Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cessena Landed Perfect In Florida With One Gear  
User currently offlineScotland1979 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 548 posts, RR: 12
Posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Did you see LIVE tv on CNN "Breaking News"?
I watched the last 8 minute dramatic on CNN. Cessana 172 registration N6434V had trouble with gear up and landed perfect. The pilot did an excellent job landing with one wheel.

Frank


Jesus said "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" - John 14:6
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineT prop From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 1028 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4909 times:

Registration N6434V belongs to a hot air ballon...

T prop


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6372 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4901 times:

Seems to be a recurring problem with Cutlass RG models...wonder why? A fair number of them end up on TV when someone chases the plane down on the runway (from a ground vehicle), and successfully pulls the landing gear leg that didn't retract into the down-and-locked position. BTW, I've heard that this is *EXCEPTIONALLY* dangerous...(working in close confines with the propeller).


Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinePilotfox From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 552 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4855 times:

It was N4634V, looks like a Delta Connection aircraft. Looked as if they cut the engine right on the flare. Quite interesting though.

User currently offlineYWG From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 1146 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4841 times:

I saw it on CNN aswell. Aparently they botched the first landing pretty bad which in turn lead to the gear damage. I'm assuming it was a student and instructor....because the 172 can take ONE HELL of a beating. I also noticed a couple other things during the live video that I'd like to commend the pilot on.
1) He followed the emergency procedure of unlatching the doors just prior to landing. Alot of people freeze up and just want to put it on the ground. The second the plane came to rest the door flung open; why he didn't get out and hug/kiss the ground immediatly will forever be a mystery.

2) The use of what looked like full, 30 degree's of flap really helped in his 'modified ground roll/skid'. I didn't see one spark!

Well done, sir.



Contact Winnipeg center now on 134.4, good day.
User currently offlineCorey07850 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2527 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4805 times:

Quoting T prop (Reply 1):
Registration N6434V belongs to a hot air ballon...

Well then a gear up landing shouldn't be enough to make it on CNN  Wink


User currently offlineCRGsFuture From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4784 times:

What airport was it at if anyone would be so kind to tell me?


Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
User currently offlineDw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1259 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4746 times:

Quoting YWG (Reply 4):
because the 172 can take ONE HELL of a beating.

Yes it can... but that doesn't really matter if there is a mechanical issue that prevents the gear from coming down. This is a 172RG (if the tail number info is correct).



CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6372 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4743 times:

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 7):
Yes it can... but that doesn't really matter if there is a mechanical issue that prevents the gear from coming down. This is a 172RG (if the tail number info is correct).

AKA Cutlass RG, or as many flight instructors I know call it, the GUTLESS Big grin



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4674 times:

Quoting YWG (Reply 4):
Well done, sir.

Did you notice the strobe lights still flashing after the landing? Electrical should have been off. Fuel cutoff as well.

The engine should have been shut down 50 feet up and the propeller cranked into the horizontal position. By not following that procedure damage done to the prop and engine will cost much more than the belly sheet metal would have alone.

If this was a flight school aircraft, it's a poor reflection on their emergency procedures training. Checklist checklist checklist!!!

I wouldn't have traded places with the guy this afternoon, but I think there's a lot of room for review on this.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineAmazonphil From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4674 times:

Quoting T prop (Reply 1):
Registration N6434V belongs to a hot air ballon...

T prop

AND the plane was a 172RG a retractable 172. A plain 172 likely would not have had this happen.



If it ain't Boeing, I ain't goeing!
User currently offlineAmazonphil From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4664 times:

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 8):
AKA Cutlass RG, or as many flight instructors I know call it, the GUTLESS

Depends on how you use the aircraft and where...I have 180hours in Cutlasses and even used it almost all those hours in Denver, CO. a high altitude area and not once did I ever not have enough power even with 4 people aboard in the summer. All on how you use it and fly it. No, it won't climb out like a 210 but it does just fine if you keep it within it's limits. Took one to 17,500ft once with 3 aboard with no problem.

Regards



If it ain't Boeing, I ain't goeing!
User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4583 times:

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 9):
The engine should have been shut down 50 feet up

Where in the checklist does it quote 50 feet up? Also I think it's smart to leave it running until closer to the ground in case he had to go around as he didn't have engine trouble it sounds like.

I havn't seen the video of this, but you say the gear was damaged? Was it somehow or would it just not go down and lock?

Now I agree the 172 can take quite a beating, God knows I've had my share of hard landings. Now, I don't know what training this instructor has had, but here they tell us a way of getting gear down when it is stuck in the up position.

Slow to around 45 or 50 knots, and climb into back seat. Instructor and student can take turns flying / crawling into back. From there if you open the door you can get a pretty good grip on the gear and your airspeed is slow enough you can usually swing the gear hard enough to get it to lock.
But I don't know what kind of damage there was to the gear.


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4490 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 12):
Where in the checklist does it quote 50 feet up? Also I think it's smart to leave it running until closer to the ground in case he had to go around as he didn't have engine trouble it sounds like.

It doesn't quote 50 ft. I'll give you that, and with the runway available and proper airspeed management, the engine could have been safely secured and saved along with the prop. The C172 checklist DOES call for elec and fuel OFF.
As for leaving it running in case of a go around. In a situation such as this you eventually set up for the slide and stay with it.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineYWG From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 1146 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4371 times:

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 9):
The engine should have been shut down 50 feet up and the propeller cranked into the horizontal position. By not following that procedure damage done to the prop and engine will cost much more than the belly sheet metal would have alone.

I didn't know the RG's had a featherable prop?



Contact Winnipeg center now on 134.4, good day.
User currently offlineAmazonphil From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4300 times:

He didn''t say "featherable" He just said cranked or "bumped" with the starter to the horizonatal position...a 2 blade prop....so it wouldn't get damage and the engine need a crank journal run out test. Only the nose gear area cowling would get damaged

Regards

[Edited 2006-09-21 00:44:59]


If it ain't Boeing, I ain't goeing!
User currently offlineArch89U From United States of America, joined May 2001, 188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4270 times:

As a CFI who trained for his commercial and CFI on the Cutlass I have to say well done to the pilots involved in this.

Where were you taught
However, I have to disagree with anyone who says to stop the engine while in flight. This is NOT recommended procedure. No one since 1959 according to the NTSB database has died in a gear up landing UNLESS the pilot attempted to save the plane by stopping the prop.

Stopping the prop adds so much unnecessary risk. The aircraft is plain and simple the insurance company's aircraft in the case of a gear up landing. They will GLADLY pay for the teardown inspection/engine replacement and new prop versus trying to settle medical claims. Hull damage is small peanuts in their book. You just have to keep those incidents to a minimum.

In any case, I would recommend against stopping the prop when confronted with a gear-up landing. Don't try to be a hero. You'll be a hero if you can walk out of the aircraft (with the doors already opened, of course)

SPREE34, I would question where you were told it was best practice to stop the prop to save the engine.


User currently offlineAmazonphil From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4224 times:

Quoting Arch89U (Reply 16):
As a CFI who trained for his commercial and CFI on the Cutlass I have to say well done to the pilots involved in this.

Where were you taught
However, I have to disagree with anyone who says to stop the engine while in flight. This is NOT recommended procedure. No one since 1959 according to the NTSB database has died in a gear up landing UNLESS the pilot attempted to save the plane by stopping the prop.

Stopping the prop adds so much unnecessary risk. The aircraft is plain and simple the insurance company's aircraft in the case of a gear up landing. They will GLADLY pay for the teardown inspection/engine replacement and new prop versus trying to settle medical claims. Hull damage is small peanuts in their book. You just have to keep those incidents to a minimum.

In any case, I would recommend against stopping the prop when confronted with a gear-up landing. Don't try to be a hero. You'll be a hero if you can walk out of the aircraft (with the doors already opened, of course)

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark  Excellent!

amazonphil



If it ain't Boeing, I ain't goeing!
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4174 times:

Quoting Arch89U (Reply 16):
SPREE34, I would question where you were told it was best practice to stop the prop to save the engine.

I was trained by "Old School" former Military test pilots who thought being Master of the craft was the way to operate. To this day I agree with their philosophies. (Yes, I believe in spin recovery training)
I don't see any airmanship in this example that a student pilot could not have accomplished. Plenty of runway available for type aircraft, make a stable approach, checklist followed, bump the prop to horizontal, noisy touchdown no braking necessary.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4489 posts, RR: 21
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4161 times:

Quoting Arch89U (Reply 16):
Stopping the prop adds so much unnecessary risk. The aircraft is plain and simple the insurance company's aircraft in the case of a gear up landing. They will GLADLY pay for the teardown inspection/engine replacement and new prop versus trying to settle medical claims. Hull damage is small peanuts in their book. You just have to keep those incidents to a minimum.

In any case, I would recommend against stopping the prop when confronted with a gear-up landing. Don't try to be a hero. You'll be a hero if you can walk out of the aircraft (with the doors already opened, of course)

Another  checkmark  from yet another CFI who suffered through his commercial in a Gutless. Very well said.

FWIW I saw a Conquest (twin turboprop) do a nose-gear-up landing a few months ago and even though the pilot feathered/shut down the engines before the props hit the runway, the aircraft STILL had a teardown of both engines.

Just land the plane.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4118 times:

Quoting Pilotfox (Reply 3):
It was N4634V, looks like a Delta Connection aircraft.

There is a surprise, their aircraft are some of the worst out there (DCA)


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...
Swiss In Talks With One World posted Mon Mar 18 2002 19:12:29 by Jiml1126
UAX E170 Lands In IAD With No Nose Gear! posted Wed May 31 2006 02:57:53 by Hannigan
Beech Duchess Crash In Florida posted Thu Nov 2 2006 05:01:59 by United757
MPH's Future In SJO With N464TA @ SJO posted Tue Oct 31 2006 19:52:36 by Tomascubero
Around The World In 3 Weeks With Airtours. posted Sat Oct 21 2006 16:35:56 by 9V
Southend In Talks With KLM posted Wed Sep 27 2006 20:50:27 by Humberside
Unknown Aircraft In SNN (with Pics) posted Wed Sep 27 2006 00:26:51 by RyanairCRL
Interesting Aircraft In Miami (with Pics) posted Mon Sep 18 2006 00:42:22 by Coyoteguy
US Airways Interested In Merging With DL Or NW posted Fri Jun 30 2006 13:37:44 by Justapassenger
Delta To Add Another City In Florida posted Fri Jun 30 2006 11:05:02 by MAH4546