Andy95W Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 8 hours ago, RobertGary1 said: It’s been awhile since the airlines have had a gear up. I’d put most of that on the fact that the plane is screaming at them to put the gear down. No, it’s because there are 2 trained, professional pilots up front that follow their procedures and checklists. They also get a minimum of 3 checkrides a year between them as well as an annual ground school. Regular training and testing really works. In over 20 years flying airliners, I’ve never heard a gear warning. I’m not even sure what it says or what it sounds like. 1 Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 3 hours ago, Hank said: I would think a lot of it has to do with that second pilot up front tasked with reading out the checklist items . . . . You know, the one who doesn't exist in our Mooneys? Or in the single pilot jets. It’s hard to ignore bitchn Betty screaming landing gear. -Robert 1 Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 26 minutes ago, Andy95W said: No, it’s because there are 2 trained, professional pilots up front that follow their procedures and checklists. They also get a minimum of 3 checkrides a year between them as well as an annual ground school. Regular training and testing really works. In over 20 years flying airliners, I’ve never heard a gear warning. I’m not even sure what it says or what it sounds like. Airlines also benefit from very routine arrivals. mostly vectors for an ILS. Hit the faf etc. In GA you get all kinds of arrivals especially vfr to fit you in. So you don’t always have the same key positions on arrival. But again single pilot jets do as well as airliners. -Robert Quote
Andy95W Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 3 hours ago, Mooneymite said: The same things that make the pilot flying forget the gear will usually make the pilot monitoring forget the checklist. Technology is the answer. Not at either of the airlines I've flown for. Adherence to procedures keeps it from happening. Even the words we use are dictated, and we actually say the words as directed by the company. At my airline, the call out is "Flaps full, landing checklist." It's hard to forget to read the checklist when you simply follow the procedure. And yes, we actually take pride in doing it the way the company says to do it. They own the airplanes, after all. The least I can do is fly them the way they want. And we have procedures spelled out for everything. Visual approach? Procedure. Join an ILS glideslope from above? Procedure. Not landing with full flaps? Procedure. The list goes on. Sound boring? It is. Boring is good. If it starts getting exciting, it usually means something went wrong. And I can honestly say it's the 2d most fun job I've ever had. But for single pilot airplanes, I agree- technology is the answer. 4 Quote
mike_elliott Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 58 minutes ago, Andy95W said: Sound boring? It is. Boring is good. If it starts getting exciting, it usually means something went wrong. And I can honestly say it's the 2d most fun job I've ever had. But for single pilot airplanes, I agree- technology is the answer. Fear is never boring Quote
carusoam Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 11 hours ago, Davidv said: I'm sure this has been suggested before, but as a final fail-safe it would seem like a pretty rudimentary circuit that could automatically lower the gear if certain conditions were met. For example, 50' AGL, flaps down, going less than 100 knots (100 only because you'll be going faster with gear up). Of course you would need a radar altimeter. automatically lowering the gear led to adding drag to an already slow plane... So instead of landing GU... they stalled instead... Today’s technology could revisit the idea... computers and logic have come a long way since the 90s... Could be expensive... even though an old iPhone could be used as its heart... Best regards, -a- Quote
skyrioca Posted October 7, 2020 Report Posted October 7, 2020 I just had Jessica working in my insurance and worth the try for sure, BWI insurance was the best quote that I had. Find her contact information bellow. Jessica Escamilla | Aviation Insurance Professional | Phone 800.666.4359 ext 102 | Email jessica.escamilla@bwifly.com | BWI The Nation’s Leader in Aviation and Drone Insurance. Celebrating 41 YEARS Nationwide! www.bwifly.com Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 12 hours ago, Mooneymite said: Technology is the answer. Yes, IIRC, the Piper Arrow had an auto-extend landing gear system many years ago. Seems we should just mandate that and it would nearly eliminate gear-ups except for mechanical failures. And a few more due to pilots disabling the system, but insurance companies could just deny claims for those so our rates wouldn't increase. Everyone okay with that technology solution? Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 34 minutes ago, MikeOH said: . Everyone okay with that technology solution? Wasn’t the goal to save money? Now you want to put thousands of dollars of FAA approved equipment in the plane? I’m not sure if you’d ever see a new savings in that case. I think my voice annunciator is good enough. Simple device that yells “check landing gear” and only cost me a few hundred. Today Garmin could probably do it with a software patch. They already know when I’m landing as they adjust traffic advisories -Robert 2 1 Quote
carusoam Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 Lowering the gear automatically was a bad solution... for a few certain circumstances... A real challenge for a bird that is having difficulty supplying power... Or when trading speed for altitude, clearing that one tall tree... It sounds better in theory, than it really is... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic or CFI... Best regards, -a- Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 31 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said: Wasn’t the goal to save money? Now you want to put thousands of dollars of FAA approved equipment in the plane? I’m not sure if you’d ever see a new savings in that case. I think my voice annunciator is good enough. Simple device that yells “check landing gear” and only cost me a few hundred. Today Garmin could probably do it with a software patch. They already know when I’m landing as they adjust traffic advisories -Robert How much more was an Arrow with the auto-extend vs. one without? Do we want to ELIMINATE gear-ups? What level of gear-ups do you find okay? People are going to ignore the verbal warnings just like the horns and buzzers. I don't think it's going to be the panacea that you hope it to be. Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 28 minutes ago, carusoam said: Lowering the gear automatically was a bad solution... for a few certain circumstances... A real challenge for a bird that is having difficulty supplying power... Or when trading speed for altitude, clearing that one tall tree... It sounds better in theory, than it really is... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic or CFI... Best regards, -a- Those situations are what the override was for. Would eliminating gear-ups offset the few situations you describe? What's the data show for those Arrows? Anyone know how many Arrows with the auto-extend have landed gear up? I'll bet it's NONE. (Mechanical failures excepted) I think it failed to 'catch-on' because 'real' pilots didn't like a decision being made for them. Even though the system was better at it than they were! 2 Quote
carusoam Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 That brings back a few memories... Mooneys have plenty of devices that can tell exactly how high above the ground they are... Something called a WAAS GPS... For $20 dollars more... somebody could build a logic box comparing throttle pulled, gear up, and the ground about 200’ away... This would be a good time to hit the gear switch... Mike this is one of those ideas we could forward to the Mooney factory to get enabled in new planes... Once enabled there... installed back through the masses of all Mooneys... Or... see if Rob, Takair would be interested in taking on such a project... Rob has built the electric Servo powered Step.... and a few other things... Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
MooneyMitch Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, mike_elliott said: Of course all the new G1000's scream "CHECK GEAR" at you once below 12" MP, but I am an evangelist of a proximity bitchin betty call out also. Anthony, as you know I am powerless, but carry a big stick... ' nuff said. As sexist as it is these days, I still miss my “bitchen betty “. Quote
Hank Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 20 minutes ago, MikeOH said: Those situations are what the override was for. Would eliminating gear-ups offset the few situations you describe? What's the data show for those Arrows? Anyone know how many Arrows with the auto-extend have landed gear up? I'll bet it's NONE. (Mechanical failures excepted) I think it failed to 'catch-on' because 'real' pilots didn't like a decision being made for them. Even though the system was better at it than they were! It was before my (piloting) time, but I always thought the issue that ended the auto-gear-extension was when it activated at undesired times, i.e., slow flight, stall practice, check rides, etc. How many gear up payouts does it take to equal one stall-spin death due to unexpected gear deployment? A whole bunch of them . . . . Add this feature to my Mooney? No, I'd sell it and hang my certificate on the wall first. In recorded history, picture frames have killed very few people; stall-spins have killed many, many, many pilots! Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 15 minutes ago, carusoam said: That brings back a few memories... Mooneys have plenty of devices that can tell exactly how high above the ground they are... Something called a WAAS GPS... For $20 dollars more... somebody could build a logic box comparing throttle pulled, gear up, and the ground about 200’ away... This would be a good time to hit the gear switch... Mike this is one of those ideas we could forward to the Mooney factory to get enabled in new planes... Once enabled there... installed back through the masses of all Mooneys... Or... see if Rob, Takair would be interested in taking on such a project... Rob has built the electric Servo powered Step.... and a few other things... Best regards, -a- I have no issue with incremental improvements; I mean, why not? I'm not as optimistic that they will significantly reduce gear-ups, but am not against them in any way. I'm surprised with your experience that you think ANYTHING in aviation is going to be only $20 However, I am also surprised at the reluctance and push-back to implement auto-extend. There is no doubt gear-ups would be extremely rare. Seems like investing a couple thousand bucks to save what, $20K, for a gear-up is pretty simple math. Oh, yeah, that doesn't count 'cause it's the INSURANCE companies money Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, Hank said: It was before my (piloting) time, but I always thought the issue that ended the auto-gear-extension was when it activated at undesired times, i.e., slow flight, stall practice, check rides, etc. How many gear up payouts does it take to equal one stall-spin death due to unexpected gear deployment? A whole bunch of them . . . . Add this feature to my Mooney? No, I'd sell it and hang my certificate on the wall first. In recorded history, picture frames have killed very few people; stall-spins have killed many, many, many pilots! Sorry, Hank, but without some real data I'm going to call hyperbole on stall-spin deaths due to the Arrow auto-extend system! Further, as has been pointed out with new tech bitchin' Bettys, it would be pretty simple to incorporate an AGL altitude system to eliminate your example possibility. I maintain that pilots are good with any level of 'warnings,' but simply won't accept automation putting the gear down if they forget. Quote
Hank Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 (edited) 20 minutes ago, MikeOH said: Sorry, Hank, but without some real data I'm going to call hyperbole on stall-spin deaths due to the Arrow auto-extend system! Further, as has been pointed out with new tech bitchin' Bettys, it would be pretty simple to incorporate an AGL altitude system to eliminate your example possibility. I maintain that pilots are good with any level of 'warnings,' but simply won't accept automation putting the gear down if they forget. Took two seconds on Google to find a 3-fatality accident due to unintentional gear deployment during slow flight. Apparently airspeed decayed while turning, gear deployed and the plane impacted terrain. For your data, this article has a link to the NTSB report and mentions the Piper AD back in the 70s to either disable the system or give specific training to pilots on how to prevent undesired deployment. Read on . . . https://generalaviationnews.com/2016/07/25/unintentional-gear-extension-proves-fatal-for-three/ A sad case, but at least my recall was correct. And no, I still do not want and will not install a system like this on my plane. Furthermore, I will not knowingly take off in a plane that has this system still active. P.S.--tell me to do something, fine. Make configuration changes to the airplane regardless if the position of cockpit controls (a la Piper), no way in Hell! Edited October 8, 2020 by Hank Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 Just now, Hank said: Took two seconds on Google to find a 3-fatality accident due to unintentional gear deployment during slow flight. Apparently airspeed decayed while turning, gear deployed and the plane impacted terrain. For your data, this article has a link to the NTSB report and mentions the Piper AD back in the 70s to either disable the system or give specific training to pilots on how to prevent undesired deployment. Read on . . . https://generalaviationnews.com/2016/07/25/unintentional-gear-extension-proves-fatal-for-three/ A sad case, but at least my recall was correct. And no, I still do not want and will not install a system like this on my plane. Furthermore, I will not knowingly take off in a plane that has this system still active. WOW! Not the best example, I'm afraid. This genius was yanking and banking at low altitude. Sure, the gear put the nail in his coffin, but I'm sure not going to condemn auto-extend as an excuse for his stupidity. And, imagine that, the FAA actually had to issue an AD to tell pilots to read the flippin' POH??? Quote
Hank Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 Just now, MikeOH said: WOW! Not the best example, I'm afraid. This genius was yanking and banking at low altitude. Sure, the gear put the nail in his coffin, but I'm sure not going to condemn auto-extend as an excuse for his stupidity. And, imagine that, the FAA actually had to issue an AD to tell pilots to read the flippin' POH??? The NTSB faulted the gear system. That's good enough for me. Sounds like they were flightseeing in a scenic area, not "yanking and banking." Put this system in your plane if you want. I don't, and I won't. Keep searching if you want more data. That was the first one I found, and I quit looking. There's probably many more before the date of the Removal AD, not so many lately. Quote
MikeOH Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 41 minutes ago, Hank said: The NTSB faulted the gear system. That's good enough for me. Sounds like they were flightseeing in a scenic area, not "yanking and banking." Put this system in your plane if you want. I don't, and I won't. Keep searching if you want more data. That was the first one I found, and I quit looking. There's probably many more before the date of the Removal AD, not so many lately. Hmm, "He heard and observed an extremely low flying airplane buzz overhead. The airplane made about a 45 degree banking turn towards the ridgeline when he heard a hydraulic noise ("gggeee"); he observed the landing gear doors open and the landing gear extend. He reported that the gear took about three seconds to lower; it wasn't a sudden drop. The witness also stated that it didn't sound as if the airplane was operating at full power, but at about half power. As the airplane leveled off in a southwesterly direction, it barely cleared the powerlines along the road and proceeded towards the ridge before going out of sight. About five seconds later they observed a plume of smoke. The witness mentioned that it appeared as if the pilot was "showing off." You misconstrue if you think I want this particular system in my plane. I brought this up only as a method to eliminate gear-ups...I'm hearing that technology can solve this...adding modern technology would work. But, alas, there is a general attitude of "I don't, and I won't.". It's just amazing to me that many advocate all manner of WARNING systems, but an advanced auto-extend system is scorned...kinda like the Cirrus chutes originally were (still are) And, I don't believe the AD mandates removal...the option is to read the POH (training)! Quote
Hank Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 Mike, I WILL NOT INSTALL any system in my airplane that autimatically changes the aircraft configuration "regardless of the position of the cockoit controls" as in the original Arrow. That changes how the plane flies, and led directly to this accident. Non-pilot witnesses on the ground are barely credible--how many people do you know who "show off" at reduced power? I don't know any. But I guess you know better than the NTSB in this accident. I'm done here, discussions with superior, closed minds are fruitless. Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 11 hours ago, MikeOH said: Everyone okay with that technology solution? This is not the direction taken by the big commercial operators. 1 Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 10 hours ago, carusoam said: That brings back a few memories... Mooneys have plenty of devices that can tell exactly how high above the ground they are... Something called a WAAS GPS... For $20 dollars more... somebody could build a logic box comparing throttle pulled, gear up, and the ground about 200’ away... This would be a good time to hit the gear switch... Mike this is one of those ideas we could forward to the Mooney factory to get enabled -a- As you know, I've posted several times on the possibility of using WAAS altitude input to determine altitude above the terrain for a low cost gear warning. I suggested it to Garmin via Trex who kindly responded that the issue had been explored by Garmin and determined to be a technological dead end. Perhaps I can find Trex' note? I still think the idea is workable, but Garmin (apparently) disagrees. Maybe this would be a great avionics entry point for an aspiring inventor? 2 Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 8, 2020 Report Posted October 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, Mooneymite said: As you know, I've posted several times on the possibility of using WAAS altitude input to determine altitude above the terrain for a low cost gear warning. I suggested it to Garmin via Trex who kindly responded that the issue had been explored by Garmin and determined to be a technological dead end. Perhaps I can find Trex' note? I still think the idea is workable, but Garmin (apparently) disagrees. Maybe this would be a great avionics entry point for an aspiring inventor? Where did that edit button go? Here's what Treck wrote: "unfortunately no, this is not something we would consider as there would be too much liability for this. the GPS antenna signal is not always a "3D DIFF NAV" which is the most precise level and even then can give a vertical error of up to 10 feet. in the event that the signal was not this level this error could be greater and still would not offer much of a solution." 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.