Gear Up at KCVH on July 8, Third Major in 12 years For This Airplane

[GeeBee]

15 minutes ago, dkkim73 said:

At the risk of asking you to tie my shoes for me, when you're at the plane next can you send me a photo of where you put the index marks? That's a great idea and I think I'll add that. Did you use touch-up paint or some kind of marker, or something else? 

The horizontal stab trim is a big safety focus item for me, too. It's a really elegant engineering solution (movable empennage) but slow to move in this plane and generates a lot of force. 

Just some black paint and masking tape. Brush it on.

[GeeBee]

Not a problem to control if trimmed up for landing in the event of a go-around. You have to "grunt" a bit however it is controllable.. The real issue is being ready for it vs. being surprised. When you are surprised it is less controllable and that is what I aim for, no surprises. 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

You simply cannot say, I will do "this" to reduce gear ups rather you say, "I will operate in this manner" as part of my entire operation.  That means checklist for each phase, call outs at critical junctures and inflection points, and the self discipline to adhere to the operational policies and routines. Training is where you practice policies and routines to make them work for you and your operation.

That's all well and good, and is how most of us probably fly. The hiccup comes along when something is different . . .

I check the green gear light on downwind when I put them down; again on base leg; and on short final I check the floor indicator. 

Then comes my flight into RDU, when Tower sent me 15 nm north of the field, still at 7500 msl. THEN they turned me inbound and cleared me to land, #8. WTF??? So here I am, 7000' agl, 15 nm out, having slowed from cruise to just above the white arc. This is not a situation that I've briefed for, nor ever practiced. Reduce power, aim down  and trim forces off, let airspeed increase. I realized at about 1500 agl that I had a decent glideslope going and would land in a normal position, and worked a little more to slow down and get the flaps out to Takeoff. Still looked good to land. Coming over the fence, habit made me look at the floor indicator, and it was NOT GREEN!! Really quick, I pulled that white knob down, felt the thump, saw the green light, saw green on the floor and flared. Not sure what automation would have done to prevent this.

[dkkim73]

14 minutes ago, Hank said:

...

Then comes my flight into RDU, when Tower sent me 15 nm north of the field, still at 7500 msl. THEN they turned me inbound and cleared me to land, #8. WTF??? ....  Still looked good to land. Coming over the fence, habit made me look at the floor indicator, and it was NOT GREEN!! Really quick, I pulled that white knob down, felt the thump, saw the green light, saw green on the floor and flared. Not sure what automation would have done to prevent this.

Yeah, that's what I'm working on, a more robust flow. It's the exceptions to flow that scare me. Had something similar though less ridiculous (#8, is that today or tomorrow? :)) recently and was very aware of the gear. I was low and far from the field and trying to manage power and guess what speed would help the traffic flow. 

Canonical points to lower gear for me so far are: 

-FAF or cleared for the visual on IFR

-abeam the threshold on a standard visual pattern

Beyond that I'm working on it. The "UPS" checklist on short final has been helpful so far as a cross-check on gear status. And the LHS is there, though a lot of places I fly have big drops prior to touchdown. 

 

 

[dkkim73]

38 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Just some black paint and masking tape. Brush it on.

Well you really took your time sending me that, didn't you?

That's great, picture ~= 1000 words, ty!

[GeeBee]

26 minutes ago, Hank said:

That's all well and good, and is how most of us probably fly. The hiccup comes along when something is different . . .

I check the green gear light on downwind when I put them down; again on base leg; and on short final I check the floor indicator. 

Then comes my flight into RDU, when Tower sent me 15 nm north of the field, still at 7500 msl. THEN they turned me inbound and cleared me to land, #8. WTF??? So here I am, 7000' agl, 15 nm out, having slowed from cruise to just above the white arc. This is not a situation that I've briefed for, nor ever practiced. Reduce power, aim down  and trim forces off, let airspeed increase. I realized at about 1500 agl that I had a decent glideslope going and would land in a normal position, and worked a little more to slow down and get the flaps out to Takeoff. Still looked good to land. Coming over the fence, habit made me look at the floor indicator, and it was NOT GREEN!! Really quick, I pulled that white knob down, felt the thump, saw the green light, saw green on the floor and flared. Not sure what automation would have done to prevent this.

500' Verbalize desired state check in addition to your checklist. "Gear down, flaps down, speed brakes down, on speed, on path" Just like the airlines verbalize, "1000 feet, Gear down, cleared to land".  No matter how far or how weird the pattern at some point, you will be a 500'

[Pinecone]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

Just some black paint and masking tape. Brush it on.

My trim strips make it obvious.  I posted a picture of my plane in the hangar and several people commented on the trim setting.

Like you, mine is in several places.  Before start, Before Taxi, Before Take off, and last chance check rolling onto the runway.

 

[Pinecone]

49 minutes ago, Hank said:

Not sure what automation would have done to prevent this.

A MicroKit Landing Height System would have said "Check Gear" at 200 feet AGL.

Since that only happens when you are at 200 feet and the gear switch UP, it is not common, so gets your attention.

[Aviationist]

Ignores the most annoying buzzer in the world. 
 

But surely a voice is not going to get ignored….

 

[Hank]

17 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

A MicroKit Landing Height System would have said "Check Gear" at 200 feet AGL.

Since that only happens when you are at 200 feet and the gear switch UP, it is not common, so gets your attention.

That's about where I noticed it myself 

[Fly Boomer]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Then I have it on the "After Start Check" to insure it is set correctly (again) and the power to it is turned on. Then I have it on the Before Takeoff Checklist

I just added it to several of my checklists in red.  It's good to separate killer items from the more mundane.

[PT20J]

The Blue Angels rig their planes with a downspring to apply a constant 40 lb. nose down force. The Thunderbirds use nose down trim for only about 20 lb. force (wimps ). So it is clearly possible to fly precisely when out of trim. 

It’s good to practice go arounds at altitude until the forces become expected and manageable. The airplanes would not have been certified if the control forces were overwhelming.  

[Parker_Woodruff]

On 7/17/2024 at 2:42 PM, wombat said:

 

Does everyone think this is a reasonable number?  Every year, at least 1 out of every 150 Mooneys lands gear-up?   Personally, I think this is a bit higher than reality.   How many flying Mooneys are there in the US?   How many Mooney gear-ups are there in the US?

 

I would guess I insure somewhere between 200 and 240 Mooneys and I bet I get 2-3 gear ups per year.  And I have strong reason to believe my loss ratio is better than most brokers.

[Parker_Woodruff]

20 hours ago, MikeOH said:

@Parker_Woodruff

Based on one of your earlier posts I am curious if your 1/3 to 1/2 estimate is ONLY for gear-ups 

Only "I forgot" or "bad maintenance" included in those wild, yet educated guesses.

[Parker_Woodruff]

We haven't even started discussing prop strikes, hail, and hangar rash.

• Personal piston aircraft insurance has historically been a loss leader for many aviation insurance underwriters.  Right now I know a few companies are actually profitable with it.
• If you're skilled at underwriting pro flown, Part 91 turbine aircraft...that's where the profit is.
• The airlines and insurance companies have been trading dollars back and forth for over a decade.  The insurance companies are just glad they haven't taken a real crash with multiple fatalities in quite some time.

 

 

[Schllc]

In the grand scheme of ownership expense ,is $1,000 or 1,500 even worth all the debate and vitriol?

I agree there are more gear ups than there should be, and it’s more than likely a direct reflection or training, or lack therof, improper techniques, or bad pilotage.  
I also agree that it’s beneficial for people, who are so inclined, to seek good training and techniques to reduce the incidence rate, but it obviously isn’t a big enough problem for insurance companies to compel the training, and people will be people….

I would be willing to bet the incident rate of gear ups among the participants of this forum is lower than the average, but is the average really a “problem” with regard to cost?

I would submit that it is not.  If you want to save $1,500 a year you can buy a 182.
Same way you can drive a Toyota Camry instead of a Porsche 911. 
But complaining about $1,000 extra in premium for the privilege to fly my plane just isn’t enough money to raise an eyebrow. 
my two cents anyway….

[MikeOH]

@Schllc

Yours is the best post of this entire thread, IMHO

[Echo]

3 hours ago, Aviationist said:

Ignores the most annoying buzzer in the world. 
 

But surely a voice is not going to get ignored….

 

It’s called triple redundancy. It’s kinda a thing especially for serious humans. It prevents needing luck. 

[Echo]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

In the grand scheme of ownership expense ,is $1,000 or 1,500 even worth all the debate and vitriol?

I agree there are more gear ups than there should be, and it’s more than likely a direct reflection or training, or lack therof, improper techniques, or bad pilotage.  
I also agree that it’s beneficial for people, who are so inclined, to seek good training and techniques to reduce the incidence rate, but it obviously isn’t a big enough problem for insurance companies to compel the training, and people will be people….

I would be willing to bet the incident rate of gear ups among the participants of this forum is lower than the average, but is the average really a “problem” with regard to cost?

I would submit that it is not.  If you want to save $1,500 a year you can buy a 182.
Same way you can drive a Toyota Camry instead of a Porsche 911. 
But complaining about $1,000 extra in premium for the privilege to fly my plane just isn’t enough money to raise an eyebrow. 
my two cents anyway….

Vitriol?  Complaining?  I just see thin skins. Man up.  If you dish crap at others you might have some slung back. This is not rocket science. Distractions happen. 
 

Love being made fun of and called crazy on forums.  Just always wish they were across table when it occurs.

High minded trope is always entertaining.  Keep it coming.

182’s for less than a Mooney?  It depends…

 

[GeeBee]

I am a big fan of Robert Serling's books that chronicle the history of various airlines and aircraft. It may surprise you, but even in the 1950's there was gear up landings of airliners. In fact, TWA landed a Super Connie gear up in Burbank. That means a 3 man crew missed the gear!

Equally surprising was the number of 707's that crashed due to dutch roll, often tearing off multiple engines. In fact a Braniff 707 ripped off 3 out of 4 engines and had to crash land in a swamp.

Starting in the 1960's the industry started looking at the growth of the industry within the present accident rates and came to the realization that at the present growth rate, the industry would by the year 2000 crashing a jet a week! Clearly there had to be a change. Clearly change occurred.

Thus came about Crew Resource Management, Safety Management Systems and most important Threat and Error Management. Our job as GA pilots is to incorporate T&E/M and CRM within our operation to improve our rates. This section of this board is in effect an ad hoc SMS where we identify trends, like the airplane in the OP.  In the identification we need to discuss T&E/M procedures for given threats, such as landing gear systems or trim systems.

Acceptance of the status quo, and the belief there is nothing to do to prevent adverse aircraft states is way too fatalistic. An accident no matter how minor is not where anyone wants to be, and indeed none of us who are sane go out with the idea we are going to land gear up. I refuse to accept the status quo as "good enough" and look to constantly advance my T&E/M skills which is really what being a pilot is all about. It is what makes being a pilot fun, and rewarding.

[Justin Schmidt]

On 7/17/2024 at 4:48 PM, Echo said:

If you forget gear when a voice in your headset is saying check gear!  Check Gear!  You may want to stop flying retractable gear aircraft 

We do have a loud incredibly annoying buzzer

[Justin Schmidt]

23 hours ago, wombat said:

I got stuck on "Gear" being part of GUMPS for a while, but after a while it became natural for the G to stand for Gas.

Personally I don't think I need a 'seatbelts' item because I put my seatbelt (and shoulder harness, if the aircraft is equipped) on before starting the engine, and leave it on the whole flight(*)

Should we as a Mooney community or as part of the 'Light GA' pilot community standardize on something do you think?  Or should we have a couple of options (GUMPS, PUFFS, GUMPS-S, etc) to choose from?

 

I'd like to have a printed list for each plane I fly regularly that matches both the aircraft and my personal inclination.  But maybe each aircraft should have a pre-landing checklist printed somewhere that is easy to reference?  I think my Mooney has one, but I never use it.

 

(*) Using a gatorade bottle for in-flight relief sometimes requires some shimmying and work.

Issue with acronyms is people memorize them with no true understanding, in general that is.

[EricJ]

I have the usual standard gear warning, plus the 1000-ft and progressive callouts from my IFD, plus my AV-17 Bitchin' Betty that says "Landing Gear" through the audio panel whenever the gear warning horn is going off.   I try to not let the gear warning go off, because it is so annoying, so if I don't have the gear down by the time I get a callout from the IFD lower than the 1000-ft call, I consider that a failure.   It doesn't happen very often, but it's easy to see how interruptions and unusual approaches can really throw a wrench into things and result in a missed gear extension.    

While the automation helps, you have to also have some awareness to be extra vigilant if/when the automation fails.  

[Echo]

33 minutes ago, Justin Schmidt said:

We do have a loud incredibly annoying buzzer

Son alerts do fail. 

[1980Mooney]

4 hours ago, Schllc said:

In the grand scheme of ownership expense ,is $1,000 or 1,500 even worth all the debate and vitriol?

I agree there are more gear ups than there should be, and it’s more than likely a direct reflection or training, or lack therof, improper techniques, or bad pilotage.  
I also agree that it’s beneficial for people, who are so inclined, to seek good training and techniques to reduce the incidence rate, but it obviously isn’t a big enough problem for insurance companies to compel the training, and people will be people….

I would be willing to bet the incident rate of gear ups among the participants of this forum is lower than the average, but is the average really a “problem” with regard to cost?

I would submit that it is not.  If you want to save $1,500 a year you can buy a 182.
Same way you can drive a Toyota Camry instead of a Porsche 911. 
But complaining about $1,000 extra in premium for the privilege to fly my plane just isn’t enough money to raise an eyebrow. 
my two cents anyway….

I would love to be your insurance agent. No price sensitivity to “a  thousand here…. A thousand there.”  That is why private equity like Arcline are scooping up aviation related companies and why they are consolidating and jacking up prices. No one really cares. 

Edited July 19 by 1980Mooney