LEGAL?

[CAVESPRING]

Detail InformationUser Name: Donaldson, John
Date: 2007/12/19
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.:

Narrative: The Island Air Flight School & Charters Inc. Cessna 150M aircraft was on a local VFR dual instruction training flight from the Toronto (City Centre) Airport (CYTZ). A simulated engine failure was conducted from an altitude of 3,500 feet, with periodic engine warming every 500 feet during the descent. During the overshoot, the engine sputtered and would not produce power. The instructor took control and carried out a successful forced landing in the student's selected farmer's field. The aircraft was subsequently moved to a nearby road and, after an inspection by the owner, was flown back to its home base by the instructor (the student drove back with the operator's staff who had been called to the scene by the instructor). The aircraft was grounded upon its return pending a full inspection by Maintenance staff. A number of aircraft components were damaged to varying degrees during the off-airport landing.

[crazy_aviator]

NOT legal IF there is no release from the AME OR a ferry flight permit issued. A pilot CANNOT make a decision as to the airworthiness of an aircraft IF there is obvious damage which is beyond cosmetics or,, hard landings, lightening strike without visible damage etc !

[CAVESPRING]

Yeah but can you just line up the airplane on a public road and take-off? AND there was damage to the airplane apparently due to the forced!

[iflyforpie]

Perfectly legal if you have a ferry permit and permission from the authorities to take off from the road. Sure you can knock off the wings and transport it, but why?

I remember shaking my head that they disassembled that 172 from Victoria that did a perfect landing on a long straight stretch of #3 east of Hope due to weather. Wonder what these people think of planes routinely landing and taking off of roads in the north?

[Hedley]

Slight thread-jack:

If there was an aircraft landed on a road, and I was asked
to fly it out ...

If I thought it wasn't damaged, I would still bring an
AME out to inspect it before I tried to fly it out, because if
I didn't do the landing, how would I know if it was hard
or not?! I would want him to look it over and sign the
journey log that in his opinion, it was airworthy.

I would alsoe call Enforcement, to let them know what I
was doing, and I would ask them if they are going to lay
any charges if I fly it out of there.

Then, I would call the local cops to co-ordinate the shutting
down of the road during the takeoff.

Needless to say, I would carefully examine the road
before takeoff to make sure that there were no signs
to clip with the wing tips, no wires to trip, etc.

Surprises are for Christmas morning, not aviation.

[square]

Yeah cops close the road down for these things all the time, and the damage could've been to wheel farings or something negligible.. or the 'operator's staff' (almost surely maintenance staff) might've replaced stuff before they carried on. They do field work all the time.

[itsajob]

The 172 from Victoria was trucked out because of the damage to the leading edge caused by a sign post strike after the landing. The wing had to be reskined due to puncture and cave in so I dont think they were scared of flying off a road but slighty turned off of the idea of flying an obviously unsafe airplane.

[VikVaughan]

Needless to say, I would carefully examine the road
before takeoff to make sure that there were no signs
to clip with the wing tips, no wires to trip, etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-5ImwoU8lI

[Hedley]

Sigh. There's really not much new under the sun, is there?

FYI what you want an AME to sign off in the journey log,
after an off-field landing, is that he has inspected the aircraft
in accordance with CAR 625 Appendix G, paragraph 8, and
has determined that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... /a625g.htm

CAR 625 App G (8) Heavy or Overweight Landings

An aircraft landing gear is designed to withstand landings at a particular aircraft weight and vertical descent velocity. If either of these parameters is exceeded during a landing, it is then probable that some damage can be caused to the landing gear or its supporting structure. Overstressing can also be caused by landing with drift or landing in an abnormal attitude (e.g. nose or tail wheel striking the runway before the main wheels).

Some aircraft have structural elements which are known to give a visual indication that specified "g" forces have been exceeded, but in all cases of suspected heavy landings, the flight crew shall be consulted for details of aircraft weight, fuel distribution, landing conditions and whether any noises indicative of structural failure were heard.

The damage resulting from a heavy landing is normally concentrated around the landing gear, its supporting structure in the wings or fuselage, the wing and stabilizer attachments and the engine mounts. Secondary damage can be found on the fuselage upper and lower skin and structure, and wing skin and structure, depending on the configuration and loading of the aircraft. On some aircraft the manufacturer can recommend that if no damage is found in the primary areas, the secondary areas need not be inspected; but if damage is found in the primary areas, then the inspection shall be continued.

Because of the number of factors involved, it is not possible to lay down precise details of the inspections which must be made after any incident, on any type of aircraft, but a preliminary inspection shall normally include the items detailed below.

(a) Landing Gear

(i) Examine tires for creep, flats, bulges, cuts, pressure loss and enlargement.

(ii) Examine wheels and brakes for fluid leaks, cracks and other damage.

(iii) Examine axles, struts and stays for distortion and other damage.

(iv) Check shock struts for fluid leaks, scoring and abnormal extension.

(v) Examine landing gear attachments for cracks, other damage and signs of movement. In some instances this can require the removal of certain bolts in critical locations, for detailed nondestructive testing.

(vi) Examine the structure in the vicinity of the landing gear attachments for signs of cracks, distortion, movement of rivets or bolts and fluid leakage.

(vii) Examine doors and fairings for damage and distortion.

(viii) Jack the aircraft and carry out retraction and nose-wheel steering tests; check for correct operation of locks and warning lights, clearances in wheel bays, fit of doors and signs of fluid leaks.

(b) Wings

(i) Examine the upper and lower skin surfaces for signs of wrinkling, pulled rivets, cracks and movement at skin joints. Inertia loading on the wing will normally result in wrinkles on the lower surface and cracks or rivet damage on the upper surface, but stress induced by wing-mounted engines can result in wrinkles on either surface.

(ii) Check for signs of fuel leaks and seepage from integral tanks.

(iii) Examine wing root fillets for cracks and signs of movement.

(iv) Check flying controls for freedom of movement.

(v) Check balance weights, powered flying control unit mountings and control surface hinges for cracks, and control surfaces for cracks or bucking.

(vi) Check spars for distortion and cracks.

(c) Fuselage

(i) Examine fuselage skin for wrinkling or other damage particularly at skin joints and adjacent to wing and landing gear attachments.

(ii) Examine pressure bulkheads for distortion and cracks.

(iii) Examine the supporting structure of heavy components such as galley modules, batteries, water tanks, fire extinguishers, auxiliary power units, etc. for distortion and cracks.

(iv) Check that the inertia switches for fire extinguishers, emergency lights, etc, have not tripped.

(v) Check instruments and instrument panels for damage and security.

(vi) Check ducts and system pipelines for leaks and buckling.

(vii) Check fit of access doors, emergency exits, etc., and surrounding areas for distortion and cracks.

(viii) Check loading and unloading operation of cargo containers and condition of cargo restraint system.

(d) Engines

(i) Check engine and propeller controls for full and free movement.

(ii) Examine engine mounts and pylons for damage and distortion, tubular members for bowing and cracks at welds, mounting bolts and attachments for damage and evidence of movement.

(iii) Check freedom of rotating assemblies - on piston engines, check freedom of rotation with spark plugs removed.

(iv) Examine engine cowlings for wrinkling and distortion, and integrity of fasteners.

(v) Check for oil, fuel and hydraulic fluid leaks.

(vi) Check propeller shaft for alignment.

(e) Empennage

(i) Check flying controls for freedom of movement.

(ii) Examine rudder and elevator hinges for cracks, and control surfaces for cracks and distortion, particularly near balance weight fittings.

(iii) Examine stabilizer attachments and fairings, screw jacks and mountings for distortion and signs of movement.

(f) Engine Runs

Provided that no major structural distortion has been found, engine runs shall be carried out to establish the satisfactory operation of all systems and controls. A general check for system leaks shall be carried out while the engines are running, and on turbine engines the rundown time shall be checked.

[_dwj_]

Speaking of which, if you read this month's enforcement actions in COPA, you'll see a guy was charged with 602.01 ("No person shall operate an aircraft in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger the life or property of any person") after doing a precautionary landing on a gravel road, checking the plane out, and crashing into a ditch while taking off. Perhaps he should have just landed in a farmer's field?

[Hedley]

A better choice - which would have been in compliance
with the CARs - would have been after the landing on
the non-certified runway, to open up the gas drains
and torch the aircraft - destroy it, so it can no longer
commit the dreadful sin of aviation in Canada.

This would have been an approved procedure, because
when all aircraft in Canada stop flying, the Canadian
Aviation Regulations will have finally served their ultimate
purpose.

[Tango01]

Hedley, you could! Nothing says that you can't display an open flame or play with matches on a farmers field. However, I don't agree with the second part. Once all the aircraft are no longer flying, TC will go after radio controlled aircraft, watch!

T01

[crazy_aviator]

I recall from my last road landing ,,, minimum, commercial pilot to fly the plane ( which i was) an AME to "sign off the plane as airworthy" ( which i was) the road needed to be secured of traffic for the take-off ( which it was) and a report was written up by the (ex) bush pilot officer ( after a few bush stories and waiting for the weather to clear). Did i mention that i REALLY really had to take a crap AND the weather wasnt pretty and i wanted to top up the fuel tank with the jerry in the back seat ?

[Blakey]

I recall from my last road landing ,,, minimum, commercial pilot to fly the plane ( which i was) an AME to "sign off the plane as airworthy" ( which i was) the road needed to be secured of traffic for the take-off ( which it was) and a report was written up by the (ex) bush pilot officer ( after a few bush stories and waiting for the weather to clear). Did i mention that i REALLY really had to take a crap AND the weather wasnt pretty and i wanted to top up the fuel tank with the jerry in the back seat ?

The commercial pilot can NOT be an owner of the aircraft.

[crazy_aviator]

Yes, i DO now recall that reg. concerning the comm pilot NOT being the owner also HOWEVER, it was "up north" and Wisdom prevailed . !

[gustind]

Was it written in the journey log or not? Yes I think this is turning into a thread about the requirements to take-off on a road somewhere blah blah blah. If memory serves me right, it is in the Highway Traffic Act as to what needs to take place for an a/c to t/o from a road. Police has to block it off, comm pilot supervises approves it etc,.

All in all, my opinion it was legal but completely stupid. We'll see the follow up on this...