if a plane crashed in water would i be safer than if the plane crashed on land?

Answer 1

Water abosorbs energy more than land (I assume the land is relatively solid) so the chances of being 'safer' are greater on water.

Answer 2

Hell No!!

I'd rather crash land on land any day.

At least that way if it's a 'controlled' decent then even with a missing undercarriage it CAN be skid landed even a a high(ish) speed.

Landing on water - judging from the footage I've seen is NOT a landing as the plane often breaks up because of the massive deceleration.

The only reason they make you wear life jackets is for something to do when crashing....and to make body recovery easier!!

Answer 3

Nope, no safer.

If a commercial airliner crash lands in the water the Engines would hit the water first and get ripped off, which would cause the nose of the aircraft to slam down in to water, which would cause the airframe shatter.

The only good thing about crashing into the sea is the fish get something to eat!

Answer 4

Realistically you would be become just a bit in the sea, depending how fast you were going of course. Over 500mph and there would be nothing left of the plane, except fuel floating on the oceans surface. Any slower and the plane would still break up because of its wings clipping the water, there is the possibility you may survive this, if you can get out. On land your chances would be deemed greater, but again it depends on the speed and nature of the crash. Discovery channel. Dont you just love it.

Answer 5

water or land will not make much of a difference. ALthough if the plane glides down and the angle of impact is close to 180 then water will be better as it will provide a smoother surface.

As far as impact is concerned, both will be the same. If you wanna experiment at home, try slapping water in a swimming pool when the water is still. Make sure you hand is flat and parallele to the surface of the water.

Answer 6

No, because you enter a factor that does not apply when crashing on land. You might drown! The effects of a crash on land is the same as hitting ground. The damage is done by the sudden stop, and not by the density of dirt vs water.

Answer 7

Yes, usually, which is why pilots try to make a controlled crash on water than on land. And for the swimming thing, airlines do have life jackets. But it all goes down the strength of the impact and the speed of the aircraft.

Answer 8

I doubt that it would make much difference. Commercial airplane crashes are almost always related to loss of control, and if you can't control the crash, you're probably dead no matter where it happens.

Light aircraft are a different story: give me land, any time. You could probably put down on a road, if you had to; I've done it. (The only damage to anything was a dent in the wing where it hit a speed limit sign.)

Answer 9

In a sense yes, but more people are likely do die in water, bucuz not many people know how to swim. The plane will also be less likely to "roll & crash" on land, so either way, the loss of passengers may be the same, just die in different ways.
It's the same either way if u ask me.

--Rich

Answer 10

It's probably about the same, on ground, the surface is harder, but it's land, so you could escape the aircraft quicker, but on water, the aircraft can float, but if you need to get away from the aircraft in a rush, then you'll struggle. Structurally, impacting water can be as effective as impacting land, the airframe will still take a lot of damage.

Answer 11

You could walk away from both.(or swim away I suppose)

It depends how bad a crash it is of course. A head first plunge from a great height or a controlled landing.

There after fire (/ smoke) is the greatest risk, so I guess a water landing should give you more time to get out.