This pilot set down a single engine on the turnpike because of a low oil pressure reading. Do the benefits of a precautionary landing outweigh the risks of landing on the freeway? I am not a pilot, so this is a serious question.
http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/plane-lands-on-new-jersey-turnpike-during-rush-hour-no-injuries-reported/19339982
Major Lord
Up to the pilot. Depending on how low the oil pressure was, yes it absolutely outweghs the risks of landing on the freeway, assuming that no other reasonable alternatives such as a nearby airfield etc. existed. A precautionary landing is just that, it's a controlled landing that you make before really bad things happen. If he had waited until the engine seized up or started shedding parts, he would have had very few options, none of which would likely have been as good as landing on a wide paved surface safely with pilot, aircraft and bystanders all intact.
Can they repair the plane and take back off or does it have to be dissembled and removed?
Depends on the cause of the low oil pressure problem. If it's anything beyond a faulty oil pressure sending unit/gauge it will probably have to be trucked because it will probably require at least a partial teardown. It also depends on the local and state laws which may vary.
That's a hard call.
The guy in the hot seat is the one with the most to lose. Putting it down on a nice wide stretch of asphalt vice trying for an airport....which may or may not be in crowded urban area....
That is one of the reasons why we pay (when we pay them) pilots so much. Just about anyone can takeoff and land....but to make those sorts of decisions on the spot.
I spent yesterday removing aircraft parts from a crash site in the desert. The pilot lost power and attempted to put it down on an abandoned dirt strip. Didn't make there but luckily no one was injured. The pilot (with his wife) got the airplane slowed up really nice then touched down on the desert. The nose gear and left main touched down about ten feet after the right main touched down. The nose gear plowed into the soft dirt and folded under. About 30 feet later, the C-172 flipped over. Distance from first mark on the ground to the wreckage was 45 feet. Just super glad no one was injured. Bummer as I am a partner in the aircraft airplane parts.
A really nice turnpike would have probably resulted in no damage to the aircraft. Highways alway make a good alternate to a airfield and the FAA has no problem with pilots using them. If the aircraft can be made flyable again, there is also no problem with closing the highway for a takeoff. And a precautionary landing is always prefered to a crash.
Where did this happen near Cherry Hill?
Hard to believe not gliding distance to an airport.
Even if PHL, after all this was an emergency.
Safer than setting it down on a highway.
Maybe different if total engine failure.
???
Quote from: Short Field on February 01, 2010, 07:04:41 PM
The nose gear and left main touched down about ten feet after the right main touched down. The nose gear plowed into the soft dirt and folded under. About 30 feet later, the C-172 flipped over. Distance from first mark on the ground to the wreckage was 45 feet.
When you say he got it slowed down real nice.
In a C172, you can hold off the nose wheel for quite some time.
Not appear to be what happened here.
Notice that he said that the accident he worded on was in the desert .
Quote from: lordmonar on February 01, 2010, 06:28:33 PM
That's a hard call.
The guy in the hot seat is the one with the most to lose. Putting it down on a nice wide stretch of asphalt vice trying for an airport....which may or may not be in crowded urban area....
That is one of the reasons why we pay (when we pay them) pilots so much. Just about anyone can takeoff and land....but to make those sorts of decisions on the spot.
I always remember the -10 saying something in it (or was it the checklist?) about the difference between "land as soon as possible" and "land as soon as practicable."
I seem to recall "Land as soon as possible" was of the "Oh, that field over there looks soft.." whereas "land as soon as practicable" was "Well, look, I can see the airfield, lets land there right now.."
Well, I used to live in the area, and if they were flying at 1000'-1500' AGL doing traffic reporting, there's no real airport close within gliding range. The closest runways are 8-10 miles away.
He's really lucky, because that's one of the few places in SoJer where the 'Pike is three lanes wide. Much of it is only two lanes wide. On top of that, the highway is heavily lined with trees.
Correction - it was on a two lane segment. News video here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/35180560#35180560). The Google Earth imagery is apparently too olde (2004) to accurately locate the landing area.
Saw this on the news, including a view of the plane being towed away.
Quote from: DG on February 01, 2010, 07:11:31 PM
When you say he got it slowed down real nice.
In a C172, you can hold off the nose wheel for quite some time.
Not appear to be what happened here.
Looked like the right main gear stuck into the soft dirt, bringing down the other main and the nose gear. Truck tires were sinking about four inches into the soil in that area, plus there was the odd dirt mound with a sage brush growing on top of it. Pilot believed he was at 45 kts or less when it hit the ground. Given the 45 ft between touchdown and flip over and the fact the aircraft was intact with only a "slight bend" to the rudder and no fuel bladders being ruptured, I (and the other pilots with me) believed he was real slow. YMMV
Quote from: Short Field on February 02, 2010, 04:16:13 AM
Quote from: DG on February 01, 2010, 07:11:31 PM
When you say he got it slowed down real nice.
In a C172, you can hold off the nose wheel for quite some time.
Not appear to be what happened here.
Looked like the right main gear stuck into the soft dirt, bringing down the other main and the nose gear. Truck tires were sinking about four inches into the soil in that area, plus there was the odd dirt mound with a sage brush growing on top of it. Pilot believed he was at 45 kts or less when it hit the ground. Given the 45 ft between touchdown and flip over and the fact the aircraft was intact with only a "slight bend" to the rudder and no fuel bladders being ruptured, I (and the other pilots with me) believed he was real slow. YMMV
Interesting question:
(Academic at this point.)
And certainly with meaning no criticism of the pilot, none whatsoever.
Would more speed have been better, at touch down? And touch down only on the mains, and pulling the yoke into your gut, slowly and with finesse so as not to jump back up at all?
So to roll out and drop the nose wheel only when all ground movement had dissapated.
???
Quote from: Major Lord on February 01, 2010, 04:52:46 PM
This pilot set down a single engine on the turnpike because of a low oil pressure reading. Do the benefits of a precautionary landing outweigh the risks of landing on the freeway? I am not a pilot, so this is a serious question.
Boy, unless that road was almost totally empty, I think it would be pretty irresponsible for the pilot to try to save his own hide by putting those using the road at risk. Hard to believe that the NJ Turnpike was empty enough for this to be done without putting a whole lot of drivers in danger.
According to the news reports, it was just before rush hour.
If you look at a typical limited access highway, traffic tends to travel in clumps. It would be relatively easy to drop in just behind a clump, with enough room for the following clump to slow down when they see the airplane. It's a merge into traffic from above instead of from the side.
Well, he did obviously manage to do it in this case, but we're not talking about a piece of rural interstate here, but an interestate segment busy enough that they've got airborne traffic reporters flying over it. Perhaps there was an open spot big enough for him to land without causing other people to slam on their brakes to avoid hitting him.
Remember...a 1 filthy 2 can slow to under highway speed in a flare. He could have reasonably blended in too.
here is the atc comms:
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviation-audio-clips/cessna-touchdown-on-nj-turnpike/
Direct Download if your logged in :
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviation-audio-clips/cessna-touchdown-on-nj-turnpike/?action=dlattach;attach=3247
you must be registered with liveatc.net
to hear it ;)
One of the reasons that all federally funded highways are required to have at least one mile in every five be straight and level is so that aircraft can land or take off from them. (Lesson learned from WW II)
Quote from: Cecil DP on February 03, 2010, 04:35:06 PM
One of the reasons that all federally funded highways are required to have at least one mile in every five be straight and level is so that aircraft can land or take off from them. (Lesson learned from WW II)
Urban legend / myth
Quote from: DG on February 03, 2010, 05:21:44 PM
Quote from: Cecil DP on February 03, 2010, 04:35:06 PM
One of the reasons that all federally funded highways are required to have at least one mile in every five be straight and level is so that aircraft can land or take off from them. (Lesson learned from WW II)
Urban legend / myth
Correction, was true, now it is not required.
While it might be a lesson learned from WW2, it was implemented only in the 1950s, under Eisenhower's federal highway program to build the interstates.
And it makes perfect sense (of course, all these overpasses anymore kind of screw the plan, but hey...). Most two-lane rural highways have trees and powerlines right up to the edge of the road -- sure you could put down a small single-engine, but you get something with any kind of wingspan and that plan becomes null and void (who's seen U.S. Marshals?)
Yesterday, I talked with the guy who did the annual on this airplane, in September.
and...? He have anything to say?
Quote from: McLarty on February 05, 2010, 02:58:34 PM
and...? He have anything to say?
Let's just say that he is engaged in extensive conversations with his friends at the FSDO.
"I am from the Government, and I am here to help you."
Quote from: DG on February 05, 2010, 09:09:41 PM
Quote from: McLarty on February 05, 2010, 02:58:34 PM
and...? He have anything to say?
Let's just say that he is engaged in extensive conversations with his friends at the FSDO.
"I am from the Government, and I am here to help you."
Sounds like something like, say an oil filter, wasn't properly secured. Or something like that...
Quote from: DG on February 05, 2010, 09:09:41 PM
Let's just say that he is engaged in extensive conversations with his friends at the FSDO.
"I am from the Government, and I am here to help you."
Hah! Heh, okay.