Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FedEx Short Final Video W/gear Not Down. Details?  
User currently offlineTrnsWrld From United States of America, joined May 1999, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 20078 times:

As always when posting videos I want to state that I did the best search I could on this site and did not come up with any results regarding this and I was not able to get my questions answered in the comments section of this video.

First off let me say im NOT going to be a pretend MD-10 pilot, but I simply wanted to share this video because regardless of what was going on here, that is some AWESOME footage of a heavy approaching with the gear up, then excellent footage of the gear finally coming down. SO does anyone have any idea what was going on here? Obviously in normal conditions such an aircraft should not get this low and close to the runway without retracting its gear. Since I do find it hard to believe that commercial pilots could forget to put the gear down especially with all the checklists and cockpit warnings, would it be safe to assume that this aircraft was having some issues? Im not familiar with the gear cycling on the DC-10 aircraft, but does it seem like they went down and the doors went up at the correct speed? The main doors went up really slow. Maybe hydraulic issues of some sort? I also was looking at the flaps and early in the video it almost appears that they are not fully extended, but I have no clue if thats true or not. I just know that I have seen DC-10's with flaps that hang extremely low, and those didnt seem to be.

Also, mods feel free to delete this video if it is a repost. Thanks

At any rate, enjoy the video, its the first time I saw it and its pretty cool to watch. Dont forget to click HD  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDgvWa-EbbE

[Edited 2013-01-28 18:04:35]

49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 742 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 20089 times:

Perhaps the PF used to be a Space Shuttle commander?  

Seriously, intriguing video. Perhaps the reason for the gear doors closing slowly is because of the unusual airflow (full flaps) vs. extension when the flaps are typically (roughly) half-extended?



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 19666 times:

Quoting TrnsWrld (Thread starter):
SO does anyone have any idea what was going on here?

I'm going to guess a hydraulic problem...that gear comes down *very* slowly, and the doors move very slowly. It looks like they don't have adequate hydraulic power. They may have been using what they had to get the flaps out and the speed down and delaying the gear until they got the flaps into landing configuration.

Tom.


User currently offlineusxguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1010 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 19437 times:

I'm not sure what Fed Ex's SOP's are for dropping the gear.. but i do know that at ORD, many pilots opt to drop the gear a heck of a lot sooner than normal to help maintain airspeed (ie - keep it low/ help them slow down). For some reason I seem to think that most airlines typically require gear down 3 miles out unless conditions otherwise limit??


xx
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 19312 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 2):
I'm going to guess a hydraulic problem...that gear comes down *very* slowly, and the doors move very slowly. It looks like they don't have adequate hydraulic power. They may have been using what they had to get the flaps out and the speed down and delaying the gear until they got the flaps into landing configuration.

It's possible that a last-minute problem developed, although I would think they would have opted for a missed approach rather than trust the gear dropping so late in the approach..

If they were having previously known hydraulic issues, they would have been configured miles out.

Quoting usxguy (Reply 3):
For some reason I seem to think that most airlines typically require gear down 3 miles out unless conditions otherwise limit??

I know that WN and US require an approach be "stabilized" at 1000ft AGL, so I'd assume that's the point where you're in the final landing configuration at the proper airspeed.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinePassedV1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 220 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 19180 times:

Stablized at 500' if it's VMC is also common across the industry, but I don't know what FEDEX's criteria is. It's not simply a hydraulic problem as someone else here pointed out you would be configured sooner. Also, if you thought you only had limited Hydraulics (i.e. some sort of leak) the first thing you would do is put the gear down. An airplane will land with no flaps, they just need a long enough runway.

The only scenario I can think of is if they got a bad gear or door indication. The procedure would be to re-cyle the gear...so if you put the gear down at the normal spot (1500' or so) got a red light ...you would put the gear up...then put it back down. Since it's VMC you continue down the approach path, once the gear competes the cycle, you look, 3 green you land...no 3 green you go-around.


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 18907 times:

You're all overreacting. This is a fairly normal gear extension sequence. I timed it; the gear transit time on this MD-10-10 is LESS TIME than the A330 takes in videos readily available on youtube.
I do agree that they're being dropped later than expected. I also seem to notice flaps transition from about 25 or so to full down.
My guess is that ATC needed them to speed things up, so they stayed clean for a while. Perhaps an emergency inbound directly behind FedEx?


User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 18345 times:

This is all over other forums, must have been around for a while. from what i can see nothing wrong. Gear down and Locked before the fence, Fuel saver.

User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 18143 times:

Its indeed a bit late, in VFR we mostly make sure to be in landing configuration when turning final (or atleast 500 ft. AGL) but i could imagine this Fedex plane having a good reason for not extanding the gear just before touchdown.. + the zoomlens makes it look much closer to the ground than the plane actually is..

1-Indeed something like an emergency behind them, with ATC forcing them to hurry up.The extra drag created by the landing gear could really slow things down
2-Cost saving measures: more drag=more thrust or higher AOA needed to compensate it: is more fuel needed
3-They had a bussy last phase of the flight and really just got to the landing gear 30 sec. before touch down.

Could name some more reasons, and although its unusuall, this is not that odd!


User currently offlineDarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1343 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 17932 times:

Quoting TrnsWrld (Thread starter):
Since I do find it hard to believe that commercial pilots could forget to put the gear down especially with all the checklists and cockpit warnings, would it be safe to assume that this aircraft was having some issues?

There have actually been a few gear-up landings done on healthy aircraft, by otherwise competent crews over the decades. These things happen. I don't know how, but they do...

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 2):

I'm going to guess a hydraulic problem...that gear comes down *very* slowly, and the doors move very slowly. It looks like they don't have adequate hydraulic power. They may have been using what they had to get the flaps out and the speed down and delaying the gear until they got the flaps into landing configuration.

Completely off the cuff guesswork here... But with a relatively high Vapp, and (sounds like anyway) a decent crosswind component, could a flight crew elect to withhold gear ext on the basis of wanting to have less to stick out into the wind, and make the approach easier? I wouldn't suggest that would be any company's SOP, but perhaps a shortcut?

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 6):
My guess is that ATC needed them to speed things up, so they stayed clean for a while. Perhaps an emergency inbound directly behind FedEx?

That may be possible, yes. But just a WAG here, when an emergency inbound is headed to a given RWY, doesn't ATC (or tower at any rate) clear traffic ahead & behind?



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlinecx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6582 posts, RR: 55
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17496 times:

Different airlines may have different policies for a stabilised approach. At mine on my fleet, a go-around is mandatory if we are not in full landing configuration by 1000ft. We aim to be fully configured by 1500ft. A little more conservative than most but configuring slightly lower really doesn't save that much time or fuel in the big scheme of things compared to the increased safety factor.

User currently offlinestarrymarkb From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2011, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16165 times:

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 9):
That may be possible, yes. But just a WAG here, when an emergency inbound is headed to a given RWY, doesn't ATC (or tower at any rate) clear traffic ahead & behind?

That was my understanding as landing or departing aircraft could suffer a tyre burst or similar which could block the runway.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 15426 times:

Quoting TrnsWrld (Thread starter):
would it be safe to assume that this aircraft was having some issues?

no, not at all

Quoting Western727 (Reply 1):
Perhaps the reason for the gear doors closing slowly is because of the unusual airflow (full flaps)

naw, any flap setting greater than 28 would have would have given them the gear warning horn

Quoting usxguy (Reply 3):
what Fed Ex's SOP's are for dropping the gear..

to be stabilized by 500' VFR

Quoting PassedV1 (Reply 5):
Stablized at 500' if it's VMC is also common across the industry, but I don't know what FEDEX's

same.
Again folks everyone seems to want to find some emergency or ATC directed reason but, regardless of that, the stab. app at 500' rules. Any emerg. would have resulted in a miss. I think the reason is simple and not any of the reasons sited here but that's all i'm saying. You can be sure flt mgt has seen it.


User currently offlineAmericanAirFan From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 408 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14636 times:

This looks like a normal approach (not normal for the gear to not be down obviously...) and normal gear extension speed. Gear doors don't close until 00:36, and the bird touches down at 00:52 that's 16 seconds between the end of the gear extension cycle, and touch down. Even on a 3 degree glide slope at a 150 knots 3 degree glide slope would be about 750 fpm. So 16 seconds at 750 fpm (this descent rate doesn't even include the flare...). This comes out to 200' AGL at MOST when the gear finished the extension cycle. And at MOST he started his gear extension at 00:13 so you're looking at 487.5 feet or roughly 500' AGL at MOST. Add in a head wind or being lighter with a slower approach speed, and you get slower than 150 knots ground speed you're going to do less than 750 fpm on a 3 degree glide slope. So at BEST we're looking at a gear extension at 500' AGL. Most likely lower just by analyzing the numbers.

To be stabilized by 500' AGL they would have to extend gear sooner to be down and locked BY 500' and not past that. Past that should warrant a go around. I'm sure these pilots were talked to by someone at the company. If not, regardless, this is not a very normal turn of events in this video...

Brought to you by your friendly arm chair pilot.

AAF

[Edited 2013-01-29 06:39:05]

[Edited 2013-01-29 06:40:13]


"American 1881 Cleared For Takeoff One Seven Left"
User currently offlinetp1040 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14589 times:

Not sure what happened

1. Cycling the gear on short final. No, if they had a gear problem on final, they would have broken off approach
2. If the gear had not dropped, was there time to spool up and go around? Probably, but I certainly would not want to be in that position.
3. Seems like a cowboy type move. If so, very unprofessional, this isn't an airshow.


User currently offlineTrnsWrld From United States of America, joined May 1999, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14089 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 6):
You're all overreacting. This is a fairly normal gear extension sequence

I dont think anyone is overreacting by any means. We are all just discussing the possibilities as to why the landing gear were lowered so late in the approach. Seems like some pretty good reasons have been discussed so far and regardless of what some people say this is not a normal gear extension process. I agree with you as well that you can actually see the flaps being lowered as well just before the gear come down. Whether it be the pilots just trying to keep speeds up for whatever reason, or some sort of mechanical issue its for sure interesting to see. And great footage as well! Looks awesome!

Quoting strangr (Reply 7):
This is all over other forums, must have been around for a while. from what i can see nothing wrong. Gear down and Locked before the fence, Fuel saver.

According to the info on the video its actually not that old. If I remember correctly sometime in the last few months of 2012. I cant imagine any pilots jeopordizing safety just to save their company a little fuel. if thats the case they must really love their company.



I know this is not some earth shattering video, but just something to discuss as I thought it was a little interesting. I grew up just a couple miles east of ORD under the 27R approach and down the street from the outter marker. 99% of the inbound aircraft dropped their landing gear at this point which was a few miles out. I timed it in this video and from the time the landing gear was 100% extended and the doors were up there was only 17 seconds from that time until the tires hit the pavement. Lastly, someone stated that they think it was the cameras zoom that made it seem like the aircraft was closer that it really was. Thats not true at all. The aircraft was on short final regardless if the camera had a telescope mounted on it or no zoom capabilities at all   They photographer was standing not far off from the end of the runway. Anyway, bad ass video!!


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 13509 times:

Quoting TrnsWrld (Reply 15):
I dont think anyone is overreacting by any means. We are all just discussing the possibilities as to why the landing gear were lowered so late in the approach.

Well though it is a little amusing that everyone went straight to the extreme conclusions of emergency, fuel savings, ATC command, etc when the obvious, having been there a few decades, is they were late because of their own choosing. That's it and yes I'm sure flt mgt was involved afterwards. There was no logical reason for it. I can guarantee they were not trying to save fuel. No abnormal such as hydraulics would suggest you just wag it and continue, there may and probably will other conditions that will apply to the abnormal that need to be addressed. the only reason to wag it and continue is if you were on fire.


User currently offlinedynamo12 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 13316 times:

Superficially it seemed there was time that if the gear had not gotten down the plane could have gone around. At 500 ft or lower a go around is possible.

With the flaps at 28 or 40 they should have gotten a gear warning anyways I think on the MD-80? Also wouldn't there be a FITNL warning from the GPWS at some point?

Apparently healthy planes do sometimes land gear up I'm actually curious what type of issues cause that given the above.


User currently offlineFlyHossD From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12710 times:

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 16):
Well though it is a little amusing that everyone went straight to the extreme conclusions of emergency, fuel savings, ATC command, etc when the obvious, having been there a few decades, is they were late because of their own choosing. That's it and yes I'm sure flt mgt was involved afterwards. There was no logical reason for it. I can guarantee they were not trying to save fuel. No abnormal such as hydraulics would suggest you just wag it and continue, there may and probably will other conditions that will apply to the abnormal that need to be addressed. the only reason to wag it and continue is if you were on fire.

Oh, come on, CC. Why take the word of an experienced Captain (you) who actually flew those birds? It's much more fun to speculate!

:D



My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4766 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12273 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Perhaps they are troll pilots who simply wanted to get everyone here riled up?     

Don't freight guys have a reputation for being of a different breed? Perhaps a conscious, hot shot decision. Against better judgement, of course.

Personally I enjoy the video. It gives a nice, clear and detailed view of gear extension in flight.  bigthumbsup 

[Edited 2013-01-29 08:50:48]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinewagz From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 516 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12270 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 9):
That may be possible, yes. But just a WAG here, when an emergency inbound is headed to a given RWY, doesn't ATC (or tower at any rate) clear traffic ahead & behind?

Traffic ahead isn't cleared, that would just be a waste of space and capacity. If an emergency is in some condition that requires a higher approach speed (flap failure etc) then we'll give an extra mile or two in front of him but otherwise its normal. At my airport, the city considers the runway closed behind an emergency aircraft and a vehicle will sweep the runway behind him to check for FOD before releasing it back to us.



I think Big Foot is blurry, Its not the photographers fault. Theres a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
User currently offlinedashman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 11922 times:

A little close to the ground for my comfort level. Our company SOP, configured for landing by 1000 feet AGL. On speed and stable by 500 feet AGL.
I won't speculate as to what the situation was but the gear extension appeared normal rate.
Personally I have missed the 1000 ft mark a couple times due to extended ATC vectoring where they slowed us to typical final approach speeds on downwind and base segments. Many aircraft minimum speeds permit flying at slower speeds with approach flaps set and gear up. It is easy to get lulled into thinking in the back of a persons mind that the gear is down as you roll out on final and intercept the glidslope. This is further compounded if an ATC assigned glideslope intercept is higher than normal.


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4913 posts, RR: 43
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 11778 times:

Quoting PassedV1 (Reply 5):
The only scenario I can think of is if they got a bad gear or door indication. The procedure would be to re-cyle the gear...so if you put the gear down at the normal spot (1500' or so) got a red light ...you would put the gear up...then put it back down. Since it's VMC you continue down the approach path, once the gear competes the cycle, you look, 3 green you land...no 3 green you go-around.

That was my thought. They got a bad gear indication, and while one is already going through the go-around in his mind, the other is re-cycling the gear. They get three greens and go back to plan A ... land.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 474 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 11744 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 8):
Its indeed a bit late, in VFR we mostly make sure to be in landing configuration when turning final (or atleast 500 ft. AGL)

When I was an active CFI, our normal procedures were gear down while midfield on the downwind leg, or if not doing a normal traffic pattern, we'd still drop it at least two to three miles out. Our max gear extension speed was higher than max flaps extended speed, so dropping the gear helped us slow it down anyway.

In IFR, it was gear down when intercepting the glide-slope or when at the FAF for non-precision approaches.

As for the video, I'm not an expert on airlines SOP, so I have no idea what's going on here.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offline71Zulu From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3060 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 11621 times:

Always nice having CC here in these kinds of threads. It is fun to speculate by we really don't know what the reason for this was. But I have a question, how did management find out about it? Is there something on the aircraft that alerts the company if the gear horn did go off? Or was it solely because of the video?


The good old days: Delta L-1011s at MSY
25 Post contains images IAHFLYR : That made my day!! That's just common practice almost everywhere. My own rule of thumb depending on the type of emergency was to give the tower nothi
26 longhauler : In today's information age, it doesn't take long for something to become worldwide knowledge. It may well have been this video that alerted managemen
27 RussianJet : It's perfectly reasonable to pose the questions. I watch aircraft come for long periods, and have never seen this. Thus, it looks unusual to me, and
28 F9animal : Gear extension appears normal. Yeah, a bit late to put the gear down. I have seen later gear extensions before. Could be a million reasons why they di
29 CosmicCruiser : In our case we would/should go around with a bad indication. What Longhauler said sums it up. And I'm sure there have been conversations but to answe
30 bueb0g : Yeah, but they wouldn't have had 3 greens at 500' AGL. The comment you are quoting is referring to the speed at which the gear deployed, and not the
31 tb727 : Yeah, it's like a scene straight from Air America every night at airports like MEM and SDF. No, but I'm sure they would love that. Oh I can see it no
32 Post contains images DABZF : What about a simple solution... captain and first officer had a bet or a dare
33 PassedV1 : Why? It's VFR with one guy flying the airplane and one guy working the gear...what is so "cowboy" about that. A go-around at ORD can create a whole h
34 Post contains images BlueShamu330s : I've watched the clip and ask myself "what's the issue?" It seems a perfectly normal, stabilised approach, albeit with a late gear extension. I would
35 CosmicCruiser : That can never supersede being stable at 500'. Guaranteed bust on a line check. There's more than one indication on the MD-10 or -11 and any green in
36 Post contains images tb727 : Which is funny because you know if the crew of this plane sat down in a room with a few dozen anetters to talk about it, there would be a simple expl
37 Post contains images TrnsWrld : Ummmm yeah we know. Thats what the point of this thread was. Its what seems to be a normal approach with amazing videography with the exception of th
38 Md88Captain : Actually, this clip made in to another website around a month ago. The clip being made public (according to FDX pilots) resulted in discipline to the
39 horstroad : I´m not a pilot, but this is b-sh*t. what do they have the alternate gear extension system for? I know of a flight that had said problem (loss of on
40 CosmicCruiser : don't think so nope nope. come on folks, if you want to change the thread to how do you cope with a single hyd sys failure cool let's talk but this w
41 Roseflyer : I've definitely heard ORD ask airplanes to keep their speed up when spacing gets tight. The plane is landing near twilight which is a busy time at ORD
42 TrnsWrld : Looks like MD88captain pretty much summed it up, but for those (including myself) who said it looks like the gear and doors operated too slow. Well I
43 airportugal310 : I just keep watching the video over and over again and telling myself that airplanes are a pretty thing when in flight, w/o all the messy stuff hangin
44 N243NW : A word of caution: Gear swings in hangars are performed without assistance of engine-driven hydraulic pumps and are therefore usually slower than the
45 web500sjc : Could one of the engines be failed? Waiting to put the gear down until the landing is assured...that is what I am being taught in multiengine flight c
46 cx flyboy : ATC often ask us for speeds on finals which we are unable to comply with without breaking our company's stabilised approach criteria. Most of us just
47 Md88Captain : No engine is failed. This video shows a healthy aircraft on a normal approach with a late configuration change. 121 engine out ops would normally put
48 CosmicCruiser : As Md88Captain said, an eng out app in a MD-10/11 is just a normal app. nothing diff except add 5 kts to Vapp.
49 PassedV1 : I wasn't going to respond to this...I sholdn't respond to this...but I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you have an open mind, and
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...
Final Video Of NZ 747-400: ZK-NBS? posted Sat Jul 25 2009 23:21:11 by InnocuousFox
AS 397 Into SEA Having Gear Trouble Down Safe posted Sun Feb 4 2007 18:15:31 by ScarletHarlot
Fedex Weather Diversion Video posted Mon Jul 17 2006 19:58:29 by Derek1876
RJ Landing Gear Not Retracted At DCA Today? posted Wed Mar 29 2006 23:08:07 by Georgetown
QF A330 Landing Gear Not Retract posted Sat Mar 25 2006 13:46:36 by AussieA346
Why Didn't My Landing Gear Come Down Together? posted Thu Sep 29 2005 18:31:37 by Irishpower
Another Short A380 Video posted Fri Apr 22 2005 14:20:45 by TGV
Question: Gear Left Down After T/o posted Tue Oct 21 2003 18:18:58 by Triscl
What Does Short Final Mean? posted Mon Oct 1 2001 11:12:21 by Cdfmxtech
Center Gear Not Touching Ground. posted Tue Nov 28 2000 16:44:59 by Adam84