AirTalk.org Aviation discussions newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Ejection -v- Forced Landing Goto page 1, 2  Next          AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Naval Aviation View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Cockpit Colin Guest Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:41 pm    Post subject: Ejection -v- Forced Landing I've read about the experiences of a few pilots who have had to eject - by all accounts it's an extremely violent process which none would care to repeat. Obviously it's done as a last alternative when the potential benefits out weigh the considerable risks. In the GA world it's not an option that we have - so in the event of, say, an engine failure, our only option is to go for a forced landing - which in my case is almost certainly going to mean a flat farmers paddock. I'd be curious to know how many "military fast jet" pilots would, in the event of a total engine failure contemplate/attempt a forced landing into the likes of a farmers paddock versus ejection? My thinking is that on one hand a GA plane is relatively flimsily built but capable of landing at a much lower speed - on the other hand a "military fast jet" is built to withstand many g's (so very strong construction) - and the pilot is secured to the aircraft with a very effective harness - with his head protected by a helmet (all advantages over a GA pilot) - but of course committed to landing at a higher speed. In the above scenario would a forced landing ever be an option - or would first choice always be ejection? Thanks for your thoughts. CC Back to top Ed Rasimus Guest Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:46 pm    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:41:14 +1200, "Cockpit Colin" <spam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: I've read about the experiences of a few pilots who have had to eject - by all accounts it's an extremely violent process which none would care to repeat. Obviously it's done as a last alternative when the potential benefits out weigh the considerable risks. In the GA world it's not an option that we have - so in the event of, say, an engine failure, our only option is to go for a forced landing - which in my case is almost certainly going to mean a flat farmers paddock. I'd be curious to know how many "military fast jet" pilots would, in the event of a total engine failure contemplate/attempt a forced landing into the likes of a farmers paddock versus ejection? My thinking is that on one hand a GA plane is relatively flimsily built but capable of landing at a much lower speed - on the other hand a "military fast jet" is built to withstand many g's (so very strong construction) - and the pilot is secured to the aircraft with a very effective harness - with his head protected by a helmet (all advantages over a GA pilot) - but of course committed to landing at a higher speed. In the above scenario would a forced landing ever be an option - or would first choice always be ejection? Thanks for your thoughts. CC Early in my fast-jet career I considered the force landing option as viable. Then, upon further examination I considered the situation of an automobile leaving the paved roadway and entering a plowed field. Do it at 140-160 MPH. What will the results be? How about if your "car" doesn't have a steel frame but is simply monocoque duraluminum on a bulkhead and stringer frame? What if directly behind you when you come to the sudden stop is a four or five ton engine? Nahh, not a good plan at all. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com Back to top W. D. Allen Sr. Guest Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Reminds me of a squadron mate who successfully ditched a North American FJ-3 Fury. Since the FJ-3 engine inlet was in the nose we had been told a water landing would result in water ramming through that nose intake splitting the fuselage (and pilot) apart. However he managed it because he was in the carrier landing pattern when he stalled the plane. Fortunately it dropped in tail first. It went completely under and popped up. He stood up and jumped as the plane went out from under him. The plane guard helo plucked him from Neptune's arms. His squadron mate was not so lucky. He went off the cat with the wings spread but not fully locked. With possibly no aileron control (we never knew) he rolled over and made his "final landing" one day before Christmas 1956. Hopefully his wife and two kids were not informed until after they had enjoyed Christmas. WDA end "Cockpit Colin" <spam@n ospam.com> wrote Quote: I've read about the experiences of a few pilots who have had to eject - by all accounts it's an extremely violent process which none would care to repeat. Obviously it's done as a last alternative when the potential benefits out weigh the considerable risks. In the GA world it's not an option that we have - so in the event of, say, an engine failure, our only option is to go for a forced landing - which in my case is almost certainly going to mean a flat farmers paddock. I'd be curious to know how many "military fast jet" pilots would, in the event of a total engine failure contemplate/attempt a forced landing into the likes of a farmers paddock versus ejection? My thinking is that on one hand a GA plane is relatively flimsily built but capable of landing at a much lower speed - on the other hand a "military fast jet" is built to withstand many g's (so very strong construction) - and the pilot is secured to the aircraft with a very effective harness - with his head protected by a helmet (all advantages over a GA pilot) - but of course committed to landing at a higher speed. In the above scenario would a forced landing ever be an option - or would first choice always be ejection? Thanks for your thoughts. CC Back to top Tiger Guest Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Cockpit Colin wrote: Quote: I've read about the experiences of a few pilots who have had to eject - by all accounts it's an extremely violent process which none would care to repeat. Obviously it's done as a last alternative when the potential benefits out weigh the considerable risks. In the GA world it's not an option that we have - so in the event of, say, an engine failure, our only option is to go for a forced landing - which in my case is almost certainly going to mean a flat farmers paddock. I'd be curious to know how many "military fast jet" pilots would, in the event of a total engine failure contemplate/attempt a forced landing into the likes of a farmers paddock versus ejection? My thinking is that on one hand a GA plane is relatively flimsily built but capable of landing at a much lower speed - on the other hand a "military fast jet" is built to withstand many g's (so very strong construction) - and the pilot is secured to the aircraft with a very effective harness - with his head protected by a helmet (all advantages over a GA pilot) - but of course committed to landing at a higher speed. In the above scenario would a forced landing ever be an option - or would first choice always be ejection? Thanks for your thoughts. CC Don't they have a parachute system for small plane's now? After market deal where if in trouble you pop the chute and land the plane. Back to top Cockpit Colin Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:37 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Quote: Don't they have a parachute system for small plane's now? After market deal where if in trouble you pop the chute and land the plane. Yes - it comes standard with the Cirrus SR22 (http://brsparachutes.com/) and is available as an after market kit for some aircraft. From what I've read there are a few examples where it's saved the occupants - but also a few where they've deployed the chute but occupants have still died - in that respect, similar to ejection seats. Does anyone know if "percentage surviveability" is increasing with modern ejection seats? and what figures we're currently at? CC Back to top vincent p. norris Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:29 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Quote: I'd be curious to know how many "military fast jet" pilots would, in the event of a total engine failure contemplate/attempt a forced landing into the likes of a farmers paddock versus ejection? Fellow I know, Jim Walbridge, flew 105s in VN. He deadsticked one onto a runway, not a farmer's paddock, but still not a highly recommended procedure. It's been some years since I heard the story, but IIRC, he hit the 180 at 10,000 agl and made the runway. vince norris Back to top William Hughes Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:12 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:41:14 +1200, in rec.aviation.military.naval "Cockpit Colin" <spam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: In the above scenario would a forced landing ever be an option - or would first choice always be ejection? I'm ex-USAF Life Support tech and Aircrew Survival Instructor. Occasionally, flight crew would ask me a similar question - my answer was always the same: "We can build a new aircraft in six months. It takes 20-25 years to build a new you. Bail." Back to top Tex Houston Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:04 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing "Tiger" <Lana_sands (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote Quote: Don't they have a parachute system for small plane's now? After market deal where if in trouble you pop the chute and land the plane. Yes they do. The fine print tells you about not being able to use the airplane again. A gentle landing, it is not. Tex Back to top waltbj01@mindspring.com Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:06 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Used to discuss GA forced landings in a class I taught. Like the previous message, if you get to use the airplane again you're twice lucky. a) Tell someone what you're doing and where. b) Stow all loose gear or heave it out the door. c) Unlock the doors and leave them ajar. d) Land into the wind. Not all cows' butts are upwind so check other indications. e) Keep best glide speed until the last few feet. f) If you see two big trees close together put the nose right between then. Taking off the wings will definitely slow you down. g) if all you have under you is rocks or water i'm sorry . . .for, rocks, see 'tees' above. for water, be advsed the airplane is very likely to end up upside down. Be prepared to unstrap and exit immediately after impact. I don't recommend unstrapping before impact - I know one guy who did (GA) and ended up crammed under the instrument panel. He had a hard time getting out before the bird sank. Flotation - if you have anything at all take it with you. Remember/learn how to make waterwings out of your trousers. h) Farms/Pastures - a nice fresh plowed field is usually so soft you'll flip over. be prepared. i) Flat range land may rpt may be as good as a sod field in that you'll come to a stop upright and in good shape. Don't bet on it. j. Find out (manufacturer?) if it's better with your rpt your airplane to put it in gear down or gear up. For example, on Boeing aircraft the gear is a 'mechanical fuse' designed to shear off before the structure it's attached to fails. If your bird has fixed gear that question is already answered. k. Lock harness and tighten safety belt while still well above ground - say 1000 feet if possible. l. Just before touchdown switches off, fuel off. m. Full flaps and flare to touchdown at stalling speed; every knot shed here means less inertial/kinetic forces on touchdown. be cool; don't do this twenty feet in the air. n. Lots of luck . . . Walt BJ PS the Martin-Baker seat is a sudden but smooth ride and beats the alternative. Back to top Cockpit Colin Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:32 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Quote: Yes they do. The fine print tells you about not being able to use the airplane again. A gentle landing, it is not. It's been pointed out that at that precise moment, you usually only own about $1000 of the aircraft - the insurance company owns the rest! Back to top Cockpit Colin Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:44 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing Quote: I'm ex-USAF Life Support tech and Aircrew Survival Instructor. Occasionally, flight crew would ask me a similar question - my answer was always the same: "We can build a new aircraft in six months. It takes 20-25 years to build a new you. Bail." I take your point completely. Perhaps what I should have asked was "which is safer". I'm not a whizz on ejection seats (all I can lay claim to fame with them is sitting in a live one on a couple of occasions) - from what I've read they certainly have saved a lot of lives - but also many cases of pilots being killed by them. I'm quite curious to know what the chances of survival (and without major injuries) would be for a pilot ejecting from a modern aircraft under "ideal" conditions (eg 200 - 300 knots, not Mach 1. etc. Have they got to the point where a "pilot in need" flying with one things thinks "thank god I've got an ejection seat" or is it a case of "do I feel lucky today" - if you get what I mean. Off memory I think the survival rate from Escapac seats from our Air Force was only something like 50% CC Back to top Tex Houston Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:54 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing "Cockpit Colin" <spam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote Quote: I take your point completely. Perhaps what I should have asked was "which is safer". I'm not a whizz on ejection seats (all I can lay claim to fame with them is sitting in a live one on a couple of occasions) - from what I've read they certainly have saved a lot of lives - but also many cases of pilots being killed by them. I'm quite curious to know what the chances of survival (and without major injuries) would be for a pilot ejecting from a modern aircraft under "ideal" conditions (eg 200 - 300 knots, not Mach 1. etc. Have they got to the point where a "pilot in need" flying with one things thinks "thank god I've got an ejection seat" or is it a case of "do I feel lucky today" - if you get what I mean. Off memory I think the survival rate from Escapac seats from our Air Force was only something like 50% CC Check out this site... http://www.martin-baker.com/ . Tex Back to top J.A.M. Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:21 am    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing At that point I just don't care a da**n about the aircraft. If I have to bail out, or crash land it, my main concern is getting the irreplacable piece of gear intact on the ground... me. "Cockpit Colin" <spam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> escribió en el mensaje news:f%K2e.14306$1S4.1478340 (AT) news (DOT) xtra.co.nz... Quote: Yes they do. The fine print tells you about not being able to use the airplane again. A gentle landing, it is not. It's been pointed out that at that precise moment, you usually only own about $1000 of the aircraft - the insurance company owns the rest! Back to top Doug Woody and Erin Beal Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing On 3/30/05 10:44 PM, in article 7aL2e.14309$1S4.1478373 (AT) news (DOT) xtra.co.nz, "Cockpit Colin" <spam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: I take your point completely. Perhaps what I should have asked was "which is safer". I'm not a whizz on ejection seats (all I can lay claim to fame with them is sitting in a live one on a couple of occasions) - from what I've read they certainly have saved a lot of lives - but also many cases of pilots being killed by them. I'm quite curious to know what the chances of survival (and without major injuries) would be for a pilot ejecting from a modern aircraft under "ideal" conditions (eg 200 - 300 knots, not Mach 1. etc. Have they got to the point where a "pilot in need" flying with one things thinks "thank god I've got an ejection seat" or is it a case of "do I feel lucky today" - if you get what I mean. I don't know a single pilot in the Hornet community who thinks that an ejection seat is the "Get Out of Jail Free" card for risky behavior--if that was your question. The seat is strictly a save your life mechanism, and in the Hornet, you WILL get hurt. If the G's and wind don't mangle you on the way up, then the chute will pummel you on the way down--17 foot conical parachute. The rate of descent is akin to jumping off the roof of a two-story home. --Woody Back to top nafod40 Guest Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Ejection -v- Forced Landing [email]waltbj01 (AT) mindspring (DOT) com[/email] wrote: Quote: Used to discuss GA forced landings in a class I taught. Like the previous message, if you get to use the airplane again you're twice lucky. Obviously a *completely* different thing from plunking down a jet into a cow pasture, but I've "landed out" a number of times in gliders now (slow land speed, excellent glidepath control), and there's lots of gamesmanship in picking your field with regards to winds, smoothness, etc. We had one of our pilots land out in what looked to be a reasonable spot, but ended up doing "strike damage" to the plane from small boulders in the field. Pilot OK. I used to end all of my OCF flights (in Beeville) with a simulated engine out from whatever altitude we entered the last spin. A long glide from SPIN 1 (20-30 miles away?) into high key and down. Got to the point where if I could take an early initial, I could skip high key and carry knots into the break and fly a regular pattern. With the right runway and the right parking spot, I could coast into the chocks from 20K' without touching the power. Amazing the games bored pilots play to make things harder. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Naval Aviation All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2  Next Page 1 of 2   Jump to: Select a forum Aviation----------------alt.aviationAviation safety EnhancementPlanes, gliders and flying in AustraliaAviation et pilotage (Français)rec.aviationAviation (Aerobatics)Hot air, gas balloons and airshipsHang-gliding, paragliding, foot-launched flightAircraft Design & BuildingInstrument Flight RulesAviation (Classifieds)Military AircraftNaval AviationAviation (Miscellaneous Topics)Owning AirplanesAviators (General Discussions)Aviation related productsAircraft RestorationHelicopters and rotary wing aircraftsFlight SimulationSailplanesAviation (Students)Light aircraftFlying related activities in the UK Airports----------------alt.airportsEdinburgh Airport Glasgow Airport Humberside Airport Luton Airport Aberdeen Airport Glasgow Prestwick Airport  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.