Mixing
In an emergency near a remote island is it better to land resulting in the airport closing or ditch in the water?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Consider a landing at a remote island (like Easter Island or perhaps one with a calm lagoon, like YLHI) in which the aircraft is likely to crash and close the airport. (For example a gear-up landing at a single-runway airport.) Under these circumstances would it be better to ditch than to attempt the landing at the airport, thus keeping the airport open for emergency aircraft?
If the above question is unanswerable: Has there been advice issued from an aviation safety authority regarding such a scenario?
emergency ditching
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Consider a landing at a remote island (like Easter Island or perhaps one with a calm lagoon, like YLHI) in which the aircraft is likely to crash and close the airport. (For example a gear-up landing at a single-runway airport.) Under these circumstances would it be better to ditch than to attempt the landing at the airport, thus keeping the airport open for emergency aircraft?
If the above question is unanswerable: Has there been advice issued from an aviation safety authority regarding such a scenario?
emergency ditching
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
5
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
7
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Consider a landing at a remote island (like Easter Island or perhaps one with a calm lagoon, like YLHI) in which the aircraft is likely to crash and close the airport. (For example a gear-up landing at a single-runway airport.) Under these circumstances would it be better to ditch than to attempt the landing at the airport, thus keeping the airport open for emergency aircraft?
If the above question is unanswerable: Has there been advice issued from an aviation safety authority regarding such a scenario?
emergency ditching
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
Consider a landing at a remote island (like Easter Island or perhaps one with a calm lagoon, like YLHI) in which the aircraft is likely to crash and close the airport. (For example a gear-up landing at a single-runway airport.) Under these circumstances would it be better to ditch than to attempt the landing at the airport, thus keeping the airport open for emergency aircraft?
If the above question is unanswerable: Has there been advice issued from an aviation safety authority regarding such a scenario?
emergency ditching
emergency ditching
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
edited 4 hours ago
Jimy
1,36111225
1,36111225
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
asked 5 hours ago
Hugh
1,00431227
1,00431227
5
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
7
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
5
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
7
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago
5
5
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
7
7
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
In general, it's a bad decision to ditch if there's an alternative, even a gear-up landing (Sully ditched in the Hudson because the alternatives were much worse: virtually certain total loss on board, plus significant ground casualties due to dense population). The safety of the crew, passengers (if present), and people on the ground is the first concern of a captain or PIC. Ditching seldom ends well, and often results in 100% fatalities, because even with a perfect ditch, rescuers often can't reach the aircraft quickly.
For a sufficiently remote location that incoming flights may not be able to return or divert (like the example, Easter Island), there may be an option to land alongside the runway (potentially a better choice for gear-up anyway, in a location without a large fire crew, since grass is less likely to start a fire than tarmac), both for safety and to keep the runway open.
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
In general, it's a bad decision to ditch if there's an alternative, even a gear-up landing (Sully ditched in the Hudson because the alternatives were much worse: virtually certain total loss on board, plus significant ground casualties due to dense population). The safety of the crew, passengers (if present), and people on the ground is the first concern of a captain or PIC. Ditching seldom ends well, and often results in 100% fatalities, because even with a perfect ditch, rescuers often can't reach the aircraft quickly.
For a sufficiently remote location that incoming flights may not be able to return or divert (like the example, Easter Island), there may be an option to land alongside the runway (potentially a better choice for gear-up anyway, in a location without a large fire crew, since grass is less likely to start a fire than tarmac), both for safety and to keep the runway open.
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
In general, it's a bad decision to ditch if there's an alternative, even a gear-up landing (Sully ditched in the Hudson because the alternatives were much worse: virtually certain total loss on board, plus significant ground casualties due to dense population). The safety of the crew, passengers (if present), and people on the ground is the first concern of a captain or PIC. Ditching seldom ends well, and often results in 100% fatalities, because even with a perfect ditch, rescuers often can't reach the aircraft quickly.
For a sufficiently remote location that incoming flights may not be able to return or divert (like the example, Easter Island), there may be an option to land alongside the runway (potentially a better choice for gear-up anyway, in a location without a large fire crew, since grass is less likely to start a fire than tarmac), both for safety and to keep the runway open.
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
up vote
7
down vote
In general, it's a bad decision to ditch if there's an alternative, even a gear-up landing (Sully ditched in the Hudson because the alternatives were much worse: virtually certain total loss on board, plus significant ground casualties due to dense population). The safety of the crew, passengers (if present), and people on the ground is the first concern of a captain or PIC. Ditching seldom ends well, and often results in 100% fatalities, because even with a perfect ditch, rescuers often can't reach the aircraft quickly.
For a sufficiently remote location that incoming flights may not be able to return or divert (like the example, Easter Island), there may be an option to land alongside the runway (potentially a better choice for gear-up anyway, in a location without a large fire crew, since grass is less likely to start a fire than tarmac), both for safety and to keep the runway open.
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
In general, it's a bad decision to ditch if there's an alternative, even a gear-up landing (Sully ditched in the Hudson because the alternatives were much worse: virtually certain total loss on board, plus significant ground casualties due to dense population). The safety of the crew, passengers (if present), and people on the ground is the first concern of a captain or PIC. Ditching seldom ends well, and often results in 100% fatalities, because even with a perfect ditch, rescuers often can't reach the aircraft quickly.
For a sufficiently remote location that incoming flights may not be able to return or divert (like the example, Easter Island), there may be an option to land alongside the runway (potentially a better choice for gear-up anyway, in a location without a large fire crew, since grass is less likely to start a fire than tarmac), both for safety and to keep the runway open.
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
edited 4 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
answered 5 hours ago
Zeiss Ikon
9538
9538
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
3
3
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
I believe landing on tarmac is preferred. Less chance of digging into the grass/dirt and flipping/cartwheeling/etc. after touchdown. Than the intact aircraft can just be dragged off the runway if needed.
– CrossRoads
3 hours ago
2
2
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
Hazards of grass vs. tarmac likely depend on the aircraft configuration. Engines below the wings, you're probably right. Planes with smooth bellies (like most business jets, for instance) may or may not be better on pavement.
– Zeiss Ikon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55056%2fin-an-emergency-near-a-remote-island-is-it-better-to-land-resulting-in-the-airpo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
5
Well, you're the emergency aircraft aren't you?
– John K
4 hours ago
7
It's worth noting that the Chilean aviation authorities only allow one plane at a time to be en route to Easter Island (more or less) for precisely this reason.
– Michael Seifert
4 hours ago