Recommended Posts

ROCKLIN, Calif. (AP) ? A small plane has made an emergency landing in traffic on a highway median in the Sacramento area.

The California Highway Patrol says the aircraft landed safely Wednesday morning on a grassy center divide of Highway 65 near Rocklin as cars whizzed by. No injuries were reported.

Pilot John Mares says he was testing a new engine on the Beech BE35-33A when it lost power at about 3,500 feet, leaving him with no choice but to find a place to land.

A mechanic was on scene to see if the fuel pump failed. The highway remained open although traffic slowed down to see the plane.

The FAA says an inspector is on the scene. The CHP will close the northbound lane if the plane is cleared to take off.

source

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1119688-plane-makes-daring-highway-landing/
Share on other sites

They say daring, I say dangerous. The same thing happened with Southern Airways 242 after surging caused both of it's engines to fail and the landing killed 9 people on the ground.

They say daring, I say dangerous. The same thing happened with Southern Airways 242 after surging caused both of it's engines to fail and the landing killed 9 people on the ground.

So what would the alternative have been? You can't not land the plane. The least risky scenario may still have a ton of risk, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the wrong choice.

In an open field, on water. Both give you about the same level of casualties on the plane, with much smaller risk to people on the ground.

Landing on the highway is the correct procedure for emergency landing when a runway is not available. An open field is a lower tiered choice, because of the amount of variables you're going to face (trees, ground conditions, surface quality, etc). Suggesting to ditch in water is just stupid, because it is really hard to execute a good landing -- direction of the waves, angle of the plane, etc. Ditching in water is practically the LAST resort.

In an open field, on water. Both give you about the same level of casualties on the plane, with much smaller risk to people on the ground.

Since when is it legal to drive on the median of a highway? You know, the part that splits the opposing sides that is usually made of grass, such as the one this guy landed on. If anyone got hit on the median, its their own fault for driving where it is illegal to drive...
In an open field, on water. Both give you about the same level of casualties on the plane, with much smaller risk to people on the ground.
Water Landings are the most dangerous, and rarely yield survivors. Field and such would also be a very bad idea, for a small plane that isn't designed for off-tarmac landings, cause it'll just dig in and flip.

They are supposed to land on the highway, it is historically the safest course of action, and while sometimes people on the ground die, numbers wise it's most always the safest course of action.

Field and such would also be a very bad idea, for a small plane that isn't designed for off-tarmac landings, cause it'll just dig in and flip.

Not really. Pilots are trained in soft-field (aka non-tarmac) landings. Many won't actually practice them since insurance companies don't like it, but the principle is the same. Basically you keep the nose wheel off the ground for as long as you possibly can and just it slowly come down.

The real problem isn't the field, its potential ditches. If you land and your wheels hit a ditch before you've slowed down enough you will flip the plane. My instructor lost his engine on climbout and had to make an emergency landing in a field, he landed perfectly and was slowing down when he hit a ditch and flipped the plane. Thankfully he was only going 10-20 knots so nobody was injured (plane was damaged), if he was going like 50-60 he'd be dead.

They say daring, I say dangerous. The same thing happened with Southern Airways 242 after surging caused both of it's engines to fail and the landing killed 9 people on the ground.

If you look at the video, you can see that he landed on a fairly wide median that was a well curated turf. By not landing on the road itself he avoided any potential traffic.

Pretty cool that after he gets his fuel pump fixed, the FAA will clear him and he will get to take off from the highway as well. He needs to get a better mechanic next time who will make sure that the new engine/fuel pump won't fail in the air, as he might not be so lucky to have such a good landing place next time.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!