europa-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Getting one's feet wet...

Subject: Re: Getting one's feet wet...
From: J. Dutch Revenboer <dutchr@ionet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:30:54
Ditched with 60 degree flaps?  The nose had to have been pointed
straight down!


Tom & Cathy Friedland wrote:
> 
> I ditched an Army L-19.  Full flaps, forward speed probably about 25 mph.
> Pitched forward when the wheels hit but did not flip.  Floated about 15 
> minutes.
> 
> It was in Lake Michigan just off the beach in Chicago.  (The beach and the 
> roads
> were jammed with people.)  The next day divers brought up the aircraft and 
> found
> that the Midnight Aircraft Supply Company had already removed the prop and the
> radios!
> 
> Tom A079
> 
> Fred Fillinger wrote:
> 
> > Paul Sweeting wrote:
> > >
> > > Some interesting stats on Ditching...
> > > http://www.equipped.org/ditchtoc.htm 
> > > <http://www.equipped.org/ditchtoc.htm>
> > > <http://www.equipped.org/ditchingmyths.htm>
> > > ....
> >
> > Good stuff, but further confusing on whether flaps up or down.
> > Tri-gear manual says "gear and flaps should be down."   A cinch on the
> > gear part(!), but maybe this faux pas was the result of cut and paste
> > from the mono manual?  Most sources say flaps down on high wing, up on
> > low wing.  In addition to possible pitch down in the water
> > (aggravated by the big XS air scoop) and flip-over, one flap may rip
> > off asymmetrically, causing real trouble.  The manual is silent on
> > whether to unlatch the door(s).
> >
> > Similarly, on the mono, if one outrigger hits water before the other,
> > that could be bad too.  Lemme guess; factory tested both tri-gear and
> > mono in the North Sea?  Here's a sample I found of what happens in a
> > minor-injury incident (a Long-EZE; AAIB web site):
> >
> > "The pilot then informed Shoreham that he intended to ditch into the
> > sea near to Shoreham harbour.  Contact with the water was made at
> > approximately 60 kt in a nose up attitude. However, as soon as the
> > main landing gear touched the water it was ripped off causing the
> > aircraft to pitch nose down.  The nose of the aircraft detached on
> > impact and the instrument panel bulkhead was dragged forward.
> > Although the fuel tanks were nearly full the foam/fibreglass
> > construction remained intact and the aircraft floated in a stable
> > manner and in an upright position."
> >
> > Note also in this type plane the pilot certainly would have had the
> > nose gear raised, but still the damage.
> >
> > Any thoughts??
> >
> > Regards,
> > Fred F.
> 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>