Lake Michigan - Would you cross it in a single?

Would you cross Lake Michigan in a single?

  • Total voters
    79
  • Poll closed .
EdFred said:
Before I crash and burn with no wind... The numbers will vary from plane to plane...
Click to expand...

I think you mean "make a picture perfect beach, cornfield, or water landing. But other than that I'm with you.

Older "underpowered" airplanes like mine are basically gliders with engines. (Aeronca, Piper, and Taylorcraft in fact built 3-seat glider trainers for the USAAF during WW2-- using the L-3, L-4, and L-2 airframes with modified front fusilages-- many were modified into powered 2-seaters after the war. With a sufficient headwind I can throttle back till the engine barely turns smoothly and stay up close to forever, with a sufficient tail wind I can go long distances at very fast for me ground speeds.
 
40 years ago my brother crossed it in 54 Tri Pacer. I recently asked if he’d do it again now and he laughed, noting that he’s less crazy now
 
EdFred said:
I'm guessing I've crossed in more times than anyone else on the board. Every single time in a single. Every month of the year. At night. In IMC. At 10000 AGL. At 500AGL. And never have I had a life raft on board. Engine doesn't know it's over water. If you trust it over land but not over water, what kind of clap trap are you flying?
Click to expand...
Country Flier said:
EdFred at a typical post:
Click to expand...

I can't judge the "more times," however, I doubt anyone would say that without having done it quite a few times. The rest of what was said is 100% reasonable. Personally, I carry a survival kit that includes an inflatable raft-- a holdover from the time spent in Alaska.
 
Barb Miller (who used to post on here) did it in a Tri-Pacer as well going to OSH. She was under 1500' the whole way.
 
I've done it a couple times, always late summer/early fall. Never taken the kids though, now that they're bigger I probably would if I bought a life raft.

Engine ran rough and made weird noises in the middle of the lake every time I did it. :eek:
 
Skinnybird said:
A PA-22? That's crazy man! Now, a PA-20 or PA-22/20 that's totally doable... :)
Click to expand...
In my much younger/more adventurous days, I did Holland - Milwaukee in a C150. When I called weather, they said there were a couple of isolated thunderstorms over the lake, but they were so isolated, they wouldn't be a problem to fly around.
They then said, "Do you have onboard radar?" (This was 20 years before ADS-B)
Me, LOL, "No. I'm in a Cessna 150."
Weather...long silence, "Um, okay. Most people would go around but alright, good luck."
 
Last edited:
mandm said:
Would you cross Lake Michigan in a single? (Outside of gliding distance)

With or without a life raft?

Any other required supplies?
Click to expand...

yes.

without a raft.

in my 210 with my 406 ELT on a flight plan.
 
EdFred said:
Yeah, what he said.
Many people won't fly at night in a single, but will fly over the same route during the day. The environment below is exactly the same. Engine doesn't know it's at night. Engine doesn't know it's over water. Does sunlight help an engine run better? Does land below help an engine run better?
Click to expand...
An emergency landing on inhospitable terrain is much more likely to be survivable in daylight when you can see and have some control over what you hit. Now what exactly are the relative survival chances of mountains vs. the middle of Lake Michigan, I don't know. Aircraft type and especially stall speed might affect the comparison.
EdFred said:
The numbers will vary from plane to plane. But minimum sink rate might be a consideration depending on the plane and wind.
Click to expand...
What is the best glide speed for distance varies with wind speed and direction. Into the wind, the best answer will be somewhere between the no-wind best glide speed and Vne; with the wind behind you it will be somewhere between the no-wind speed and the max endurance speed.
 
South to north?
Not going to happen. Not enough fuel in the plane.
West to east? Sure. Prevailing tailwind and all that.
East to west? Probably, depending on wind.

Silly analogue: You fly the Hudson River Exclusion at 800' and something goes wrong you are probably going to land at Sully International. Not a lot of options during the work week.
Just like flying over the lakes.

How is that different than flying over the lake or to Block Island?
OK. If you go in flying to or from Block Island, someone in a boat is going to run into you and kill you.
On the other hand, some summer weekends you can walk from shore to shore across the boats and not get wet.
 
This one seems to come up every few years, I might have to channel Jay Honeck and ignore these threads. Lake Michigan is mighty cold such that survival is in hours or less, and boats are mighty thin. I fly at dark in the Midwest (because corn fields) and over warm bodies of water ‘feeling’ that it’s an acceptable risk. I’ve griped about flying under the ORD bravo knowing full well it adds 20 minutes of flying in hot and bumpy conditions but if I grenade the engine it will be captured on at least 100 instagram posts and CPD will drop their donuts to rev their speed boat and fish me out. Not so much in the linked article - 4 miles from shore of Michigan with the coast guard on alert.
 
EdFred said:
So the air is different above water? Got it.
Click to expand...


Risk Management 101: there are two components to a risk, the probability of occurrence and the consequence of occurrence. The probability of an engine failure above the lake is the same as above a runway or farm field or road, but the consequence of going into frigid water miles from shore with slow (if any) rescue is much worse. Hence, the risk is greater.
 
Shepherd said:
Silly analogue: You fly the Hudson River Exclusion at 800' and something goes wrong you are probably going to land at Sully International. Not a lot of options during the work week.
Just like flying over the lakes.

How is that different than flying over the lake or to Block Island?
OK. If you go in flying to or from Block Island, someone in a boat is going to run into you and kill you.
On the other hand, some summer weekends you can walk from shore to shore across the boats and not get wet.
Click to expand...

At least in the Hudson corridor, even if you have to go down in the water you're not miles from land, so swimming looks a lot more possible. And nowadays, twelve thousand people will see you, call 911... and video the whole thing on their phone cameras.

OTOH, I once emergency landed my T-Craft on a pier on the NJ side of the corridor... and flew it out the next day. But it was a different world then.
 
mandm said:
Let’s say Lake Michigan is 65 miles across. At 7000’ with sea level approx 700’ let’s say 6000’ = 1 SM with a glide ratio of 9:1 you might 9 miles. 65 - 18 = 47 miles stretch not within glide distance. That’s about 20-30 minutes.
Click to expand...

For a Mooney 201, at 10500, glide distance is 20 nm, so (65 miles = 56 nm, leaving me 16 nm exposed, at a 160 knots, that’s 6 minutes.
I spent that time staring at my engine monitor, I did have a life vest, but no raft, I also carried a marine radio. I was near the middle so a long flight to avoid the water wasn’t practical.
 
Mxfarm said:
Shouldn’t the engine TBO be considered?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Not directly, I'd trust a smooth running high compression engine at 125% TBO more than a rough running engine with mixed compression readings at 65% of TBO. Also I note many engine failures seem to occur with newly zero timed engines. One should know their specific equipment and trust that more than general guidelines set for all items of a type.
 
I'm not sure trust has anything to do with it. My engine was 900smoh and running perfectly, right up until the governor shaft let go and it pumped all its oil out. I trusted it completely... had my whole family on board.

The difference as see it is that landing in Lake Michigan is basically a death sentence. Even in the summer the water is cold enough to kill you in a couple hours and the chances of being found that fast aren't that good unless someone sees you go down. A 406elt would definitely help if you remember to turn it on. I'd rather go down in the woods than more than a mile from the shore of Lake Michigan.

That said engines rarely fail instantly. Mine ran 6 minutes before i shut it down, and surely had a couple more minutes in it. That would get you ~20 miles, which is almost halfway across the lake.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
No. I have grown a vagina over the years. Twenty years ago I would have gone without much concern. The airplane has no idea it’s over a lake ya know. Now… not so much.
Click to expand...

Having one of those didn't stop many a lady from flying over water or even around the world. Heck, 19 year old Zara Rutherford even did it in a light sport.
 
Jim K said:
The difference as see it is that landing in Lake Michigan is basically a death sentence...
Click to expand...
Without a bit of preparation, knowledge or training, sure. Same as Alaska, Canada, and the northern USA in wintertime.
Jim K said:
Chances of being found that fast aren't that good unless someone sees you go down...
Click to expand...
Or you have prepared for an emergency, know the frequencies, your location, and can communicate same.
Jim K said:
That said engines rarely fail instantly. Mine ran 6 minutes before i shut it down, and surely had a couple more minutes in it. That would get you ~20 miles, which is almost halfway across the lake.
Click to expand...
46 nmi /2 =23 nmi - 1.5 nmi per 1000' altitude (9:1 glide ratio). So, say 20 sm = 17.33 nmi. Meaning that at a 4000' altitude you have zero gap.
 
Last edited:
sourdough44 said:
I’ve done it, mostly solo. I fly high, with at least flight following. There are about 25 miles in the middle where I can’t glide to the beach.

My plan was 1 mile in front of the mid lake ore carrier.
View attachment 105381
Click to expand...
Sick pic. How long is that strip on the carrier?. Looks like a great landing spot :p
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I’m not talking about a real vagina. Stop being a virtue signaler. It makes you sound disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Of course I know that you didn’t grow a real one, but that isn’t the point. The very fact that you seem to equate having one with a lack of courage is demonstrative of your attitude towards women. As far as “virtue signaling”, I have always found that phrase a bit idiotic. Based on the opinions and beliefs of many people, I am probably not considered a very virtuous person and frankly that does not bother me. However, I will call out ignorant thought when I see it and the only person I am trying to signal is the person I am addressing. Disingenuous? Hardly.
 
I've done it a bunch of times in a single in the past (with and without a life raft) but at this stage in my life (with little kids and a bit more financial means), I might not. Everyone's risk calculus is different - and not always fully rational/consistent.
 
Hector Parra said:
Sick pic. How long is that strip on the carrier?. Looks like a great landing spot :p
Click to expand...

I think if you came near the ship, they’d treat you like a Kamikaze pilot, taking defense actions.

It’s like going hiking in AK or Yellowstone, people will talk for pages about guns for bear protection when other threats are much higher on the list. Think of all the accidents you’ve looked at here & elsewhere, have to look to find the few that went into Lake MI. That also assumes you can weed out the silly ones, out of fuel, bad weather, troublesome mechanical issues.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Of course I know that you didn’t grow a real one, but that isn’t the point. The very fact that you seem to equate having one with a lack of courage is demonstrative of your attitude towards women. As far as “virtue signaling”, I have always found that phrase a bit idiotic. Based on the opinions and beliefs of many people, I am probably not considered a very virtuous person and frankly that does not bother me. However, I will call out ignorant thought when I see it and the only person I am trying to signal is the person I am addressing. Disingenuous? Hardly.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. You do seem to spend a lot of time tilting at social justice windmills. You’re entitled to your opinion but then so is Tarheel pilot. If you don’t like his opinion you can put him on ignore and cancel him. But you do seem to enjoy “calling him out”. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
I've been over Lake Ontario a number of times. On the way up, I'd check websites that show the locations of ships so I would have a general knowledge. On the way home, I relied upon luck.
 
Morgan3820 said:
I don’t know. You do seem to spend a lot of time tilting at social justice windmills. You’re entitled to your opinion but then so is Tarheel pilot. If you don’t like his opinion you can put him on ignore and cancel him. But you do seem to enjoy “calling him out”. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
It’s funny too because the same guy that’s virtue signaling in this thread is going on about hookers and blow in other threads. He’s a hypocrite. Anyone not grown up enough to see what I said in this thread has nothing to do with actual gender is to immature for me to interact with anymore.
 
LesGawlik said:
I'd check websites that show the locations of ships so I would have a general knowledge...
Click to expand...
As stated, there are scheduled ferries MTW - LDM north of Minnow, and MKE - MKG south of that MOA. Putting them EXACTLY under your flight plan from and to those paired cities. You can easily approximate ship positions based on schedules.
 
I crossed it going to/from OSH in 2019. In a fast-ish airplane you're not out of gliding distance that long, and there is enough traffic that you'll probably be able to spot a boat you can glide towards.

No way would I do it during the colder months.
 
Groundpounder said:
I crossed it going to/from OSH in 2019. In a fast-ish airplane you're not out of gliding distance that long, and there is enough traffic that you'll probably be able to spot a boat you can glide towards.

No way would I do it during the colder months.
Click to expand...

Same. Done it several times for OSH. Inflatable life jacket on, watch the boats, flight following. I may attach some sort of daytime signaling device to the jacket - I just have a small strobe now. And/or a PLB.

All this said, I grew up sailing offshore and am in a fast plane (with a chute). I might not do it in a 150 (though I've done it in both a Mooney and a Cardinal), and I certainly won't do it in the winter.
 
No.

Water flying never bothered me. In the northeast the trips to P.Town, Block Island, etc., were usually done VFR, sometimes flight following, around 2,500 AGL. I trusted the plane. When I first moved out there I did a MYF - SBA direct trip.. that's a lot of water in a straight line and if you stay below the LAX Bravo you are well outside glide range for most of it

Then one day some guy I agreed to safety for decided to do a 10 mile DME arc at 2,500 off the OCN VOR. This PA-28 apparently had a habit of 'hiccupping' from time to time. Since then I hate flying over water. Doesn't bother me anymore in a twin! Btw, a few months after that flight that same PA-28 lost a cylinder in flight due to a valve issue.. it made some power and they landed but.. yeah. No thanks!


PS, flying at night or over mountains or in hard IMC is virtually the same issue. But, at least if you survive mushing into bushes on the side of a mountain then you will probably survive assuming ATC knows where you are or you have a PLB or sat phone. In the water, in most places, you are looking at less than an hour of survival. A crashed airplane is also easier to spot on land vs a tiny head bobbing in the water 2-3 inches above the surface

Mtns2Skies said:
I climb up to 11,500
Click to expand...
haha I used to do the same going to AVX. My friends thought I was crazy but at least I could glide from anywhere. That's a cool airport btw in your pic
 
So I've been reading this entire discussion with real interest. Having a need to get across Lake Michigan on a regular basis, I have a set of the following minimums to cross in my SR20.

1. The water needs to be > 55 degrees on the surface. Below that, cold shock and hypothermia are too likely to result in your inability to function and/or survive for > 2 hrs.
2. I fly at either 11,000 or 12,000 depending E/W on an IFR flight plan, and yes, it takes forever to get there in an SR20. Typically I fly at 7,000 until about 50 miles out from the lake, burn off fuel and then climb.
2. There need to be reasonable day VFR conditions and winds such that one of the helicopters can depart and haul my butt out of the water in the event I did go down. This doesn't mean I won't fly above a layer or in IMC. I just need to know the chopper will be able to find me.
3. I cross within a 45 minute flight from one of the staffed helicopter bases. Typically Traverse City such that my exposure would be < 2 hrs.
4. Everyone wears an inflatable PFD over the water. We carry additional PLB other than the ELT.
5. In the event we are not taking a raft (weight related), we fly KSIQ to KSJX to shore or the opposite when heading E to W.

So what does this mean in reality? I fly over the lake from July to early October. Otherwise, I'm going around.
 
You're probably fine. Seeing all the blue under you is a much more stark reminder than simply flying at night, over mountains, etc. We all take our risks.
 
LesGawlik said:
I've been over Lake Ontario a number of times. On the way up, I'd check websites that show the locations of ships so I would have a general knowledge.
Click to expand...

We have smaller lakes around my neck of the woods. Back in the day of flying two stroke ultralights over the lakes we would go at 3K so as to have some glide ability to the shore in case of engine failure. My buddies would ask where to land if the engine quit and you couldn't make it to the shore. "On the nearest fishing boat" was my answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top