains, cold temps...Simply awesome!

 

[FloridaPilot]

At one time I did some FAA Safety Seminars about this topic, with research from the FAA, it was found that around 96% survival rate was in the water during a CONTROLLED water landing, (not a straight in crash). On land it was about 85% during a CONTROLLED landing, but of the persons surviving the controlled landing on land, 42% died from being burned to death.

I always carry the inflatable life preservers behind each seat in my aircraft and a raft, even when flying over land.

I am sure the stats have changed now but that stat was from 8 years ago, and no difference between fixed gear or retract gear, nor between single or twin. In the two hundred cases that were studied, only one airplane flipped during a water landing.

Give me water over trees anytime, just me...

Maybe it's because we are Floridians? but I agree with you. I have my Scuba Diving cert and I would prefer water over trees. You can die in both places but I guess it's a matter of "Pick your poison". If I lived somewhere else in the US I might pick the trees because of the water temps. I can still get hypothermia here but if it was a planned trip over water I would carry a life raft, vest..etc. Expect the unexpected I guess!

Not afraid of water, I think it's actually beautiful from up high!

 

[FloridaPilot]

Been over the gulf a long the west coast of FL, and over the Great Lakes several times. Yawn.

When its your time, its your time.

 

[MAKG1]

I think as a general statement that's true but I have flown over stretches of the Desolation Wilderness where a forced landing would have been completely unsurvivable. I'm talking near vertical granite pinnacles approaching 12K with no flat land whatsoever at the bases for a 50 NM +/- stretch. One of those never again moments. I've always used the passes since.

Certainly. When you cross big mountains, you should pick a route that allows you some options. Desolation Wilderness isn't that far from two major highways (in Echo Pass and Donner Pass).

Though the highest peak there is under 10,000, not over 12,000. Did you mean somewhere else? There are certainly worse places in the Sierra, like John Muir Wilderness and Ansel Adams wilderness (on either side of Mammoth Pass), both of which have 13,000+ peaks and no roads west of the crest.

KOAK direct KLAS is a pretty bad idea as well, unless you have a turbocharger.

My point is just that there are a lot more options in mountains than people presume.

 

[Dav8or]

I won't cross any significant body of water without being IFR or at least getting flight following.

I used to fly a lot of IFR years ago and in the Bay Area, some of the IFR routing takes you way out over the Pacific Ocean, well beyond glide distance. I find IFR a distinct disadvantage in that you can not choose the safest route for your single engine plane. The entire IFR system is predicated on you having multiple engines IMO.

Flight following is a good idea, but of course there is only so much a controller can do for you in an emergency. The controller can get the S&R equipment headed in your general direction, but like Henning said, the best bet is to have a 406 PLB and a 406 ELT in the plane. Before I even call up ATC, I would push the button on my ELT.

 

[Scott@KTYR]

I was one of those guys until last week. We just returned from our trip to the Bahamas. After the first 2.5 hour flight from Ft. Pierce to Long Island BS I felt good about flying over water. Raft behind the seat, life jacket on, flying high enough to glide close to land if engine out. It is No Big Deal!!! We are already planning our next trip back.

 

[Dav8or]

There is a guy that crossed the Atlantic in a Mooney:

Ice cold water, icebergs, mountains, cold temps...Simply awesome!

As long as everything goes well. Otherwise... simply statistic. The ocean floors are littered with airplanes.

 

[Dav8or]

You can survive forced landings even on mountainsides if done correctly -- there was even a case of a student pilot doing just that a year or so ago after getting lost in the mountains and running out of performance.

Yes, but how does one practice mountainside landings so they can do it correctly? That's putting a lot of faith into something you have to get perfect on the first time you have ever tried it.

 

[Scott@KTYR]

I enjoyed the statement my instructor said in a Mountain Flying class.

If you are going down in an area were there is nothing but trees, try to hit the Light Green trees because they are not as hard as the Dark green.

 

[Fearless Tower]

I have vastly more fear of a forest of 80 foot pine trees than I do of a wave.

Why? A forest is not necessarily any better or worse than a water landing IF you enter in slow, controlled flight. Yes, a tree can ruin your day if you hit it wrong, but so can a wave.

If I had to choose between the two, I might lean toward the water, but if wind/sea state and water temp were of any concern, I wouldn't hesitate to land in the trees.

 

[azure]

I used to fly a lot of IFR years ago and in the Bay Area, some of the IFR routing takes you way out over the Pacific Ocean, well beyond glide distance. I find IFR a distinct disadvantage in that you can not choose the safest route for your single engine plane. The entire IFR system is predicated on you having multiple engines IMO.

A glance at the airway system over Lake Erie reveals that there is probably a lot of truth to that assertion. Nevertheless, it's not always a showstopper if you're willing to negotiate. On my recent trip out east, my expected route clearance in FF would have taken me to BUF via DKK, straight down the center of Lake Erie for over 100 nm. I called up Detroit Approach and told them I was single engine and really didn't want to spend that much time over open water. They asked me if I wanted to stay in US airspace or if I was okay with going over Canada. I answered that Canada was fine. 15 minutes later I was told to expect direct BUF after takeoff. MUCH simpler and it was easy peasy. (They even gave me a squawk code to use from the ground, WITHOUT actually giving me my clearance and a void time, the first time that's ever happened to me.)

I'm sure that doesn't always work, and I've been given reroutes over the Lake (as well as to the west) when arriving from the south due to jet traffic coming into DTW. Sometimes there is no way to avoid the pucker factor. Other times it's as simple as being willing to negotiate. I think it's always worth a try, the worst they can say is no.

 

[azure]

One typical point for twins is that over water is often preferable to over mountains. Over mountains, many piston twins (naturally aspirated) don't have the service ceiling to clear mountain tops in case of an engine failure. Meanwhile, over water all you technically need is 1 MSL.

Errr... that won't work over the Great Lakes.

 

[MAKG1]

Yes, but how does one practice mountainside landings so they can do it correctly? That's putting a lot of faith into something you have to get perfect on the first time you have ever tried it.

Land on sloped runways. They exist.

Practice precision in your landings every time. Not a lot of difference aiming between trees as hitting the center line.

Most of us don't practice ditching, either.

Or even landing off pavement.

 

[Bonchie]

I think first instinct is water is better then trees. It was when I first climbed in a single engine piston.

Since then I've been taught that land is almost always preferable, especially in the Cherokee's I fly.

But given the choice of a thick 100 foot pine forest or a mile out in a cold lake, I'm not sure there's a right answer. Sometimes both choices suck and will likely kill you.

 

[jordane93]

I used to fly a lot of IFR years ago and in the Bay Area, some of the IFR routing takes you way out over the Pacific Ocean, well beyond glide distance. I find IFR a distinct disadvantage in that you can not choose the safest route for your single engine plane. The entire IFR system is predicated on you having multiple engines IMO.

Controllers have no problems giving you re routes. I've flown to Nantucket dozens of times and have always gotten the same route no matter what I filed. The route basically brings me up to Connecticut, over to Block Island then towards some random fixes southwest of it in the Atlantic, and finally to ACK. Whenever I talk to Providence Approach I'll always ask for a re route due to single engine and not wanting to stay over water that long. They have never denied me

 

[MAKG1]

I think first instinct is water is better then trees. It was when I first climbed in a single engine piston.

Since then I've been taught that land is almost always preferable, especially in the Cherokee's I fly.

But given the choice of a thick 100 foot pine forest or a mile out in a cold lake, I'm not sure there's a right answer. Sometimes both choices suck and will likely kill you.

There's a right answer to that. The pine forest has a finite probability of survival.

There is no good answer, but one is indeed better.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Certainly. When you cross big mountains, you should pick a route that allows you some options. Desolation Wilderness isn't that far from two major highways (in Echo Pass and Donner Pass).

Though the highest peak there is under 10,000, not over 12,000. Did you mean somewhere else? There are certainly worse places in the Sierra, like John Muir Wilderness and Ansel Adams wilderness (on either side of Mammoth Pass), both of which have 13,000+ peaks and no roads west of the crest.

KOAK direct KLAS is a pretty bad idea as well, unless you have a turbocharger.

My point is just that there are a lot more options in mountains than people presume.

I'm talking about the area South of Tahoe closer to Mammoth pass.

 

[bahama flier]

That's the way I fly, wearing my PFD, and someone in the plane is designated with the raft, and with a lot of instructions.... don't pull the cord until out of the plane....

 

[Timmer]

I don't remember where or when, but I read an article that looked at the NTSB record of land versus water landings. Forced water landings have a much higher surviving rate during the crash than do land landings. This makes sense as there aren't the power lines, buildings, rocks, and trees to ruin your day.

The other side of the coin, however, is that there is a much higher post-crash fatality rate in water landings. Drowning, unable to get out of the plane, or being knocked unconscious is common, as is drowning or hypothermia once out of the plane.

Overall, I think they were relatively even with other conditions making a larger determining factor of survival, like landing in shallow water on a shoreline is pretty good, near people is good. Landing on dense woods or in urban city not so much.

The take-away was that while landing on water has its own set of problems, it is not a guaranteed death sentence and may be the better option depending on the land environment.

 

[MAKG1]

If you go down in San Diego Bay, your odds of survival are not good. If you go down on the other side of Silver Strand, they are absolutely terrible.

Even Los Angeles has more good emergency landing sites than you might think. You need it survivable, not damage free. You can overrun with a lot less probability of injury than just hitting something.

For some reason, people seem not to think about landing on ridgetops. In the Coast Ranges and Peninsulars, that's often a decent option. Even in the cities.

 

[Jay Honeck]

As someone who now flies over water literally on every flight, I've got a somewhat unusual perspective.

When we first moved to the island, we were uncomfortable and tended to hug the land. We flew with a full set of life preservers, and made plans for what to do in the event of an engine failure at any point.

With our RV, carrying life preservers in an accessible spot is not possible. We have talked about wearing them, but the discomfort level is high, and our exposure to the warm waters of the Gulf is limited. For example, when landing at our airport, if you do a long straight-in, you are over water, at relatively low altitude, for about four miles. This is out of gliding distance, but our exposure is brief -- less than three minutes.

We figure our odds of the engine continuing to develop power for that length of time are pretty good.

Of greater concern is losing an engine on takeoff. Our options are limited to dunes, smooth beach full of tourists, or water. Our plan is to aim for the beach, but turn out into the water just offshore to avoid hitting someone. Hopefully we will never need to implement this plan.

Another concern is egress. With a sliding canopy that is not approved for opening in flight, and can't be locked open anyway, our best hope is that the canopy frame doesn't deform to the extent that we cannot escape.

Everything in GA is a calculated risk.

 

[MSPAviator]

The Coast Guard announced that the lake is ice free as of last Tuesday.

They're on the wane and could be mostly gone but there could be the odd one out there. I was out in DLH in April and I was at ASX on Memorial Day.

http://www.wisconsinoutdoorfun.com/...022/DNR-Lake-Superior-icebergs-still-floating

http://blogs.mprnews.org/updraft/2014/06/june-icebergs-still-roaming-lake-superior/

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/

 

[Henning]

Many people assume a ditching in warmer weather just means swimming for a while until you are rescued. Actually, hypothermia is almost as much a danger as it is in colder waters. Time to unconsciousness can still be quite brief.

BTW, a little foot note to add to that chart, that is provided that you have an approved PFD that keeps your head above water, otherwise you will run out of energy somewhere between dexterity and consciousness unless you know some water survival skills. (Water survival has nothing to do with swimming)

In really cold water without a PFD, there is a good chance you will cramp, go into shock, and drown right off the bat. I've been told by people who got pulled out that it was very peaceful.

 

[Henning]

As someone who now flies over water literally on every flight, I've got a somewhat unusual perspective.

When we first moved to the island, we were uncomfortable and tended to hug the land. We flew with a full set of life preservers, and made plans for what to do in the event of an engine failure at any point.

With our RV, carrying life preservers in an accessible spot is not possible. We have talked about wearing them, but the discomfort level is high, and our exposure to the warm waters of the Gulf is limited. For example, when landing at our airport, if you do a long straight-in, you are over water, at relatively low altitude, for about four miles. This is out of gliding distance, but our exposure is brief -- less than three minutes.

We figure our odds of the engine continuing to develop power for that length of time are pretty good.

Of greater concern is losing an engine on takeoff. Our options are limited to dunes, smooth beach full of tourists, or water. Our plan is to aim for the beach, but turn out into the water just offshore to avoid hitting someone. Hopefully we will never need to implement this plan.

Another concern is egress. With a sliding canopy that is not approved for opening in flight, and can't be locked open anyway, our best hope is that the canopy frame doesn't deform to the extent that we cannot escape.

Everything in GA is a calculated risk.

Have you looked at the Mustang inflatable vests? You want the ones without the hydrostatic release. They are perfectly comfortable and in-obtrusive to wear.

I'm having trouble picturing when I would be making a long straight in to Mustang Island. When is that required?

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Have you looked at the Mustang inflatable vests? You want the ones without the hydrostatic release. They are perfectly comfortable and in-obtrusive to wear.

I've been known to wear my SOSpenders for a couple days at a time (including sleeping). No problem with comfort. And, I would think that you want the manual trigger - I think the auto is required for USCG approval, but you wouldn't want it to go off before you get out of yea olde airplane.

 

[FloridaPilot]

As long as everything goes well. Otherwise... simply statistic. The ocean floors are littered with airplanes.

IMO GA is dangerous but I love it, if I wanted safe then I would've taken up knitting.

 

[Timmer]

Hypothermia in warm water:

I learned about this long ago when I got my SCUBA license. I went with my family to Cozumel, nice and warm 80+ degree water. On my first group dive out there, I had a dive master who, once getting off the boat, immediately jumped in the small tub of jacuzzi-temperature water. She was freezing!

I asked why she did that -- we were diving in temps over 80 degrees. She said, yes, but when you spend half the day in 80-degree water, your body gets chilled quickly. Any water below your body temp will eventually get you. She spent so long under water that even after an hour dive, her body was shivering.

 

[redtail]

I've been known to wear my SOSpenders for a couple days at a time (including sleeping). No problem with comfort. And, I would think that you want the manual trigger - I think the auto is required for USCG approval, but you wouldn't want it to go off before you get out of yea olde airplane.

I wear mine anytime I fly the Hudson/East river scenic route. They're so comfortable, I forget that I have it on.

 

[redtail]

Everything in GA is a calculated risk.

"Wilbur readies his Model A to fly at the Hudson-Fulton Celebration in New York City in 1909. The canoe strapped between the landing skids was to serve as a pontoon should Wilbur have been forced down in the water"

 

[Jim Logajan]

I don't remember where or when, but I read an article that looked at the NTSB record of land versus water landings. Forced water landings have a much higher surviving rate during the crash than do land landings. This makes sense as there aren't the power lines, buildings, rocks, and trees to ruin your day.

The other side of the coin, however, is that there is a much higher post-crash fatality rate in water landings. Drowning, unable to get out of the plane, or being knocked unconscious is common, as is drowning or hypothermia once out of the plane.

I've posted a link to this article (Ditching Myths Torpedoed by Paul Bertorelli) in the past but worth reposting:

http://www.equipped.com/ditchingmyths.htm

Some selected quotes from the conclusion:

Because ditching accident details are wanting, drawing incontrovertible conclusions from a review of accidents is tricky business. Still, one thing is certain: Landing an airplane in the water under control is a highly survivable experience that appears to take very little skill, experience, or preparation. Nine out of ten pilots who attempt it succeed, even when ditching in the ocean close to shore.
​

...

How to avoid going into the water in the first place? Don't run out of gas and/or make sure the gas you have isn't fouled with water or other debris. At least a third of all ditchings are caused by fuel exhaustion, mismanagement, or contamination. These are, quite simply, absolutely avoidable.
Mechanical failures are listed as the cause in nearly as many ditchings--about 25 percent--as is fuel exhaustion, but we're skeptical of making too much of this. Many ditched aircraft aren't recovered, so investigators have to take the pilot's word for what happened. It's not that we don't trust pilots, but absent an examination of the air filled tanks, few are willing to admit running an airplane out of gas.
​

...

Last, if you take no other wisdom away from this examination of ditchings, know this: All things considered, when faced with landing on the water or impacting trees, rocks, or other rough surfaces, the water is more likely to be survivable. Where this might come into play is during an emergency landing where the choice may be between a crowdedbeachor a rough wooded area and an expanse of open water. This should be no contest; the water wins.

​

 

[Fearless Tower]

I've posted a link to this article (Ditching Myths Torpedoed by Paul Bertorelli) in the past but worth reposting:

http://www.equipped.com/ditchingmyths.htm

Overall very good article by Paul busting ditching myths.

The one problem I have with it, however, is that he introduces this claim in his conclusion:

[/I]

Last, if you take no other wisdom away from this examination of ditchings, know this: All things considered, when faced with landing on the water or impacting trees, rocks, or other rough surfaces, the water is more likely to be survivable. Where this might come into play is during an emergency landing where the choice may be between a crowdedbeachor a rough wooded area and an expanse of open water. This should be no contest; the water wins.

​

But fails to provide ANY data to back that conclusion up. He doesn't address data for other types of forced landings.

A forest doesn't have to be any more menacing than water. Like Paul mentions with a water landing, the key to survival is maintaining control of the aircraft.....or as Hoover put it "fly the thing as far into the crash as possible"

Just like ditching, if you are under control and at a minimum controllable airspeed you will dissipate a great deal of energy entering the treetops before impacting the real hard stuff. There was a video not too long ago of a failed high DA takeoff in a Stinson within the last couple years that provides a good illustration of this. I also have a friend who survived (with minimal scratches) a engine failure in a Stearman over a dense forest. Maintain control and let the airplane band the trees take as much energy as possible and you greatly increase your odds of survival.

Note: I am NOT saying ditchings are death sentences or anything of the sort and I would hardly rule out ditching. Just that forests do not have to be as big of a boogeyman as some folks seem to make them out to be.

 

[Henning]

One typical point for twins is that over water is often preferable to over mountains. Over mountains, many piston twins (naturally aspirated) don't have the service ceiling to clear mountain tops in case of an engine failure. Meanwhile, over water all you technically need is 1 MSL.

And at 1'-15' MSL, you also get a drag reduction from ground effect so you can stretch your fuel on one engine some better.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Have you looked at the Mustang inflatable vests? You want the ones without the hydrostatic release. They are perfectly comfortable and in-obtrusive to wear.

I'm having trouble picturing when I would be making a long straight in to Mustang Island. When is that required?

Those are on our short list of things to look for at OSH.

It's never required to make a long straight in to Rwy 12. Coming in from the Northwest, however, it often makes the most sense.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3...

 

[Henning]

Those are on our short list of things to look for at OSH.

It's never required to make a long straight in to Rwy 12. Coming in from the Northwest, however, it often makes the most sense.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3...

Plus they make you look like you're wearing a parachute.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

In really cold water without a PFD, there is a good chance you will cramp, go into shock, and drown right off the bat. I've been told by people who got pulled out that it was very peaceful.

Which part was peaceful? The cramping, the shock or the drowning?? None of those sound peaceful to me for some reason

 

[Henning]

Which part was peaceful? The cramping, the shock or the drowning?? None of those sound peaceful to me for some reason

The mind is an incredible thing, everything we feel, everything we think, it is all a construct of the mind. When one is facing death at nose rubbing distance, it is peaceful, even if one is thinking and working at 15 times normal speed doing what you need to make it work out, or if you detach from that particular reality as a viewer from the outside, it is completely calm and peaceful, more peaceful than you have ever been.