What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Ditching an RV in water

Arlen

Well Known Member
I've looked back through a couple old threads about ditching, and there is plenty of discussion about not being able to open the canopy in flight and the difficulty of getting it open if under water. But I have a couple other questions.

In my Bonanza (retractable), I always considered ditching as a very viable option in an engine-out scenario with no obvious landing areas nearby. Land it flat on its belly in water, and one has a couple minutes to climb out on the wing. I'm thinking this is not so in an RV.

Here is that article about the guy who ditched the RV-8 and flipped over in Hawaii in 2004: http://archives.starbulletin.com/2004/01/19/news/story1.html

So, do the RVs usually or always flip over in a water landing?

Would it be better to take a controlled slow-as-possible crash landing into a field - even if not appearing to be ideal - or trees instead of water?
 
Trees

Where I fly often the only two choices are water or trees. I have thought this through, and for me when the choice is water or trees I'll take the trees every time. The thought of flipping upside down in shallow water is not pleasant. Even in deep water the canopy may not be able to be opened. Of course my thinking may be somewhat biased by the fact I am a lousy swimmer, and would be even a worse swimmer if I were injured!
 
The possibility of flipping during a water landing is an issue I wanted to address as a fair bit of our flying is over water...

I put pip pins in the front mounts of my -8 canopy instead of screws. If I ever have to ditch, the canopy will depart before I hit the water...

The trees we have in our part of the country do not look very friendly...
 
Unless the only land option was steep rugged terrain, my choice will always be land vs water.

If I did have to land in the water, I would never purposely choose to do so without a canopy over my head.
The flip that will likely result because of fixed gear is likely a rather violent event. I would rather risk a possible jammed canopy , but still be conscious and able to work at getting out, than be unconscious and under water..
 
Trees vs. water: I'll take the water as near the shoreline and / or boats in the area as I can, and I will unlatch (x 2) my tip-up if I remember / have time. Caveat: I am a good swimmer and have been to a Helo dunker for inverted egress training several times. Keep meaning to buy one of those 'hit of oxygen' cans to help the process (can do double duty as a backup to the O2 system I need to come up with).
 
If you were a good pilot you could approach the water inverted and then flip right side up, assuming a flip :)

Ok probably not. Good to think about though. I hate water I think I'll choose trees maybe depending
 
Trees vs. water: I'll take the water as near the shoreline and / or boats in the area as I can, and I will unlatch (x 2) my tip-up if I remember / have time. Caveat: I am a good swimmer and have been to a Helo dunker for inverted egress training several times. Keep meaning to buy one of those 'hit of oxygen' cans to help the process (can do double duty as a backup to the O2 system I need to come up with).

Those of us that have been involved with RV's since the 80's probably remember a fatal RV-4 accident where the airplane landed near shore in shallow water because of an engine failure.
The two people on board drowned because the shallow depth of the water caused the canopy to be pinned to the bottom, trapping them inside.
 
Those of us that have been involved with RV's since the 80's probably remember a fatal RV-4 accident where the airplane landed near shore in shallow water because of an engine failure.
The two people on board drowned because the shallow depth of the water caused the canopy to be pinned to the bottom, trapping them inside.

Such tragic examples provide a sober reminder NOT to ditch too close to shore! You can often see from the air where the water depth falls off from shallow to deep, and this perspective can help you avoid entering the water where the depth may not be adequate.
 
It'd be good to have some really descriptive narrative of what happens to either the tip-up or the slider canopies upon impact/inversion. For example, does a tip-up, unlatched, slam forward, then back, upon impact? Once inverted, I can see unbuckling the harness and then pushing down on the canopy with ones feet, up against the interior/floor with hands, but how hard is it to really open that canopy enough to get out? How long does it take? Can it be done before the entire cabin is flooded? Etc.

I can imagine the disorientation would be very startling at first, but if you can keep a cool head, what would it take to get out of the cockpit after the event?
 
I have watched WWII vids of aircraft ditching near the carrier. In some cases one wing hit the water first causing the aircraft to cartwheel and remain upright. I wonder if forced to ditch we would have a better chance of staying upright by doing the same.
 

On the question of gear-up or gear-down in a water ditching, he says:

"We think the best you can do is to examine the big picture: Irrespective of aircraft configuration, do the pilots and crew get out of the airplane after impact? Yes, overwhelmingly. How often does the airplane flip over because the gear caught in the water? We don't really know. But even if all the airplanes flipped--highly unlikely--the occupants still manage to egress safely. Conclusion: It may not matter much.

From films of live ditchings and interviews with survivors, our impression is that most airplanes don't flip, but dig in one wing, turn and settle upright or settle straight ahead with a bit of nose under moment. But, we simply don't have enough reliable information to make a definitive judgement on this. Our best advice is make your own assessment and configure the airplane accordingly
."
 
Here is an update to the "Ditching myths debunked" article. This one specifically addresses trees versus water. The conclusion is that both have a similar survival rate, with trees being slightly ahead (but probably within the margin of error). The risk of serious injury is significantly higher in the trees. However in water there is some risk of drowning after surviving the landing, a risk that essentially does not exist with the trees. Pick your poison!

http://www.equipped.com/watertrees.htm
 
Last edited:
On the question of gear-up or gear-down in a water ditching, he says:

"We think the best you can do is to examine the big picture: Irrespective of aircraft configuration, do the pilots and crew get out of the airplane after impact? Yes, overwhelmingly. How often does the airplane flip over because the gear caught in the water? We don't really know. But even if all the airplanes flipped--highly unlikely--the occupants still manage to egress safely. Conclusion: It may not matter much.

From films of live ditchings and interviews with survivors, our impression is that most airplanes don't flip, but dig in one wing, turn and settle upright or settle straight ahead with a bit of nose under moment. But, we simply don't have enough reliable information to make a definitive judgement on this. Our best advice is make your own assessment and configure the airplane accordingly
."

I can not refute the evidence they are talking about. One important piece of info missing from the article is what the ration of fixed gear to retract aircraft was in the sample cases looked at. All I know for my self is the two RV ditching accidents I am familiar with (one a first hand account from the pilot on board an RV-8A), both ended up inverted.
 
Last edited:
This is one reason I built a tipper, since I have been to the islands several times in various aircraft and once in my RV7. I gave my wife a briefing as we left Ft. Pierce and told her that in the advent of an emergency that resulted in us having to ditch. :(
1. we would already have the life vest on.
2. We would already be talking to Miami so they would know and head for any ship we saw. I'd be like a torpedo over their bow.:)

3. at 2000 feet MSL we would disconnect the Hydraulic arms to the canopy
4. tighten the harness as tight as you can possibly get it.
5. put one of our blankets in front of your face.
6. we will say a quick prayer, duck as low as we could behind the panel and pull the release handle on the canopy:eek:
7. Hopefully we will be near an island.
That was the basics to the instructions. Hopefully it will never happen.

That being said one of the terrible thoughts on ditching in aircraft is that a passenger might inflate the vest and not be able to get out the little windows on so many cabin aircraft.

or if you survive the ditching... they take the raft out inflate it and get on the wing but fail to tie it to the little Red metal tab just outside the emergency exit on most jets and the raft floats away.
 
Last edited:
One factor that should also be a consideration is water temp. Your time in the water where you can actually function is just minutes with a 40 degree water temp. Warm water I would be inclined to ditch rather then go into trees. Cold water I will take the trees every time.
George
 
I have watched WWII vids of aircraft ditching near the carrier. In some cases one wing hit the water first causing the aircraft to cartwheel and remain upright. I wonder if forced to ditch we would have a better chance of staying upright by doing the same.
One of the old POH's I have for s certified plane recommends putting one wing the water first to avoid going over.

I have a friend and fellow RV builder who ditched a Cherokee on the way back from the Bahamas. It was just he and his wife on board.

He said that they were not wearing their life vets or safety gear and once the engine stopped the put that stuff on their laps.

When the plane hit, that gear was all thrown into the foot well and they never retrieved any of it.

He said that as soon as the plane stopped moving he egressed the plane and couldn't find his wife so he started to swim back towards the plane only to see his wife pop up out of the water. He swam right past here, out the door while she was still in the seat and he never saw her because of the air bubbles.

The plane floated, tail in the air for maybe five minutes and they were in the water 15 minutes before the Coast Guard rescued them.

The reason for the short duration of their swim was that they were given a bad winds forecast from the FAA weather briefer, later proven by the NTSB. By the time he realized the wouldn't make shore, he was too far out to turn around. They Controller scrambled the helicopter while they were still in the air and at one point they thought they would fly formation before running out of fuel.

We talked a length about his adventure and the ditching procedures included in my POH is influenced by his experience.

With the tip-up canopy on my RV-9 tail dragger, I will open the canopy but not jettison it. I will do my best to get the tailwheel in the water first and at stall speed. Those 10 MPH of lower stall speeds of the -9 will really help reduce the impact. Hitting the water, regardless of how slow will probably slam the nose down and flip the canopy forward, pulling out the hydraulic lift struts. If the canopy closes again, once the water pressure equalizes, I will simply push it open and exit the airplane.

Keep in mind, if the canopy is unlatched and the plane slews sideways, there is a chance the canopy frame could hit myself or my passenger.
 
The reason for the short duration of their swim was that they were given a bad winds forecast from the FAA weather briefer, later proven by the NTSB. By the time he realized the wouldn't make shore, he was too far out to turn around.

Hmmmm...must have been a seriously wrong forecast. Isn't the closest Point of Entry only something like 60 miles from the Florida coast?
 
I have watched WWII vids of aircraft ditching near the carrier. In some cases one wing hit the water first causing the aircraft to cartwheel and remain upright. I wonder if forced to ditch we would have a better chance of staying upright by doing the same.
That's a consideration i've kept in mind. For a low-wing airplane, you wouldn't need much bank to hit the wingtip (well, less than a high-wing). My logic is that the transfer of inertia from a simple forward energy vector into both rotational and translational inertia may bleed off some of the direct impact forces as well.

That, combined with unlatching the canopy before impact, would be my plan. Although i'd still prefer a flat beach. :p
 
My logic is that the transfer of inertia from a simple forward energy vector into both rotational and translational inertia may bleed off some of the direct impact forces as well.

I'm not so sure about this and the side forces it may produce.

At the time the plane is "grabbed" by the water, it will come to a stop very quickly. If you're secured tightly by the shoulder belts and you decelerate straight ahead, your body will stay close to the seat and your head will flop forward....hopefully not hitting the stick or anything else. If you touch a wingtip and the plane spins 90 degrees and then "bites" into the water, it may in fact not flip over, but the deceleration will throw your shoulders and head into the side of the plane and canopy.

Hmmmm. I don't know which would be best.
 
At the time the plane is "grabbed" by the water, it will come to a stop very quickly. If you're secured tightly by the shoulder belts and you decelerate straight ahead, your body will stay close to the seat and your head will flop forward....hopefully not hitting the stick or anything else. If you touch a wingtip and the plane spins 90 degrees and then "bites" into the water, it may in fact not flip over, but the deceleration will throw your shoulders and head into the side of the plane and canopy.
It's all speculation of course, but I sort of have in mind that putting one wingtip in would swing the aircraft above the water and bring the nose in to the water in (roughly) a 30 degree wing low, 30 degree nose low attitude. So you'd get a combination of sideways and forward stopping forces, with (i'm guessing) a majority of them being forwards. If I dropped the pilot's side wing in the water, i'd be thrown into the empty part of the cabin (RV-6). My passenger could prepare with a balled up sweater beside their head in case they get tossed sideways into the canopy.

Maybe it's over-thinking. Maybe it would be better to just go in straight, take the flip, and push open the canopy. I'm sure if the situation ever arises, i'll choose one of these options. Which one will probably depend on how high I am when I have to make the decision.
 
To throw another option into the ring, if wearing a parachute, would it be better to bail instead of ride it in, or would you be concerned about being drowned by the parachute?
 
Bail Out

Jurjis Kairys chose to bail out of the Sukhoi when the engine quit. No significant injuries, he spent a few hours in the water before rescue.
 
To throw another option into the ring, if wearing a parachute, would it be better to bail instead of ride it in, or would you be concerned about being drowned by the parachute?

Way back when I was young and foolish I did some skydive training. What I remember from the old round parachute days was to unfasten your harness when you got close to the water and slip out of it as soon as your feet touched the water. The reason for waiting for your feet to touch was that it is very easy to misjudge your height above water.

Don
 
To throw another option into the ring, if wearing a parachute, would it be better to bail instead of ride it in, or would you be concerned about being drowned by the parachute?

I've made several parachute landings in water. As long as you keep your head and don't try to swim through the canopy (go under and away) it's a piece of cake. Fun actually.
 
Last edited:
prep for water

Might not be time for the following, after ditching.... but I carry a tool that Allan sells at Antisplat Aero... made with a specific notch to break canopy pieces away. On water flights I also carry the spare air attached to my vest.
Did this while sailing and sleeping on boats too. The thought of being trapped and only needed a few short minutes to extricate myself has spurred me to carry additional items. On some Alaska research flights I kept the survival suit on during flight and rolled down to my waist. Much of it might just be wishful thinking I suppose....
 
pancake it in! i heard about this technique from an old timer years ago. never tried it, never heard of anyone else even talk about it, so here it is.

approach full flaps and as low as possible, at the last moment pull back and stall the plane. you will gain a bit of altitude and slow to minimum speed before pancaking it in.

a quick prayer to your favorite god or goddess is not a bad idea either.

Definition of PANCAKE LANDING

: a landing in which the airplane is stalled usually unintentionally above the landing surface causing it to drop abruptly in an approximately horizontal position with little forward motion.
 
Hmmmm...must have been a seriously wrong forecast. Isn't the closest Point of Entry only something like 60 miles from the Florida coast?

I've heard this story from the pilot's perspective. IIRC, the leg was substantially longer than 60 NM. They launched, found unexpected headwinds, called FSS, were told "It's gonna turn into a tailwind". Lather, rinse, repeat, until things were out of hand.

It was determined later that the FSS was using an out of date wind forecast.
 
pancake it in! i heard about this technique from an old timer years ago. never tried it, never heard of anyone else even talk about it, so here it is.

approach full flaps and as low as possible, at the last moment pull back and stall the plane. you will gain a bit of altitude and slow to minimum speed before pancaking it in.

a quick prayer to your favorite god or goddess is not a bad idea either.

Definition of PANCAKE LANDING

: a landing in which the airplane is stalled usually unintentionally above the landing surface causing it to drop abruptly in an approximately horizontal position with little forward motion.

The only thing I'd worry about is the poor depth perception you have over water. That would make it difficult to tell when "the last moment" arrives. Still, I think, at least with a tip-up, this is what I'd try to pull off.
 
I'm sure that made for an uncomfortable conversation afterwards... :)
His wife is a great person, helped him build an RV and flies with him often.

Hmmmm...must have been a seriously wrong forecast. Isn't the closest Point of Entry only something like 60 miles from the Florida coast?
I've heard this story from the pilot's perspective. IIRC, the leg was substantially longer than 60 NM. They launched, found unexpected headwinds, called FSS, were told "It's gonna turn into a tailwind". Lather, rinse, repeat, until things were out of hand.

It was determined later that the FSS was using an out of date wind forecast.
What Kyle said, FSS screwed up, it almost cost him his life, and the leg was longer than 60 NM.

The reason the pilot didn't fill up on the islands is after inspecting the condition of the rusty fueling barrels and consulting the winds forecast, he felt is safer to go with the fuel on board rather than risk fuel contamination.
 
Nope

Sorry but I can't let this one pass. It was the PIC making poor ADM choices. We're given very little info on this incident but to give wholesale blame to FSS is absolutely ridiculous.

A headwind puts you in the water? Didn't the PIC check his progress throughout the flight and realize he had a headwind? Divert to another airport? Turn back to the departure airport? If the fuel planning was that tight shouldn't the PIC have been hypersensitive to his progress?

"I won't use that bad fuel so I'll just continue to fly over open water" is just one link in the accident chain. I will wager there were many dumb choices in this accident chain.

I don't let ATC nor FSS ever fly my airplane...

A take away lesson is to ask how old the winds aloft forecast is.
 
I kind of wondered about the wind forecast myself. It had to have been really off to cause you to use all your reserve and still end up well short of your destination and in the water. With the location of the airports in the Bahamas and Florida a turn around should have been possible at very low fuel state. To overfly airports and start across a small 60 mile open stretch of water knowing you can't make it unless you get a radical wind change is one very optimistic pilot!
George
 
His wife is a great person, helped him build an RV and flies with him often.


What Kyle said, FSS screwed up, it almost cost him his life, and the leg was longer than 60 NM.

The reason the pilot didn't fill up on the islands is after inspecting the condition of the rusty fueling barrels and consulting the winds forecast, he felt is safer to go with the fuel on board rather than risk fuel contamination.

And he didn't just fly to the closest airport with better fuel facilities?
 
I'm not the pilot, so I can't answer for him and this is way off topic.

What was supposed to be a mild tail wind turned into a significant headwind, along the line of 40 knots, IIRC.

So, what turned into a flight with significant margin turned into one w/ no margin.

As for planning, we have all gotten spoiled by using our GPS's. This flight happened before the availability of sat navigation and a watch and compass were the primary over water navigation tools.

So diverting to another island was not an option.

Now, back to the question at hand, ditching. The reason for his ditching isn't important, what was that he did everything correctly and lived to tell the tail.
 
I'm not the pilot, so I can't answer for him and this is way off topic.

What was supposed to be a mild tail wind turned into a significant headwind, along the line of 40 knots, IIRC.

So, what turned into a flight with significant margin turned into one w/ no margin.

As for planning, we have all gotten spoiled by using our GPS's. This flight happened before the availability of sat navigation and a watch and compass were the primary over water navigation tools.

So diverting to another island was not an option.

Now, back to the question at hand, ditching. The reason for his ditching isn't important, what was that he did everything correctly and lived to tell the tail.

I disagree that this is off-topic...the best way to deal with an accident is not to have one in the first place, and as the "debunking myths" page pointed out from their data:

In nearly a third of all single-engine ditchings, fuel exhaustion, mismanagement, or contamination is the suspected cause...

Further, you stated that neither the pilot nor passenger were wearing lifejackets, despite what was an apparently long overwater route, another bad idea.

If it was a 40 knot headwind, then turning around would have made it a 40 knot tailwind. Let's assume around 120 knots for a Cherokee...that's 165 knots groundspeed.

Edited: So he got himself at least 80 nautical miles (assuming 1/2 hour reserve) from land, with insufficient fuel to proceed, and nobody was wearing survival gear.

And yet this is FSS' fault?
 
Last edited:
Pancake landing

Saw Turbo's post about "Pancake" landing into water. Minimizing forward speed onto any "bad" situation is a good idea...period. I thankfully have never had to, but a very experienced bush pilot I know and trust has survived 3 "hang it in the trees" by pancake into tall lodge pole or spruce trees.
 
I'm not the pilot, so I can't answer for him and this is way off topic.

What was supposed to be a mild tail wind turned into a significant headwind, along the line of 40 knots, IIRC.

So, what turned into a flight with significant margin turned into one w/ no margin.

As for planning, we have all gotten spoiled by using our GPS's. This flight happened before the availability of sat navigation and a watch and compass were the primary over water navigation tools.

So diverting to another island was not an option.

It appears to have taken place in 2005...SAT navigation had been easily available for several years.
 
It appears to have taken place in 2005...SAT navigation had been easily available for several years.

You are assuming the link provided was the person I was talking about and that he had a GPS on board, neither may be good assumptions.
 
Last edited:
You are assuming the link provided was the person I was talking about and that he had a GPS on board.

So there were TWO Cherokees who flew from the Bahamas to Florida into 40 knot winds and ran out of gas just short of the Florida coastline?

Uh, yeah...
 
You are assuming the link provided was the person I was talking about and that he had a GPS on board.

Although I am, in fact, assuming that the link posted describes the event, I am not assuming that a GPS was on board. I am merely pointing out that in 2005, time/heading was certainly not the primary method of over-water navigation.
 
Lets all remember that 40 kt. headwind instantly becomes a 40 kt. tailwind after a 180 degree turn.

And lets look at the the definition of forecast and why we it should only be one tool in the kit bag:

noun: forecast; plural noun: forecasts

1. a prediction or estimate of future events, especially coming weather or a financial trend.
synonyms: prediction, prophecy, forewarning, prognostication, augury, divination, prognosis
 
Although I am, in fact, assuming that the link posted describes the event, I am not assuming that a GPS was on board. I am merely pointing out that in 2005, time/heading was certainly not the primary method of over-water navigation.

That was the accident. I do not remember what nav gear was aboard, and it probably wasn't a causal factor in the event in any case.

Thankfully, nobody was hurt and we all have a good reminder that weather is whatever it is, regardless of what was forecast.
 
So there were TWO Cherokees who flew from the Bahamas to Florida into 40 knot winds and ran out of gas just short of the Florida coastline?

Uh, yeah...

That's good!

No, I just don't know the time frame of his ditching. Kyle probably knows better than I do. For some reason, I thought it happened before then but I could very well be wrong; probably am wrong.
 
In case I missed it... Do the folks here that fly over water regularlarly also wear a "Mae West" while flying? If so, what is a good one? I fly over Minnesota, "Land of 10,000 Lakes", I've been thinking of buying one.
 
My ditching procedure (or some variation)

1. turn 90 degrees to waves
2. tighten seat belts
3. starting cutting...yes I carry this tool in my airplane when over water, swamp or mountainous terraign

2n84qi1.jpg
[/IMG]
 
Back
Top