A hypothetical situation I thought of recently...

[Guest Jake.f]

.

 

 

[Exadios]

Ok, say a light, single-engine aircraft (Ga or RAA, but preferably RAA) was flying within the the vicinity of a major international airport, like Sydney Intl. for example. The aircraft experiences engine failure and cannot restart, the only airstrip within gliding distance is Sydney international and if the pilot doesn't land there he/she will have to land on a road, beach or ditch in the water.What would happen in this case? I assume that they would have to be allowed to land at Sydney?

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

This situation sounds a little contrived. In any case you should always land at an airport in an emergency if possible.

 

The procedure I would use would be to visually check the runway, declare an emergency and your intention land on the runway. Any planes that are already on a straight in approach can go around etc. But even if you cannot use a runway for any reason then it is still better to land at the airport than anywhere else. The thing about airports is that there are plenty of places to land a light plane other than runways. The advantage of airports is that the emergency services are already there.

 

Landing on a city road is, IMO, not an option. For one thing is that there is too much "furniture" around roads and there are also lots of third parties who may be injured or killed.

 

 

[Guest Jake.f]

How would the controllers react in this instance? Sydney, being an extremely busy airport, would have major disruptions if a light plane were to land there.

 

 

[Exadios]

How would the controllers react in this instance? Sydney, being an extremely busy airport, would have major disruptions if a light plane were to land there.

The controllers should, as soon as they become aware of the emergency situation, attempt to clear the airspace. You, as the pilot who has declared the emergency, will be chiefly concerned about the location of other aircraft - most importantly those aircraft which may be immediately intending to land on the runway. For that reason you may pick a taxi way to land on or even the "runway strip" which is between the pavement and the square markers.

 

 

[Guest Jake.f]

jake....i reckon if you were in a RAA registered a/c...outside controlled airspace...below 5000'...with an engine failore...u ain;t gonna land at YSSY!!!

That is why it is only hypothetical! :)

 

 

[Guest DJH]

Land at the closest available airfield, then hold the discussion afterwards........preservation of life is the paramount issue here.

 

 

[sfGnome]

Ok, we've ascertained that it's only a hypothetical question for the reasons that cfi gave, but that aside, DJH has hit the nail on the head. Get down in one piece without endangering others, worry about the paperwork afterwards.

 

On the subject of ATC at a major airport, if you stray into controlled space, they'll start re-routing the RPT away from you immediately (which is why they hate incursions - it costs the airlines a bomb and it screws up the timetables). They aren't the slightest bit worried about your safety, but the safety of the 300 passengers on the bus you're about to blunder into is of far more interest. The pleasing side effect is that you get to live as well...

 

 

[facthunter]

The situation is a bit contrived but leaving all that aside, if an aircraft is in an emergency situation it will get priority. ie If a departing aircraft has an in-flight fire, it would be expected to get back on the ground as quickly as possible. ATC are trained to cope with this sort of thing, and would divert all necessary traffic. Being realistic you would not barrell into a situation where you would cause damage to say an Airliner and perhaps greater loss of life by your actions. You would at all times take action to prevent a collision for instance. These situations are known as "what if's". Sometimes you have to break a law to avoid a bigger calamity. Courts will have a lot lomger to work out what you might have to decide in seconds. Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

jake....i reckon if you were in a RAA registered a/c...outside controlled airspace...below 5000'...with an engine failore...u ain;t gonna land at YSSY!!!

Not Sydney but maybe Albury, Alice Springs, Wagga Wagga, Broken Hill, Launceston, Broome etc, etc because another little project getting aired by CASA is a possible expansion of class C airspace where previously has been G, E or D. Gotta look after all those paying pax!

 

Just make sure you don't hit anyone or anything if you land short of the runway!

 

kaz

 

 

[Hildy]

jake....i reckon if you were in a RAA registered a/c...outside controlled airspace...below 5000'...with an engine failore...u ain;t gonna land at YSSY!!!

if you are flying certain segments of victor one at 120kt, have a Vbg of 60kt with a glide ratio of 18:1 and a 20kt soueasterly, you will make 34R. I think.

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

When we had the birdstrike we ended up at Moorabbin (which I realise is a far smaller scale than YMMB or YSSY) and called up and requested priority and the controller rearranged things so we were #1 to land. I assume they'd do the same thing just on a far bigger scale at one of the big airports. I can't see anyone going 'Nah mate, go and crash on a house, I've got all my RPTs lined up already, tough luck'

 

 

[jakej]

When we had the birdstrike we ended up at Moorabbin (which I realise is a far smaller scale than YMMB or YSSY) and called up and requested priority and the controller rearranged things so we were #1 to land. I assume they'd do the same thing just on a far bigger scale at one of the big airports. I can't see anyone going 'Nah mate, go and crash on a house, I've got all my RPTs lined up already, tough luck'

Years ago there was a canard homebuilt at BK with engine and 'handling' issues ie overheating and control problems at low speed - he was in the air and wanted a long runway to land at high speed but SY said NO so the arrival at BK resulted in a crash he walked away from. So I wouldn't rely on getting permission based on that incident.

 

Jake J

 

 

[Guest redleader]

Years ago there was a canard homebuilt at BK with engine and 'handling' issues ie overheating and control problems at low speed - he was in the air and wanted a long runway to land at high speed but SY said NO so the arrival at BK resulted in a crash he walked away from. So I wouldn't rely on getting permission based on that incident.Jake J

Did he request or state he required a longer runway? I would suspect he requested rather than a statement of requirement. Controllers if you use require are not likely unless for really really strong reasons not to give it to you eg Works in progress on that runway. Ultimate responsibility for safety of an aircraft belongs on the pilot. A controller can try and "suggest" that its not a good idea when a requirement is made however persistence that it is a requirement normally will set that straight. I am Trying to find the link in the documents to support that case.

A controller is not necessarily likely to be aware of every aircraft type and performance characteristics. The responsibility is on the pilot to make them aware :) and to tell them of their requirements. Ultimately the pilot in this case ACCEPTED a shorter runway then required for the circumstances.

 

 

[jakej]

I was first to land at BK (runway was closed temporarily) after the incident and met the owner, still on other the runway, who told me what happened. A friend had the same type Q200 so I was interested in the outcome. The first flight was obviously stressful with the overheating so maybe he didn't insist on going to SY?

 

Jake J

 

 

[Guest redleader]

I suspect he didn't make it clear that going to SY was a requirement due longer runway. I wasn't their so can only go on what is being said.

 

I guess my point is that being a pilot in command requires airman-ship, confidence, knowledge and understanding of the machine. Sometimes, me included at times are lacking in one area and can lead to an outcome that is not desirable.

 

I agree that the pilot was probably under a whole lot of stress. Generally when stress increases performance decreases unless has a robust system in place that is automatic. What I am just trying to point out is that sometimes the words we use over the radio has distinct meanings. It is why our instructors are so pedantic about correct phraseology. I am just trying to convey that when correct phraseology is used, there is no insisting required. Sometimes controllers might ask for clarification, it is human nature to feel this as a pressure that an individual might have to insist. However normal reiteration of the requirement in a professional manner is all that is required and then things start getting moved out of your way.

 

The clarification is a question from the controller that normally has this in it. Did I hear you correctly Are you really sure that you need that cause do you have any idea what you are telling me? (cause this is going to stuff up my day). This is what they get paid the big bucks to do is sort out the traffic so us pilots can focus on our Job. It is about being confident in what you require.

 

Yes the pilot had a plane that he was unsure about. The instinct was correct by the outcome that the pilot needed a longer runway to pull off a incident free landing. I suggest only If the pilot was confident in radio procedure and making it clear that it was a requirement probably be a incident free landing at SY as the Pilot did have good instincts to make a request. Just needed more confidence to understand the difference between a request and a requirement. Was worried about the paperwork perhaps? I prefer to be alive to deal with the paperwork issue after the event fortunately walked away but still has paperwork to do and a broken plane. I know I would just prefer paperwork.

 

 

[Hildy]

how about a lazair with an engine down in victor one? yssy is the only realistic airport option there.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Never *ever* hesitate to go into controlled airspace and make RPT wait if that can save your life, that of your passenger or those on the ground. Just make sure that, if you can, you communicate this.

 

An engine out is probably a poor example in this case as I cannot see how you would be OCTA but in gliding distance of that airfield. But an engine indicating it is running on its last legs, or control problems that makes you want to use a lot of space to try and put it down, are good enough reasons in my book.

 

 

[pylon500]

Can't remember the EXACT details or date, but this has already happened at YSSY.

 

I think it was a Jab flying down Victor One in deteriorating weather (100 feet in rain) and called to come in and land.

 

Pretty sure they declared an emergency, which 'made things happen', but afterwards had to dismantle and truck out.

 

Anyone out there remember?

 

 

[wanabigaplane]

Yes, I heard about it. I think the aircraft was a Kitfox from Jaspers. I understand it flew North on Victor 1, ran into low visibility weather, and had to back track into a headwind, consequently running low on fuel in the vicinity of Sydney Airport. Jack

 

 

[Exadios]

Can't remember the EXACT details or date, but this has already happened at YSSY.I think it was a Jab flying down Victor One in deteriorating weather (100 feet in rain) and called to come in and land.

Pretty sure they declared an emergency, which 'made things happen', but afterwards had to dismantle and truck out.

 

Anyone out there remember?

Landing is not optional but taking off is. :)

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

but afterwards had to dismantle and truck out.

Why would that be? Even if it is an RA-Aus aircraft couldn't you get a PPL to fly it out?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

hhmm..theres a few stories getting rolled into one there.. thats all i'll say about that one..;)

 

On a recent trip (delivery of a jab) I found myself in a messy situation. Late in the afternoon, with about 1 hr till last light, i was enroute from narrabri to wollongong. At about 5 miles north of katoomba the cloud base was starting to push me down. It was a very deceptive situation, you don't notice untill you glance at your alt and see that your 300 feet lower than you were before. then 500, then 700 over the course of several minutes.

 

West was not an option, turning around wasn't either as the door had shut behind us. We called radar and asked for some wx info, and begun to squeeze along the Richmond control zone. 5 minutes later the situation was still getting worse and my heading had drifted east and i was heading straight at the zone.

 

Radar called us up and asked us to turn west to avoid the zone. Just at that time strata form started whizzing past us, the only clear route was east, straight into the zone.And even that was getting worse.

 

My pax (a cpl holder) was freaking out about the contoller telling us to turn.

 

She couldnt believe i wasnt answering them.

 

I said, tell them to standbye, I have bigger fish to fry.ie, remaining VMC. Staying out of the soup required my full attention as by now we were right on (dare i say it) lowest safe (which thankfully was a nice clear number written on mt flightplan)

 

I replied I was unable to comply with the vectoring due wx. The controller wised up to the situation and contacted RIC. 20 seconds later we had a clearance to clip the zone and track direct to camden, without even requesting it.

 

We made wollongong with 11 minutes to spare before last light.

 

While it wasn't an emergency situation, it was only seconds away from becoming one, and at the time, aviating took priority over communicating.

 

My pax and I discussed the situation at length and admitted she didn't realize we were in trouble until i told her to be quiet...lol...

 

She said she would have turned west and then asked for clearance. In an aircraft with no AH, i feel this could have been a very wrong decision.

 

Moral of the story..

 

Aviate

 

Navigate

 

.....

 

....

 

....

 

communicate

 

my 2 cents.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Ps.

 

In the situation proposed by the original poster, YSSY would not be an option. There aint no aeroplane that can glide that far from 500 ft, eben after converting speed to height. Also, sydney don't monitor the victor 1 freq, you would have to have terminal dialled into your stby freq and hope for a break in the transmissions.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

PPS.

 

Basch, a PPL holder did fly it out....and in....;)

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Hey, at least it wasn't a thunderstorm...