Why does a lot of pilots fear flying over water?

[FloridaPilot]

I noticed from previous forums how a lot of pilots fear flying over water. Why is that? Is it because your calculations have to be accurate? Or maybe the fear of an engine out? Inquiring minds want to know!


Thank You,

 

[Fearless Tower]

The concern is usually in regards to flying a single engine over water -if you lose the engine, you are obviously going down. Depending on the sea state (and pilot technique) a ditching may or may not be survivable and depending on the time of year, even if you ditch, you might not survive long enough to be rescued if hypothermia is a concern.

Like anything in flying, it comes down to irrigating risk and deciding his much risk you are willing to accept.

 

[FloridaPilot]

The concern is usually in regards to flying a single engine over water -if you lose the engine, you are obviously going down. Depending on the sea state (and pilot technique) a ditching may or may not be survivable and depending on the time of year, even if you ditch, you might not survive long enough to be rescued if hypothermia is a concern.

Like anything in flying, it comes down to irrigating risk and deciding his much risk you are willing to accept.

Thanks for the post!

Wouldn't it help to bring an emergency kit with you on the trip if you know you are flying over water, (With an inflatable raft just in case). So if you survive you can be found?

 

[Fearless Tower]

Thanks for the post!

Wouldn't it help to bring an emergency kit with you on the trip if you know you are flying over water, (With an inflatable raft just in case). So if you survive you can be found?

A lot of people do, but not required unless you are flying for hire.

 

[Ted]

Basically, you have no place to land but water if something really bad happens. The normal concern is an engine failure, but it's worth noting that you can have plenty of other failures. Electrical issues, fires, heater issues, magneto failures... lots of things you might want to land for that over water, you can't. There is extra risk. What it really comes down to is risk management and risk tolerance.

 

[EdFred]

Because they are a bunch of weenies that jump at the sight of their own shadow.

 

[mnewb1]

I have no fear of flying over water


I have a definite fear of stopping flying while over water

 

[Velocity173]

I don't have a fear of flying over water, just water that has sharks in it. Ever read the book Unbroken? Scary.

My friends flys HH-60s in the CG and I'm always telling him he's nuts to be flying in that kind of wx out over the water. For him, he actually feels most comfortable in bad wx over water. Nothing to hit.

 

[Geico266]

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.

 

[flyingriki]

Lack of options, duh. You wanna roll the dice, go for it. Planes fall out of the sky for many reasons regularly. It may never happen to you but if it does.......

 

[jordane93]

I prefer land over water in a single engine.

 

[bullwinkle]

I think it's because most pilots can't breathe water.

 

[flyingriki]

If you want some perspective from professional test pilots....Mike Melville says when he and Dick flew their EZs around the world they flew over water at night because they were too scared to see it......!

I take my advice from the best, not so much from forums.....

 

[azure]

Lack of options, duh. You wanna roll the dice, go for it. Planes fall out of the sky for many reasons regularly. It may never happen to you but if it does.......

I roll the dice every time I lift off from home base. Engine failure on takeoff, between 30 and 1000 AGL, I have no good options. My philosophy on over water is that I will do it, just not all the time, and when I do, I try to get as high as I practicably can, even if I can't eliminate altogether the time I'll spend out of glide distance of the shore.

Now that I expect to be flying a few times between here and Vermont, I'm actually a little more concerned about flying over the Adirondacks than over, say, Lake Michigan. It's a remote wilderness about twice as wide as LM, with few airports, no chance in a light single of getting high enough to be able to glide to safety at all times, and no benign terrain to put down in. I'll still do it, but I really don't want to make a habit of it.

 

[Clip4]

Given the choice of mountains or water, I suppose I would take water.

 

[MachFly]

So imagine, your flying a single engine piston aircraft over water a few miles east of Maine, beyond glide range, in December, and then you lose an engine. For how long can you swim before you get hypothermia and drown? And do you realize how hard it will be for the S&R guys to find you? Now imagine if this whole thing happens at night...

 

[flyingriki]

I roll the dice every time I lift off from home base. Engine failure on takeoff, between 30 and 1000 AGL, I have no good options. My philosophy on over water is that I will do it, just not all the time, and when I do, I try to get as high as I practicably can, even if I can't eliminate altogether the time I'll spend out of glide distance of the shore.

Now that I expect to be flying a few times between here and Vermont, I'm actually a little more concerned about flying over the Adirondacks than over, say, Lake Michigan. It's a remote wilderness about twice as wide as LM, with few airports, no chance in a light single of getting high enough to be able to glide to safety at all times, and no benign terrain to put down in. I'll still do it, but I really don't want to make a habit of it.

I call that "pucker time" and I don't enjoy the very few minutes I spend in that envelope when I do and it's very rarely and it's just a very few minutes, not long passages - EVER. Some have different comfort levels. I don't respect those that do this with passengers. Putting, usually unknowing, people's live at risk when they don't realize it is just criminal. There have been plenty of accidents over the years where unknowing passengers croaked because the pilot didn't think something was important enough to worry about.....or let them in on.

 

[MSPAviator]

I fly over Lake Superior fairly regularly, but I always hug the shoreline and never stray out of gliding distance.

Boats are few and that water will kill you. There are still icebergs on the lake right now.

 

[JHW]

I noticed from previous forums how a lot of pilots fear flying over water. Why is that? Is it because your calculations have to be accurate? Or maybe the fear of an engine out? Inquiring minds want to know!


Thank You,

Find a place to take the dunk&roll class if you are interested, it will be eye opening. The first time i did it, i got disoriented and the diver had to save me. And that was in well-lit clean water.

Later I watched 4 people ditch a SE cessna. It was a textbook-perfect ditching that people on web boards talk about as if it would be easy - the plane stayed upright and floated. Two of them never got out, the other 2 we watched them struggle and drown as we circled overhead.

So yes I fear water, the same as I fear poisonous snakes and high voltage lines. I'll avoid it if at all possible. When we ferried planes from florida to south africa, there was no avoiding open water. However when we take the kids from peoria to machinac island the straight line runs right up the middle of lake michigan. That is easily avoided, we go around.

 

[ateamer]

For me, it's because much of the California coast offers few decent places to land (mountains, cliffs with narrow beaches at the base) and the Pacific is cold - 55 degrees - and I'm not too much of a swimmer.

 

[3393RP]

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.

 

[ja_user]

I think it's because most pilots can't breathe water.

You Win

 

[Silvaire]

It's pretty basic, after a successful forced landing on either land or water you can only stand on one but what may be more interesting is, given a choice of the water or the trees, you might be irresistibly drawn to the water despite it very likely not being the best choice.

In the end, if you are going to fly an airplane with the requirement that you must always have a suitable area to land within gliding distance well, you may as well just drive.

 

[Henning]

I noticed from previous forums how a lot of pilots fear flying over water. Why is that? Is it because your calculations have to be accurate? Or maybe the fear of an engine out? Inquiring minds want to know!


Thank You,

Because most people won't survive in the water for very long.

 

[Henning]

It's pretty basic, after a successful forced landing on either land or water you can only stand on one but what may be more interesting is, given a choice of the water or the trees, you might be irresistibly drawn to the water despite it very likely not being the best choice.

In the end, if you are going to fly an airplane with the requirement that you must always have a suitable area to land within gliding distance well, you may as well just drive.

Given a choice between water and trees, unless the water is rough and the trees are up a wave beaten coastline, I would likely ditch in the water next to the trees.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Given the choice of mountains or water, I suppose I would take water.

Ditto, over water I can bring a liferaft to mitigate the risk, how do I lessen the risk over the mountains? At least over water I don't have to worry about terrain height, and the ride is generally smoother than over mountains. But given the choice, following the shoreline seems to be the best option.

 

[vdehart]

I've scoured the NTSB database on this topic for a while now. Surprisingly, most of the forced landings on water are non-fatal as the pilot generally makes the choice of gliding as close as possible to shore or near a boat that can effect rescue. I would choose the water over a dicey landing on rugged terrain any day.

Crossing to Catalina from Long Beach will most certainly put you out of gliding distance from land unless you've climbed very high. Catalina provides absolutely no suitable locations for forced landings besides the airport and a very small isthmus surrounded by mountainous terrain. The mainland has more abundant options including a large beach line and airports if they could be made.

 

[Henning]

Ditto, over water I can bring a liferaft to mitigate the risk, how do I lessen the risk over the mountains? At least over water I don't have to worry about terrain height, and the ride is generally smoother than over mountains. But given the choice, following the shoreline seems to be the best option.

You mitigate mountain risk by flying Day VFR. Most mountains drop off steeper than the glide slope of our planes, even a Cherokee 6. Upwind ridges you approach at a 45 so you can make a downhill turn in 90° either way. Rare is the occasion in the mountains when you can see to the end of your glide range and can't glide to someplace survivable in our typical GA planes if we are comfortable and competent with the bottom end of our energy envelope. Not saying it'll be a landing spot, just someplace to keep your deceleration below 25g. People often focus on a 'place to land', that's not necessary, anyplace that allows for prolonged deceleration is good if you're going slow enough.

The wildcard is things intruding in the cockpit like large tree branches. There is a hedge against this though. In Ag flying they teach you to fly under the wires rather than climb for them. The key is that once you spot sky (or extended horizon against rising terrain) under the wire, you are good to go and NEVER LOOK AT THE WIRE AGAIN! Just maintain your spacing off the deck and you will go under. This comes from a little rule in human ergonomics, "where the eyes go, the body will follow." and by extension so will the machine the body is operating. Holds true in motorcycles as well when avoiding debris on the road, "Never look at the debris, look at the path through it." When you are putting a plane in, always keep your focus on where you want to be, not what you want to avoid. If you focus on what you want to avoid, you will hit it.

 

[Henning]

I've scoured the NTSB database on this topic for a while now. Surprisingly, most of the forced landings on water are non-fatal as the pilot generally makes the choice of gliding as close as possible to shore or near a boat that can effect rescue. I would choose the water over a dicey landing on rugged terrain any day.

Crossing to Catalina from Long Beach will most certainly put you out of gliding distance from land unless you've climbed very high. Catalina provides absolutely no suitable locations for forced landings besides the airport and a very small isthmus surrounded by mountainous terrain. The mainland has more abundant options including a large beach line and airports if they could be made.

If you are flying to Catalina during open airport hours for non residents, you need not climb high, just place yourself somewhere between Long Beach Gate and Angels Gate before you turn for Catalina. I used to do it at 1500' under the layer and there were always boats within gliding range even in crappy weather in winter. Along that path you will be within gliding distance of some vessel that will pick you up. The island itself has a myriad of survivable crash sites, and even some pretty good landing stretches on the Crest and Wrigley Ranch roads. If you are good the Isthmus is also landable. Heck, you can even ditch in the reservoir on top of a hill! If you are looking and seeing nothing, you need to modify the way you see things. Don't look for landing spots, look for things and places that absorb energy.

This is why I say people should be extremely comfortable and practiced with the bottom of the energy envelope. The slower you are going in, the exponentially greater the chances of survival are in ANY situation. There are times that means more than others.

 

[flyingron]

I won't cross any significant body of water without being IFR or at least getting flight following. But I don't go over the middle of Lake Michigan or way off shore on the coasts at all (don't have the equipment).

 

[Bill]

I roll the dice every time I lift off from home base. Engine failure on takeoff, between 30 and 1000 AGL, I have no good options.

Yeah, I get to eat bark if I lose it on the way out.

 

[Henning]

I won't cross any significant body of water without being IFR or at least getting flight following. But I don't go over the middle of Lake Michigan or way off shore on the coasts at all (don't have the equipment).

You're better off with a 406 G/PLB than FF or IFR. Remember a while back the guy that went into one Great Lake while talking to ATC, and ATC sent the rescue to the wrong lake? The 406 system is the ONLY dedicated SAR system that will locate and deliver your coordinates to a dedicated world wide SAR system within minutes, assigning one person case responsibility from beginning to conclusion, with the ability to contact any SAR facility and direct them; and it does it in minutes.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

I fly over Lake Superior fairly regularly, but I always hug the shoreline and never stray out of gliding distance.

Boats are few and that water will kill you. There are still icebergs on the lake right now.

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


I trust my Rotax, but I don't trust it more than I have to and tend to avoid long over water flights. But some over water is unavoidable when your airplane is based on an island. I don't carry a raft due to very limited load capacity, but I have worn inflatable life vests when I expect to be over water for a significant time - but mostly I try to just minimize the time out of range of land.

 

[Alexb2000]

I've flown across the gulf of mexico single engine. I love over water, you can plan for it. I have PFD's, survival kit, and life raft at a minimum. Over real cold water I would also have immersion suits. I wouldn't do it in some clapped out rental though.

 

[RoscoeT]

it comes down to irrigating risk.

Haha...Freudian.

 

[bahama flier]

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...

 

[Ted]

I've flown across the gulf of mexico single engine. I love over water, you can plan for it. I have PFD's, survival kit, and life raft at a minimum. Over real cold water I would also have immersion suits. I wouldn't do it in some clapped out rental though.

I think this is the biggest point. There is a lot of planning you can do for over water. My typical planning these days involves going via Key West instead of New Orleans since you're never very far from land (relatively). I'm also always flying a twin that's got a good history, trust, and know the maintenance on.

I did fly the 310 on that route (Key West - Cozumel - Belize) with engines that had about 10 hours on them as I departed Key West. Some people would say that was nuts. On the other hand, they were done by Zephyr Aircraft Engines and I had two. The failure I had on that flight ended up being the Aspen.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Haha...Freudian.

I didn't even notice that. Stoopid iPhone!

 

[Sac Arrow]

Heck, you can even ditch in the reservoir on top of a hill!

I'm sure the locals would be thrilled with that decision.

 

[MAKG1]

Given the choice of mountains or water, I suppose I would take water.

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.