six gear collapses & gear ups in one week

[Eduleo]

The scariest lesson on a gear up landing I've had was seeing one happen right in front of me.

A few years ago I was doing an IPC in a C172 shooting the VOR RWY34 approach at Carol County MD, past the FAF, when an Arrow turned in front of us, low, doing s turns, with no radio communication at the CTAF at any point in the pattern. It looked like 180 power off commercial practice. My instructor looked up and said "wow, that's not nice!" as I slowed down ready for a go around. The Arrow landed a few seconds later, and it stopped in about 50 feet and a lot of smoke. As I announced on the radio that the runway was closed with a disabled aircraft in it, I could see the face of the pilot walking onto the wing wondering what had happened. I don't think I'll ever forget that.

Still, three GUMPS and a "gear down, flaps full" call over the numbers don't seem enough sometimes.

 

[carusoam]

18 hours ago, Hoeschen said:

I am curious how someone can become configured for landing approach speed without lowering the gear. It seems necessary for me to to lower the gear just to help get slowed down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Many MSers...

1) Actually have a focus on efficiency....

2) The last thing they want to do is waste energy used in the climb...

3) Given the opportunity... they engineer the descent to start and stop so all the excess energy has been used up going forwards...

4) Getting to the traffic pattern with minimal excess energy... there is no need for brakes...

5) When there is no need for brakes... you won’t notice the braking power of the gear not being there...

So...  

the more efficiently you fly... the more at risk you are of not noticing the gear being left up...

It’s so easy to bring back the throttle at TPA... in a timely fashion... just in time for the cognitive overload to begin...

Subtle hints of cog overload... messing up radio calls in the pattern... late or omitted...  

 

Of course, if your flying and efficiency isn’t a concern... come in fast hit the brakes... and land.

• Flaps
• Speed brakes
• Prop pushed in
• gear down

Lots of drag can easily hide one of these not being deployed...

Best regards,

-a-

[Bob - S50]

18 hours ago, Hoeschen said:

I am curious how someone can become configured for landing approach speed without lowering the gear. It seems necessary for me to to lower the gear just to help get slowed down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

A strong headwind will do it.

[carusoam]

Thanks Bob!

That’s a good source of variable drag that can add to challenges...

Best regards,

-a-

[Hank]

4 hours ago, carusoam said:

Many MSers...

1) Actually have a focus on efficiency....

2) The last thing they want to do is waste energy used in the climb...

3) Given the opportunity... they engineer the descent to start and stop so all the excess energy has been used up going forwards...

4) Getting to the traffic pattern with minimal excess energy... there is no need for brakes...

5) When there is no need for brakes... you won’t notice the braking power of the gear not being there...

So...  

the more efficiently you fly... the more at risk you are of not noticing the gear being left up...

It’s so easy to bring back the throttle at TPA... in a timely fashion... just in time for the cognitive overload to begin...

Subtle hints of cog overload... messing up radio calls in the pattern... late or omitted...  

 

Of course, if your flying and efficiency isn’t a concern... come in fast hit the brakes... and land.

• Flaps
• Speed brakes
• Prop pushed in
• gear down

Lots of drag can easily hide one of these not being deployed...

Best regards,

-a-

Yep, I'm generally at TPA a couple miles from pattern entry, somewhere around 160mphi. Throttle back and level off, I usually get Takeoff Flaps down by downwind entry (Vfe = 125 mph, but I'm gentle and hold out for 120). My only brakes besides on the tires is that big 3-blade Hartzell, but I'm not a fan of pushing that lever forward to slow down; I'd rather break away or do S-turns or something.

Class D controllers used to periodically keep me at 4500 msl until past their runway, 4 nm from home (TPA = 1600 msl); I'd turn away from both and make a descending 540° turn, and be on altitude and speed when I reached downwind entry. Not a problem anymore, because I'm 3 Mooney hours south of there now, no towers for miles and miles (except cell towers everywhere!).

[brndiar]

On 5/13/2020 at 4:23 AM, Hoeschen said:

I am curious how someone can become configured for landing approach speed without lowering the gear. It seems necessary for me to to lower the gear just to help get slowed down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

-At approach speed 70 knots (personally 65 knots with my C when solo) you are on the back side of the power curve (C model).

-With long & shallow approach with full flaps +  headwind (no strong headwind needed!!!)  there is no excessive deceleration, everything looks normal.

-Finally, despite gear up power is needed (back side of the power curve) what is extreme tricky, because there is no warning horn.

-Without checkliste completed you are lost.

 

[philiplane]

Many of these incidents are listed as gear collapse after landing. That is a maintenance issue, not operations. What parts are failing? Or is it just inattention to correct rigging procedures? 

 

[mike_elliott]

On 5/12/2020 at 3:00 PM, kortopates said:

oddly it shows a registration date in the future but i suspect the month and day got transposed and it was just registered in March.

..naw...thats when coffee break is over and it can be entered

 

[gsxrpilot]

43 minutes ago, philiplane said:

Many of these incidents are listed as gear collapse after landing. That is a maintenance issue, not operations. What parts are failing? Or is it just inattention to correct rigging procedures? 

 

Gear collapse can happen. But I'd bet that 90% of these were pilots who are trying to put the blame somewhere other than on themselves for forgetting the gear. 

[kortopates]

8 hours ago, brndiar said:

-At approach speed 70 knots (personally 65 knots with my C when solo) you are on the back side of the power curve (C model).

-With long & shallow approach with full flaps +  headwind (no strong headwind needed!!!)  there is no excessive deceleration, everything looks normal.

-Finally, despite gear up power is needed (back side of the power curve) what is extreme tricky, because there is no warning horn.

-Without checkliste completed you are lost.

 

Good points! and another great reason why dragging it in low and slow is just very poor technique. Unfortunately its how many private pilots learned to do short field landing because they could make up for poor precision in stabilized 3 degree approach by coming in low and just chopping the power to fall onto the numbers. In addition to risk of missing the gear,  the plane is also much more susceptible to any downdrafts at short final where the pilot might incorrectly pull up and stall rather than push while adding power to get some speed first. The back side is not the place to be on approach. On the other hand, a bit steeper than 3 degree approach slope at idle power at the end followed by quicker than normal round out (because of higher descent rate) just above the runway will absorb more energy leaving less forward energy and easily enable beating POH landing distances. It will also ensure the gear horn goes off if need be because its uses even less engine power and one won't be nearly so vulnerable to a downdraft on short final.

Good points on how that sets you up for a gear up. I had only associated the other bad issues I mentioned above and had not also realized how easily it can set the pilot up for gear up as well - valuable lesson!

[HRM]

What's the penalty for having a GU?

Apparently the insurance companies aren't putting enough pain into it, or the pilots are departing GA afterwards.

[kortopates]

On 5/12/2020 at 7:23 PM, Hoeschen said:

I am curious how someone can become configured for landing approach speed without lowering the gear. It seems necessary for me to to lower the gear just to help get slowed down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

19 hours ago, Bob - S50 said:

A strong headwind will do it.

Bob is so right! But it doesn't take a strong head wind either. I wish we could dispel this myth for ever. But to even suggest this is a sign of a pilot that hasn't yet mastered his stead. Trust me, after hundreds of Mooney hours, certainly thousands,  a Mooney pilot should have no problem slowing there bird down on approach such that they no longer need to get it slowed down to landing approach speed with the gear down. I personally think this myth is one, but just one,  of the reasons we have so many gear ups.  And as most will agree,  its rarely just one, but usually multiple issues/mistakes that come together to result in a gear up.

[steingar]

9 minutes ago, HRM said:

What's the penalty for having a GU?

Apparently the insurance companies aren't putting enough pain into it, or the pilots are departing GA afterwards.

What's your deductible? 

[kortopates]

2 minutes ago, HRM said:

What's the penalty for having a GU?

Apparently the insurance companies aren't putting enough pain into it, or the pilots are departing GA afterwards.

Given the current small insurance market, rates going up and greater requirements etc, pilots of gear ups are getting non-renewals after a gear up. That mean unable to get in-motion insurance by many company's  till the history of gear up is no longer in their look back history. For many that means three years. I personally send pilots I know in this position to Avemco since they only look back 1 year. They are expensive but to many pilots that lost their insurance after a big gear up claim at least they can get insurance again after just a 1 year sentence in the insurance hell penalty box. I am sure some leave aviation as well, but none of the ones I've known - thankfully! We're only human after all and hopefully always learning.

[HRM]

1 minute ago, kortopates said:

Given the current small insurance market, rates going up and greater requirements etc, pilots of gear ups are getting non-renewals after a gear up. That mean unable to get in-motion insurance by many company's  till the history of gear up is no longer in their look back history. For many that means three years. I personally send pilots I know in this position to Avemco since they only look back 1 year. They are expensive but to many pilots that lost their insurance after a big gear up claim at least they can get insurance again after just a 1 year sentence in the insurance hell penalty box. I am sure some leave aviation as well, but none of the ones I've known - thankfully! We're only human after all and hopefully always learning.

OK, THAT is some serious pain.

[Bob - S50]

55 minutes ago, kortopates said:

 

Bob is so right! But it doesn't take a strong head wind either. I wish we could dispel this myth for ever. But to even suggest this is a sign of a pilot that hasn't yet mastered his stead. Trust me, after hundreds of Mooney hours, certainly thousands,  a Mooney pilot should have no problem slowing there bird down on approach such that they no longer need to get it slowed down to landing approach speed with the gear down. I personally think this myth is one, but just one,  of the reasons we have so many gear ups.  And as most will agree,  its rarely just one, but usually multiple issues/mistakes that come together to result in a gear up.

No problem slowing down, but once on the glideslope I wouldn't be able to keep approach speed in my J without gear down unless I had a lot of headwind.

[kortopates]

Just now, Bob - S50 said:

No problem slowing down, but once on the glideslope I wouldn't be able to keep approach speed in my J without gear down unless I had a lot of headwind.

I wonder if maybe your throttle MAP sensor for the gear horn is a bit on the high side? Or maybe your approach speed is low too - I use 100 kts with no flaps till minimums (very stable that way) on an approach but lower at 90 kts level  and less on the circle as well as in a VFR pattern.

[Bob - S50]

44 minutes ago, kortopates said:

I wonder if maybe your throttle MAP sensor for the gear horn is a bit on the high side? Or maybe your approach speed is low too - I use 100 kts with no flaps till minimums (very stable that way) on an approach but lower at 90 kts level  and less on the circle as well as in a VFR pattern.

Horn goes off at about 13".  I have found that I can't descend more than about 200'/NM while clean and keep the plane at 120 KIAS or less.  Standard glidepath is a bit over 300'/NM.

[kortopates]

4 hours ago, Bob - S50 said:

Horn goes off at about 13".  I have found that I can't descend more than about 200'/NM while clean and keep the plane at 120 KIAS or less.  Standard glidepath is a bit over 300'/NM.

I might be totally missing your point, but am confused since the best glide engine out on the J (and R) model rate of descent from the POH is very close to 1.9 nm/1000' which translates to 4.9 degrees a bit more than 1.5x the normal 3 degree rate of descent with Vg at max gross weight at 91 kts not that far from approach speed. So its not difficult to imagine, fully clean, you are going to need some power to reduce rate of descent from say near a 5.0 degree descent rate of just under 800'/min to a 3 degree descent rate of closer to just under 500'/min - and still way below 120 kts. 

I fear we may be getting into the weeds on an aspect that's lost touch with the original gear incident and believing one can't slow down without putting the gear down. I'll agree these must be really rare when we fly an ILS since we are in the habit of intercepting the final at near approach speed and the use the gear to come down on glide slope. A precision approach makes it a lot easier to remember the gear. But I believe the vast majority of these gear up incidents happen flying a pattern, not necessarily a normal pattern since its often a distraction from something out of the ordinary as well as the lack of a stabilized descent that leads to a gear up, but lost of pilots have unfortunately demonstrated one can descend for landing without the gear down. 

[cliffy]

I know of one Mooney that has had 3 gear ups with the same owner. None had insurance and only one made it to the log book. 

[brndiar]

6 hours ago, kortopates said:

I might be totally missing your point, but am confused since the best glide engine out on the J (and R) model rate of descent from the POH is very close to 1.9 nm/1000' which translates to 4.9 degrees a bit more than 1.5x the normal 3 degree rate of descent with Vg at max gross weight at 91 kts not that far from approach speed. So its not difficult to imagine, fully clean, you are going to need some power to reduce rate of descent from say near a 5.0 degree descent rate of just under 800'/min to a 3 degree descent rate of closer to just under 500'/min - and still way below 120 kts. 

I fear we may be getting into the weeds on an aspect that's lost touch with the original gear incident and believing one can't slow down without putting the gear down. I'll agree these must be really rare when we fly an ILS since we are in the habit of intercepting the final at near approach speed and the use the gear to come down on glide slope. A precision approach makes it a lot easier to remember the gear. But I believe the vast majority of these gear up incidents happen flying a pattern, not necessarily a normal pattern since its often a distraction from something out of the ordinary as well as the lack of a stabilized descent that leads to a gear up, but lost of pilots have unfortunately demonstrated one can descend for landing without the gear down. 

I would just like to add math from POH (C model):

BEST GLIDE

Gross weight, gear & flaps up:

1, Prop. stopped 12,7:1 glide ratio  at 87 kts IAS ...tan (a)= 1/12,7... 4,5 degree descent.

2, Prop. windmilling 10,3:1 glide ratio at 91 kts IAS  ...1/10,3..... 5,54 degree descent.

P.S. I try to figure out numbers for gear up & flaps T/O and full down. 

lg,m

[Bob - S50]

All I can say is try it.  Stay clean, pull the power but not so much that the horn comes on and try to track an ILS or LPV glideslope.  See what your speed is after 1000' of descent.

[bonal]

On May 14, 2020 at 9:40 AM, kortopates said:

Good points! and another great reason why dragging it in low and slow is just very poor technique. Unfortunately its how many private pilots learned to do short field landing because they could make up for poor precision in stabilized 3 degree approach by coming in low and just chopping the power to fall onto the numbers. In addition to risk of missing the gear,  the plane is also much more susceptible to any downdrafts at short final where the pilot might incorrectly pull up and stall rather than push while adding power to get some speed first. The back side is not the place to be on approach. On the other hand, a bit steeper than 3 degree approach slope at idle power at the end followed by quicker than normal round out (because of higher descent rate) just above the runway will absorb more energy leaving less forward energy and easily enable beating POH landing distances. It will also ensure the gear horn goes off if need be because its uses even less engine power and one won't be nearly so vulnerable to a downdraft on short final.

Good points on how that sets you up for a gear up. I had only associated the other bad issues I mentioned above and had not also realized how easily it can set the pilot up for gear up as well - valuable lesson!

When flying into class delta patterns and being advised of traffic on final I am always curious as I look to visually acquire the traffic looking on what would be a three or four degree approach and end up finding them so low just barely above the trees even when a half a mile or more out.  There is no way they would make the runway if they lost power. This is very common I'm thinking dam that guy is low.

[kortopates]

3 hours ago, bonal said:

When flying into class delta patterns and being advised of traffic on final I am always curious as I look to visually acquire the traffic looking on what would be a three or four degree approach and end up finding them so low just barely above the trees even when a half a mile or more out.  There is no way they would make the runway if they lost power. This is very common I'm thinking dam that guy is low.

Yep, so true that and the 747 traffic pattern have always amazed me. I get why, but I feel much too vulnerable flying so low  at a distance  from the runway in a SEL plane that I regard as trying to kill me if I don't keep my guard up. 

[kortopates]

15 hours ago, brndiar said:

I would just like to add math from POH (C model):

BEST GLIDE

Gross weight, gear & flaps up:

1, Prop. stopped 12,7:1 glide ratio  at 87 kts IAS ...tan (a)= 1/12,7... 4,5 degree descent.

2, Prop. windmilling 10,3:1 glide ratio at 91 kts IAS  ...1/10,3..... 5,54 degree descent.

P.S. I try to figure out numbers for gear up & flaps T/O and full down. 

lg,m

....

Here is chart of glide ratios of several aircraft that I use in my class. But for comparison, the Mooney's have excellent glide ratios. Not sure what aircraft stand above others but I imagine a DA20 would do well too.