jumbojim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, RR: 50 Posted (5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
I was thinking about this when i was trying to think of a solution to a perfect ditching of an airliner.
I thought of something that may help in the situation its a bit far fetched and it may sound silly to most but what about having skids on the bottom like sea planes on airliners or you may have a better idea to improve an aircraft not much has changed in the overall design for a while.
Whats your thoughts.
David L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9217 posts, RR: 42 Reply 1, posted (5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3431 times:
Perhaps it would help during a ditching. However, what would the aerodynamics be like for the 99.99999...% of the time that the aircraft wasn't being ditched? In the grand scheme of things, the ditching of airliners hardly ever happens.
jumbojim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, RR: 50 Reply 2, posted (5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3393 times:
Hi david
I agree with you it hardly happens but it does happen.
Also agree that the it would throw the aerodynamics out.
But its a thought maybe not a very good one
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 4, posted (5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3091 times:
Quoting jumbojim747 (Thread starter): what about having skids on the bottom like sea planes on airliners
What would they do? Are we talking about big pontoons that keep the engines from hitting the water or just something to take the water impact? If the former, that would require too much weight and drag to ever be viable. If the latter, what exactly are we trying to prevent?
mandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6181 posts, RR: 74 Reply 5, posted (5 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2995 times:
Just get an engine jettison switch...
As you're about to ditch, if engines are still on and still got fuel.. power up the APU, as you get lower, press the jettison switch, all electrics and bleed switches to APU (why you want bleed air for ditching I dunno ) cut fuel and isolate it from the piping to the engines, after a few secs... jettisons the engine...
Voila, you now have a streamline glider to ditch with...
Nah, it's just my Christmas prank... though better than the skids idea.... I think... (OK, I better stop drinking!)
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
bristolflyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 2135 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 months 5 hours ago) and read 2734 times:
I only remember one airliner being landed on water (ditching of US Airways flight on Hudson River). How much more control would skis afford exactly? That landing was near perfect.
TWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 762 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (4 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 2198 times:
How about this one, inflatable floats that pop out and inflate from strategic parts of the aircraft that help the plane float after it is in the water? Sounds like it could save lives and not weigh too much.
Just thinkin' here.
There's nothing like the smell of Jet-A in the morning. It smells like... VICTORY!!!
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, RR: 66 Reply 8, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2139 times:
Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 7):
How about this one, inflatable floats that pop out and inflate from strategic parts of the aircraft that help the plane float after it is in the water? Sounds like it could save lives and not weigh too much.
Save lives? Yes, in very very rare cases.
Weight too much? Also yes. It would weight a lot. You have to factor in the weight of the gas to inflate the floats, plus the containers for the gas, and the gas lines...
Don't get me wrong. I love ideas. I think ideas are great. Weird, left-field ideas have sometimes been the clever thing to do. However you always have to figure out if there is something better you can do with the money.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
jumbojim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, RR: 50 Reply 10, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2031 times:
Hey jimbo.
I guess its all about money and a life doesn't factor to the bean counters in the board room of airline companies .
Its sad we come to this.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 11, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2005 times:
Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 7): How about this one, inflatable floats that pop out and inflate from strategic parts of the aircraft that help the plane float after it is in the water? Sounds like it could save lives and not weigh too much.
I think it's a cool idea but I think it would only work in a very narrow range of crashes...you need a ditching where the aircraft is intact enough to be floated (and to have passengers survive), but damaged enough that a normal ditching wouldn't have stayed floating for long enough. That's a pretty small set of possible accidents.
Quoting jumbojim747 (Reply 10): I guess its all about money and a life doesn't factor to the bean counters in the board room of airline companies .
It's all about trades. It's *not* all about money. It's about keeping people safe while still providing them economical transportation. Even if you want to take the purely cynical view, lives are expensive (crashes even more so) and airlines take it into account from that direction.
The counter argument that usually gets screwed up is that a life isn't worth infinite money...we will not spend any arbitrarily large amount just to save one person. If we did that, there would be no commercial aviation industry (or auto industry or space program or woodshop or ...). The whole point of engineering is to apply technology *safely* to the benefit of mankind; engineers spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to be safe enough while still being practical. Aviation engineers, in particular, are very very good at this.
Come to? It's better today than it's ever been. Air travel was, relatively speaking, horrifically dangerous for about the first 80% of its life. It got better than virtually all other modes of transportation (including walking and driving) and now is orders of magnitude safer, all while being cheaper (in real dollars), more ubiquitous, and more convenient than ever before.
Other than the Ethiopian hi-jacking, this is the only other ditching I can think of since jet transport aircraft started crossing water. It is very rare.
Quoting jumbojim747 (Reply 10): Hey jimbo.
I guess its all about money and a life doesn't factor to the bean counters in the board room of airline companies .
Its sad we come to this.
I can understand your sentiment, but with flying so incredibly safe today, would passengers be willing to pay 4 or 5 times the fare to increase safety from say 1 in a Billion to 1 in 1.5 Billion? Remember more or less, passengers dictate the fare, not the Board Room.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
Other than the Ethiopian hi-jacking, this is the only other ditching I can think of since jet transport aircraft started crossing water. It is very rare.
There have been others although not all were planned ditchings. A few other water landings that come to mind.
DC-9-33 that ran out of fuel en route JFK-SXM and ditched in 1970. Operated for ALM Antillean Airlines by US charter carrier Overseas National Airways. 23 fatalities, 40 survivors. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19700502-0
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, RR: 36 Reply 14, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1850 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13): DC-9-33 that ran out of fuel en route JFK-SXM and ditched in 1970.
Yes, that is the one I mentioned, and I cringe every time I read the book about it. It is a great read if anyone is interested, entitled "35 Miles From Shore".
But I understand what you mean about a "ditching" vs, simply ending up in the water. There have been dozens of incidents of an aircraft ending up in the water, usually near the runway for which they were aiming, shoot USAir/USAirways put three in the water in the vicinity of LGA alone!
Then there was the DC-8-43 of CP at HND, skipped across the water, activated the spoilers and ended up just on shore!
But really with regard to a "ditching", I was really referring to intentionally landing the aircraft on water for various reasons, that the pilots though continuing was not a better idea. As opposed to ending up in the water, because it happened to be near the airport.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
airportugal310 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3070 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1636 times:
What is it with people on this board and hating "bean counters"?
Everyone loves a profitable airline but no one cares about how it got to be that way...
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2312 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (4 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1454 times:
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 5): Just get an engine jettison switch...
As you're about to ditch, if engines are still on and still got fuel.. power up the APU, as you get lower, press the jettison switch, all electrics and bleed switches to APU (why you want bleed air for ditching I dunno ) cut fuel and isolate it from the piping to the engines, after a few secs... jettisons the engine...
Actually Boeing recommends that if you have to ditch, try to do so when the engines are still running to improve controllablity of the airplane when setting it down in the water.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9217 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 60 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6181 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
