johnh wrote:
I was very surprised that a French PPL requires training in precautionary (not emergency) off-airport landings. The instructor seemed surprised when I said “why would you ever do that?” But I guess it means that if you DO make one, then nobody is going to be super-surprised.I think this is yet another hangover from the 1930s – it seems like the French PPL syllabus was probably made up by Bleriot and hasn’t changed since.
They teach us precautionary (off-airport) landings in the UK as well.
You are supposed to execute those when you have, for example, weather problems (the clouds closed behind you).
Also if you have engine problems – when you see a problem developing, you might prefer to land while you still have engine power, than to glide.
In my 22 years I’ve never known anyone who did a precautionary landing – in a fixed wing aircraft. I have vaguely heard of some renter doing one, and leaving the plane there and just going home.
Psychologically this is obviously difficult, for anyone who cares about the aircraft, because in most cases the aircraft will need to be dismantled.
Indeed, they were taught in my PPL.
What if your passenger has a medical urgency (not: emergency) ?
I had a landing, which I would call a precautionary, under such condition. At a closed airfield, which in Germany is the legal aviation equivalent of any flat piece of ground.
I had been in contact with FIS Langen, who were helpful.
And a flying buddy of mine put his BO207 down in a large grass field, when the engine ran badly during initial descent towards EDMA (presumably iced up gascolator on a summer day) but still had power. He took a break, did some ground running and then left for EDMA.
He had also been in contact with Langen.
No further consequences. In either case.
I do recall being taught about precautionary versus emergency landings in the US but it might have been from my father, not an instructor… In the real world the artificial distinction doesn’t actually make a difference once you’re on the ground, the pilot is in either case responsible for safe resumption of the flight and asks the owner (if he isn’t the owner) and A&P for help if he needs it.
A friend of mine was ferrying a Cessna 140 from US coast to coast. He’d bought it to resell after some repairs to be done after he got it home (he is a German resident in the US and an FAA A&P IA). At some point he experienced a concerning airframe vibration and landed on a road as a precaution. ATC was not involved and the problem turned out to be easy enough to fix, something to do with the cowling IIRC. However by the time it was fixed a policeman had arrived. The policeman would not let him take off and called the FAA FSDO. The FAA guy then asked to talk to the pilot, listened to the story, then asked to talk to the policeman who after that conversation blocked the road and finally let him leave 
Same story with another friend who landed a Stearman on Interstate 8 probably 20 years ago. He wouldn’t have been talking on the radio but once on the ground made some calls and got some help from a duster operation nearby. Eventually the Highway Patrol let him fly off.
I also recall a story from my Cessna Reims Rocket owning friend in Germany. I can’t remember why he landed in a field but apparently he was able to resolve the issue, and told me he was happy to get out of there before anybody from officialdom showed up.
What if your passenger has a medical urgency (not: emergency) ?
Mayday, and land at an airport. The ambulance can get there quick, which won’t usually be the case with some field. Many/most fields are actually completely inaccessible to a vehicle.
Peter wrote:
What if your passenger has a medical urgency (not: emergency) ?Mayday, and land at an airport. The ambulance can get there quick, which won’t usually be the case with some field. Many/most fields are actually completely inaccessible to a vehicle.
Had a discussion with my instructor ages ago re: passenger medical problems. She said it makes sense to land on a runway, and makes sense to consider where is the nearest hospital. For example, for a pilot that is based at Elstree it might make sense to return to Elstree: a) Pilot is familiar with the aerodrome, should be quicker and more comfortable to use it (i.e. no go-arounds) and b) Watford hospital is nearby, while for some other airfield that might no be the case.
@Peter, is it actually a mayday? I thought that unless it is an aircraft in distress (or flight crew), it should be pan-pan.
Either will do, IMHO. Nobody will question your decision.
In my radio exam, 22 years ago, I was taught that if I see a raft in the water or hear an ELT beacon, I should set 7700 and declare a mayday and pass on the location etc.
arj1 wrote:
@Peter, is it actually a mayday? I thought that unless it is an aircraft in distress (or flight crew), it should be pan-pan.
I have it mind it is “PAN MEDICAL”. But as Peter says, for a medical emergency (not urgency) of a passenger, nobody will make you trouble for doing a MAYDAY.
Peter wrote:
Mayday, and land at an airport.
I’m not sure what ch.ess meant by “medical urgency”, I clearly understood a far more minor thing than you did. But if an ambulance is needed, or even just professional medical help beyond “first aid out of box”, I would say definitely a “real airport” if any is nearby, they will have EMTs (emergency medical technicians) or paramedics RIGHT THERE AT THE AIRPORT, bored out of their mind waiting for an emergency to happen (which will probably be the same person as the firefighters). Make use of them.
I’m puzzled too by this idea of a medical urgency. If they need treatment, an airport is the place to be. Even if it’s an uttanded grass strip, I can get the ambulance to be on the way while I’m in the air, or at worst when I get on the ground and they’ll know where to go.
Otherwise, what? Needs a pee or worse, or feeling sick? If it’s comes to it I’d rather clean up a mess IN the plane than a mess OF the plane. Hard to imagine what lies in between.
In maybe 2008 a pilot from a neighbouring airfield landed in a field near Dijon because he felt very unwell. It turned out to be the start of a heart attack, so he did the right thing. I can’t find a report, so it either wasn’t judged an accident or it’s an urban myth.
There may be a direct correlation between the likelihood to land in a field, and the ability to get out of a field (STOL, trailer)
It can’t be an easy decision to make. With an engine failure the decision is made for you For certain types of accidents, e.g. VFR IMC CFIT or partial power loss, more awareness on precautionary landings might make a difference to accident rates. On the other hand, so might diverting or turning back earlier.
