C150 crash on Santa Monica beach - 24/12/22

[plugga]

https://gulfnews.com/world/americas/video-plane-crash-lands-on-california-beach-1-dead-1.92869728

 

US accident, but potentially of wider interest, given the scenario.  Sad outcome for the passenger, not clear whether shoulder straps fitted or worn, but from a distance it certainly looked survivable, although I guess a 95yo neck and/or skull may be a little more prone to damage.

 

This caught my attention because a very experienced mate and I were low level over the beach in his RV and he idly asked what my plan was if it went quiet up front.  He was a bit taken aback when I pointed to smooth water behind backline. My reasoning was that unless an obviously smooth, hard and clearish beach presented itself (unlikely, the beaches in this area are notoriously soft), I would be far more comfortable getting out of even an inverted aircraft in deeper water and swimming for it, than battling a tip up canopy in the shallows or on a deserted beach.  YMMV

Edited December 27, 2022 by plugga

[Student Pilot]

No such thing as a gentle turn over in water, you will be most likely incapacitated when the windscreen caves in. Bit hard to egress when your unconscious. 

[facthunter]

Non retract Cessna High wings usually invert.  Water is a hard object when you hit it straight on.  Nev

[plugga]

7 hours ago, Student Pilot said:

No such thing as a gentle turn over in water, you will be most likely incapacitated when the windscreen caves in. Bit hard to egress when your unconscious. 

😄 There is pretty extensive research to suggest otherwise; somewhere approaching 90% of pax and pilots in light aircraft successfully egress with minimal injury after ditching.  I think I'll stick with that in place of an off the cuff opinion thanks.

[Student Pilot]

Plugga, where is this research? Does it include all configurations of aircraft? What percentage of high wing ditchings result in fatalities? Does it include an airliner full of pax ditching in the Hudson? My comments might be off the cuff but come with a lifetime of being around aircraft and discussing this very subject with all sorts of EXPERIENCED pilots including pilots who fly rough country for a living. Feel free to correct my grammar and spelling if you feel the need.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Student Pilot

[IBob]

Student Pilot, here ya go:
https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/features/the-myths-of-ditching/

[IBob]

And a good segment from Paul Bertorelli:

 

[facthunter]

I wouldn't consider that article to be Paul's greatest effort and I like most of  his work.   Water is not the worst landing option . Others like Sharp rocks and heavily timbered slopes  are far worse, of course.   The majority of ditchings of Large planes involve break up of the plane in quite a dramatic  and violent way with big destructive forces involved.. Not many exited a downed  turboprop in Lake Victoria lately although  the Plane was intact.  Nev

[facthunter]

My above response is to the first article..  Both by Paul.   Nev

[IBob]

2 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I wouldn't consider that article to be Paul's greatest effort and I like most of  his work.   Water is not the worst landing option . Others like Sharp rocks and heavily timbered slopes  are far worse, of course.   The majority of ditchings of Large planes involve break up of the plane in quite a dramatic  and violent way with big destructive forces involved.. Not many exited a downed  turboprop in Lake Victoria lately although  the Plane was intact.  Nev

Maybe so, Nev. But for those of us flying light aircraft, and sometimes over water, I would say it gives valuable insight.

[facthunter]

 If you lose control  and hit water hard it won't be much different from a rock cliff. for effect. Paul seems to infer that whatever you do won't make a lot of difference. May is not a word I like to use around aeroplane behaviour. Gear dangling has to be a big issue. It has a fairly large moment from the CofG.. Of course it's NOT a "WE are all gonna die" situation but it's not just another landing either.  There's a lot you can do to make it a better outcome than  not having any realistic idea of what to expect.  Nev

[IBob]

Well, Nev, if you have insights not touched on in the thread so far, could you please share them?

[facthunter]

I have done some already but it's not my job to tell people all things. It's to have them seek facts for themselves. "Never stop Learning" is my avatar.  Nev.

[IBob]

Right, well, my view is this:
When it comes to ditching there is a fair bit of theory and speculation, but not a lot of what one could call hard data.
By digging back into what data from actual events he could find, and extracting some stats, I think that Bertorelli has helped shed some real light on the subject.

 

[facthunter]

He's a journalist as a job and as I've already said I like most of what he's had to say, but that point has to be remembered. . He's putting a certain message across  in that article which is  not actually telling you much that will help you perform better. Nev

[Student Pilot]

I will leave it to the experts......

[IBob]

1 hour ago, Student Pilot said:

I will leave it to the experts......

Me too, Student Pilot......)

[plugga]

Thanks for putting up the link, IBob - somewhat more persuasive than untested old wives tales.  As with most of his work, Paul is pulling together the threads, pointing in a direction and providing the benefit of his experience and research, not providing a definitive instructional treatise.  Still a useful read.

 

For those lacking a functional google app, here's another with several further links embedded.  It is a little dated in regard to epirb and plbs, but the aircraft and underlying message remain the same.

http://www.equipped.com/aopa-ditch-rebut.htm

 

Now Student Pilot, I'm not sure why you found it necessary to make comments about correcting grammar, nor indeed why you feel the need to sink the barb about leaving this to the experts.  Every one of us who aviates over or near water may face the dilemma one day and have to do the best we can.  And no, this has nothing to do with the Hudson ditching, airline pilots have entire training departments to tell them what to do in that event.  You may have noticed that I referred to light aircraft. I'm sure you are a perfectly nice chap face to face and have plenty if wisdom to share, however, do not expect dangerous old wives' tales to go unchallenged.

Edited December 28, 2022 by plugga

[facthunter]

That rebut isn't personal .  MUCH.  ha Ha. Obviously those blokes hate each other's guts from wayback.. Yes ditching is a Piece of cake when it's well know that seaplanes cannot land in the open sea (a Walrus excepted). Read PJTaylors book. Dangling wheel wont tip you over?? Try a  damp patch in a field with about a foot of grass at near lift off speed.or depth of eater on the runway. Even heavy braking on a tailwheel can produce a tip over. Try putting your hand over the side in a boat at  any real rate of knots.   Put a wing float into the water and see how quick she turns  and throws the weight on the other side. Nev

[IBob]

Nev, nobody here at any point has suggested that ditching is a piece of cake.

However, stirring a big pot full of stale theories, adding a few airliners and dishing up the results in a doom-laden fashion does nothing to help- anyone.

 

Did you miss the recently posted Savannah accidental ditching?

High wing, fixed undercarriage, didn't flip. Could have but didn't.
However the doors (which cannot be opened safely inflight) were held shut by water pressure until the fuselage filled. They then opened.
I found that description of actual events useful.

[facthunter]

You have represented what I'm saying dishonestly. Clearly you don't want facts. I've been around long enough to be aware of a few and you can't defy Physics. Your second line  is a disgrace. 

   The Savannah could probably land at no forward speed in a mild wind so why could it be considered  representative? Nev

[IBob]

Nev, this is bizzare. As a person living on a pair of islands with about 25minutes water between, I take a real and ongoing interest in this stuff. And I fly a Savannah , so I am doubly interested in how that might behave in a ditching. What I am not so much interested in is Walruses or airliners in Tanzania.

I certainly made no claim that my own position was 'representative'.
As for facts, I'm not sure what your problem is with the statistics that Bertorelli dug up, but I personally am far happier going with those than some notion of 'physics.
And that's it from me on this.

[facthunter]

You'll be OK on your Island hopping. Your touch down speed will be near nothing and the water will be warm. It's not exactly remote and you won't have rough water. On a forum such as ours a lot of other people read what is posted and some of them might like actual facts and be aware of real risks and the need to recognise and minimise such risks as a responsible pilot.  Amphibious float planes have retractable wheels. IF the pilot forgets to retract  them for a water landing it usually results in a prang. Water has a lot of force.  Nev

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

On a forum such as ours a lot of other people read what is posted and some of them might like actual facts .....  Amphibious float planes have retractable wheels. 

We're getting into the deep stuff now, NASA level.

[facthunter]

You've completely cut and paste that to change the meaning. Stop it.  it's a matter of safety not for U to poke fun at.  Nev.