If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
Question for you guys: I fly out of Troutdale, Oregon (KTTD) which is at the mouth of the Columbia River Gorge. Because of sheer cliffs, tunnels, things like that, if I had to make an emergency landing in a single engine aircraft, in some stretches it would be treacherous or impossible to land on the road. As a boater, however, I'm familiar with the river charts and know that much of it is only 2 to 4 feet deep. So if I knew, reasonably, that I could ditch very shallow water, would that be a viable emergency landing plan as opposed to a winding and potentially busy freeway with a 700' cliff on one side? Different in high wing verses low wing? -c |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
In article ,
"gatt" wrote: Question for you guys: I fly out of Troutdale, Oregon (KTTD) which is at the mouth of the Columbia River Gorge. Because of sheer cliffs, tunnels, things like that, if I had to make an emergency landing in a single engine aircraft, in some stretches it would be treacherous or impossible to land on the road. As a boater, however, I'm familiar with the river charts and know that much of it is only 2 to 4 feet deep. So if I knew, reasonably, that I could ditch very shallow water, would that be a viable emergency landing plan as opposed to a winding and potentially busy freeway with a 700' cliff on one side? Different in high wing verses low wing? High wing you may end up "floating" under water where with a low wing you'll be above the surface probably. I recommend that you take a course in aircraft survival that lets you do the "dilbert dunker" thing. Get some practical experience escaping from an aircraft in the water...it may save your life. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
Gatt
I know the area fairly well.... If you had an engine failure I'd sure opt for the upstream landing as near the shore as possible. The problem, as you probably know, is all the submerged pilings from docks, wharves, etc. And, the current is ferocious so I'd damned sure want to be close to the beach, such as it is. Now, if you could make it to the freeway or interstate? Its a crap shoot. I often wonder about the options and what I'd do but until it happens you can only speculate and try to play, "What if....." If you are doing that much, you are way ahead of the game and will be an interesting story on "News At 9" instead of a statistic with NTSB. Hope you never have to make that choice! Cheers and fly safe |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote opt for the upstream landing Why upstream? Seems to me that it would be better to land with the waves and current. Less deceleration, and all. -- Jim in NC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
Jim
Think of ground speed? Whats gonna happen when you finally settle to a stop and the current takes over? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message Jim Think of ground speed? Whats gonna happen when you finally settle to a stop and the current takes over? Interesting stuff. In the area I'm talking about the water is very shallow (2'-4') and there's almost no current. There IS the ever-present possibility of 10-50mph wind. (Different story in the channel, but I wouldn't land there.) -c |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message oups.com... Jim Think of ground speed? Whats gonna happen when you finally settle to a stop and the current takes over? Within about 5 seconds of stopping in the water, you will be going the same relative ground speed, (down stream) no matter which way you land. A few knots, of drifting current speed, hitting a sudden stop on land is not going to hurt very much. If you are talking about decelerating from 60 knots, landing with the current of 5 knots means you are only touching down at 55 knots. Landing against the current means you are touching down at 65 knots. That 10 knots sounds significant, to me. This is all saying that you are not going to hit any land while you are still slowing down, which is the only way I can figure your point means anything. If that is it, I'll be trying really hard not to hit any land until I am stopped. What am I missing, that someone else far smarter than me has already figured out? Id doesn't make sense to me. All in all, wind speed and direction would be the most important factor, I would think. -- Jim in NC |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
You will probably flip over. If the doors are closed you wont be able
to open them until the plane fills with water. I hope you have shoulder harnesses. Land downstream if possible. This will minimize speed over the water. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
"Morgans" wrote in message
... Within about 5 seconds of stopping in the water, you will be going the same relative ground speed, (down stream) no matter which way you land. A few knots, of drifting current speed, hitting a sudden stop on land is not going to hurt very much. If you are talking about decelerating from 60 knots, landing with the current of 5 knots means you are only touching down at 55 knots. Landing against the current means you are touching down at 65 knots. That 10 knots sounds significant, to me. It is, and in many cases the current is more than 5 knots, making an even bigger difference. Your analysis is correct, and barring any other issues, downstream is better than upstream. Of course, the chance of a messy landing is significant in any case. But you want to give yourself the least chance of a messy landing, and lowest water speed is the way to go for that (ie, downstream). The situation in this particular instance may warrant a different decision, of course. Since there's a particular location from which the original poster is departing, and since the river has a specific configuration both upstream and downstream from that location, and since there may be a more desirable ditching area upstream than downstream, it's entirely possible that in that situation specifically, upstream is preferable. Pete |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Emergency landing theoretical
Jim
An important factor is the wind in the gorge nearly always is blowing east to west and it happens to be with the water current too. Not uncommon for the winds to be blowing there in excess of 50 knots. If I recall, the max winds recorded there are well in excess of 100 mph! I landed seaplanes a number of times on rivers, mainly the Mississippi which in many ways reminds me of the Columbia. I've lived on the shores of both and often thought of the way I'd make an emergency landing to the water. Includes rivers, lakes, and ocean. Since each situation is so different its nearly impossible to say it should be done one way or other. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
plane crashed on takeoff attempt after emergency landing | Toks Desalu | Piloting | 33 | November 1st 05 03:31 PM |
Tamed by the Tailwheel | [email protected] | Piloting | 84 | January 18th 05 04:08 PM |
"bush flying" in the suburbs? | [email protected] | Home Built | 85 | December 28th 04 11:04 PM |
"bush flying" in the suburbs? | [email protected] | Piloting | 88 | December 28th 04 11:04 PM |
Landout Laws | Charles Petersen | Soaring | 90 | February 26th 04 02:09 AM |