Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Video: 737 Landing W/O Left Landing Gear  
User currently offlinePaulianer From Germany, joined Jul 2002, 875 posts, RR: 13
Posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4229 times:

Hello everyone,

I've just found an interesting video of a 737 landing without the left landing gear.

Anyone know where this video was taken and what flight this was?

737 Landing

Greetings
Tobi


Tobias Rose - Hamburg (HAM/EDDH) & (XFW/EDHI) - Canon EOS D60 - ICQ: 235621277 - MSN: Tobias.Rose@gmx.de
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLMML 14/32 From Malta, joined Jan 2001, 2565 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4188 times:

This video was shown on DiscoveryEurope as part of a documentary on the perils of aviaiton. When the gears were lowered on approach both main gears did not extend. The pilot went around and flew by the tower who confirmed that only the nose gear is down. The pilot took the plane to FL100, dived to FL050 and pulled up sharply. This action helped to release the RHS gear. The maneouver was repeated but failed to release the LHS gear. The pilot then decided to bounce the aircraft on the runway (as shown on the video) on the extended gear in an attempt to release the LHS gear from the well. Two attempts failed and the emergency landing followed. On investigation it resulted that the wheels were jammed with a wheel chock which was left in the well by the marshaller.

An interesting observation is how the pilot actually slammed the aircraft on the ground as opposed to a smooth landing and letting the aircraft roll out slowly then gently list to the left on the engine. The pilot said that he decided to disable the antiskid system, land heavily and slam on the brakes so that the tyres would burn and the wheel would skid on the rim in an attempt to prevent a skid. It worked. But I talked to several pilots and asked them what they would do in such a scenario and invariably their answer was the opposite of what this pilot actually did.

The only injury sustained in this incident was that the pilot fractured his little finger while sliding down the rope from the cockpit window.

How would you, as a pilot, have reacted?


User currently offlineTurbulence From Spain, joined Nov 1999, 963 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4163 times:

Luckily nobody was hurted, what a bad luck for the pilot, after managin such a good landing, to hurt himself while evacuating he airplane...

Anyway, congratulations for the "ideas" to the captain and thanks to Paulianer for the video.

Best turbulences


User currently offlineAApilot2b From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 572 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4105 times:

This was a US Air flight. I remember seeing this very clip in the news when it happened a few years a go. Unfortunately, I cannot remember the exact time when it occurred. I think the pilot did an excellent job! I'm sure the critics can point fingers and say what he could have done differently, but under tough circustances he landed the plane very well and no one was hurt. Correct me on this, but I beleive the airframe was repaired as well (not a loss).


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4085 times:

>>>An interesting observation is how the pilot actually slammed the aircraft on the ground as opposed to a smooth landing and letting the aircraft roll out slowly then gently list to the left on the engine. The pilot said that he decided to disable the antiskid system, land heavily and slam on the brakes so that the tyres would burn and the wheel would skid on the rim in an attempt to prevent a skid. It worked. But I talked to several pilots and asked them what they would do in such a scenario and invariably their answer was the opposite of what this pilot actually did.

SWA had one of these incidents back in 1996 at ONT, and the crew in this one also did the opposite of what the Piedmont crew did, i.e. held the wing off as long as possible before it eventually allowed the engine to contact the runway about 65 knots. The gear failure wasn't caused by a mis-stored wheel chock, but by an internal failure within the gear strut which allowed it to hyper extend within the wheel well.

One thing that you will hopefully not see should a main gear problem (on any type of aircraft) recur is a single-gear and touch and go. In the classic example of Charlie Brown, doing one that results in a gear extension makes one the proverbial "hero" in avoiding a couple of million in damage to the aircraft. Doing one that has unexpected problems that make the situation much worse make one (and the passengers along for the ride) the proverbial "goat". Bottom line is that it's better to slide to a stop on the runway at 65 knots than it is to RISK running off or cartwheeling off the runway at 120-130 knots and killing folks in a fireball.

Should a future partial gear situation result in single-gear touch and go that goes badly with a major accident, you know how case is going to be litigated, i.e., "they didn't play it safe and unecessarily risked the lives of everyone aboard..."


User currently offlineRP From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4086 times:

The aircraft was N413US, B737-401. This happened shortly after the Piedmont-USAir merger. Flight was DCA-CLT, flight diverted to GSO a Piedmont maintenance base. Aug 2, 1989 http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/n413us/photo.shtml


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Torsten Maiwald



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Schaefer



User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4066 times:

>>>This video was shown on DiscoveryEurope as part of a documentary on the perils of aviaiton. When the gears were lowered on approach both main gears did not extend

FYI, the video is also available at the link below (it's the last one listed), and you'll also note that only one of the two main gears did not extend, not both...

http://www.airdisaster.com/movies/


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4030 times:

For those who are interested, as far as the 757/767 goes in my airline at least the procedure is:

Landing - One Main Gear Down and Nose Gear Extended

Fly a normal approach and flare profile. The landing gear will absorb the initial shock and delay touchdown of the engine. At touchdown, raise the speedbrakes and use rudder and nose wheel steering for directional control. Braking and reverse thrust on the engine opposite the unsupported wing should be used as required to keep the aircraft rolling straight. Maintain the wings level as long as possible. Place the fuel control switch to cut-off prior to the engine contacting the ground. Pull the engine and APU fire handles and discharge fire bottles.

After stopping, initiate the passenger evacuation procedure.

Sounds simple huh? Wouldn't like to try it for real though...



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineGunFighter 6 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2001, 404 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

The pilot did one hell of job  Smile

Really shows some skills..

G.


User currently offlineLMML 14/32 From Malta, joined Jan 2001, 2565 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3998 times:

Interesting Rick767.

OPNLguy The video shows one gear extended. But the initial problem was that BOTH main gears were stuck in. My source is the Pilot himself describing the incident on the documentary.

I am not criticising his actions in any way. If the end justifies the means, then I would say the pilot did the right thing. But from my point of view, and I am not a pilot, I think what Rick767 says above is safer, more logical and much less stressful on a plane full of pax who had just had an aerobatic experience.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3903 times:

>>>The video shows one gear extended. But the initial problem was that BOTH main gears were stuck in.

OK, I was not aware of that.


>>> If the end justifies the means, then I would say the pilot did the right thing.

I think the procedure that Rick767 mentions (which is the same as ours) is sound, and should be the chosen course, rather than turn a B737 into an XB737 with passengers onboard. Aircraft with tricycle landing gear have been making occasional 2-out-of-3 gear landings for years, and they are emminently survivable. It makes zero sense (to me) to expose passengers to MORE risk from the "solution" than is present from the original problem.

Emergencies of the type that Al Haynes and crew found themselves in with UA232 are another matter, i.e., there's nothing in the book to cover those types of situation, and you have to resourceful out of necessity.

These gear situations don't require that type of resourcefulness to be successful (as in protecting the passengers versus minimizing damage to the aircraft), and as such, established procedures should be followed, i.e., no single-gear touch and go attempts to "shake things loose."


User currently offlineCdfmxtech From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1341 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3825 times:

Check the very end of that video as they are evacuating. Notice someone jumped out of the left side L1 door without a slide being there. Of course there would be no exacuation from that side since that was the danegr side. But he jumped out of the door.

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

"The pilot said that he decided to disable the antiskid system, land heavily and slam on the brakes so that the tyres would burn and the wheel would skid on the rim in an attempt to prevent a skid."

Whilst I am not questioning the decision made by the crew, I would think this invites a wheel well fire, which (whilst it didn't happen in this case) would simply present another emergency once the aircraft had stopped and evacuation was required.

It would be interesting to know if there was a "published procedure" available to those pilots for such an event at the time.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3697 times:

>>>would simply present another emergency once the aircraft had stopped and evacuation was required.

Concur, absolutely...


>>>It would be interesting to know if there was a "published procedure" available to those pilots for such an event at the time.

Can't say about the first one, but after the second one, everyone involved was debriefed with "lessons learned" disseminated to all...


User currently offlineFlyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3640 times:

Could this video be any worse quality?

I mean god it's horrible.

Glad everyone was ok though.



Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
User currently offlineAApilot2b From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 572 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3519 times:

Yeh Flyingbronco05! I guess they should have called out a professional camera man. Maybe they could have got the pilot to fly around in circles while they got several professional photographers and what not situated around the airport so they could make these peoples nightmare more entertaining.  Wink/being sarcastic The crash viewed from many different angles, a few added explosions for special effects,.... Shoot! We could have had a scene straight from Hollywood here!

Just Kidding with you Pal. I'm a bit sarcastic today.  Big grin


User currently offlineLMML 14/32 From Malta, joined Jan 2001, 2565 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3511 times:

"The pilot said that he decided to disable the antiskid system, land heavily and slam on the brakes so that the tyres would burn and the wheel would skid on the rim in an attempt to prevent a skid."

It would be interesting to know if there was a "published procedure" available to those pilots for such an event at the time.

The pilot admitted that it was his decision to do so. It seems that it was not in the books. I am sure he had good reason for doing that. But watching the whole landing sequence on TV the landing seemed very violent, especially the engine to ground contact.


User currently offlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2485 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3393 times:

Looks like a sound procedure as described by Rick767. One observation though:
At touchdown, raise the speedbrakes and use rudder and nose wheel steering for directional control . . . Maintain the wings level as long as possible

Well it seems to me that there is no way to hold the wings level after deploying the speed brakes [=spoilers right?]. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the ailerons will have sufficient authority over the speed brakes to hold up the wing. This can be seen very clearly in the above link. Once the speed brakes are deployed...bang, down goes the wing and the nacelle slams the runway.

Rick767, did I understand this correctly: are you saying that once the engine has slammed the runway, directional control can be gained/maintained to a certain degree by regulating reverse thrust on the opposite engine? Or would you shut down both engines when the aircraft contacts the runway?

Thanks for clearing this up...

PW100



Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Video: MD80 Hard Landing, Loses Tail And Gear posted Wed Mar 31 2004 08:16:24 by Concord977
737 Landing Gear posted Sat May 20 2000 22:55:21 by CXA330-342
Video Of Hard Landing And Tail Falling Off posted Wed Jun 14 2006 00:06:06 by United787
Video Of Plane Landing On Motorway posted Sun Jun 12 2005 21:34:39 by BCAL
Video: MD11 Rough Landing At Kai-tak posted Wed Mar 31 2004 08:23:11 by Concord977
737 Landing Fees At Orly+CDG/Beauvaus? posted Sat Sep 28 2002 09:27:41 by Donder10
Boeing 737 Landing Light Question posted Thu Feb 28 2002 05:35:59 by Rolex01
737 Landing Approaches. posted Tue Sep 19 2000 18:26:35 by Adair
737 Landing Light Question... posted Fri Aug 18 2000 17:41:59 by PVDFlier
AA Video: 737/757/777 In Formation posted Wed May 2 2001 01:22:12 by Mirrodie