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

[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

[Justin Schmidt]

26 minutes ago, Echo said:

Son alerts do fail. 

Son that's why you fix things, it's an airworthy item 

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

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

 

Sure, cause that’s what I said and was implying…

Ok, so what’s the solution?

In the meantime, while you’re working on it, I’ll, pay the extra 1k which is a rounding error on the cost to own and operate my plane, and hope you guys can find a solution. 

For what it’s worth, I don’t disagree it’s a problem that could be improved on, just haven’t heard any real productive suggestions for solving…

the point was that insurance companies obviously don’t really see it a a problem,  because if they did the rate would be a great deal more than 1k a year.  
if we are all in the same “pool”, one airliner accident dwarfs a year of piston gear ups in value…

I applaud all that are making the effort and support you in your endeavors.  

[PT20J]

@Parker_Woodruff how do Cirrus hull rates compare to Mooneys with similar value and pilot experience?

[Parker_Woodruff]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

@Parker_Woodruff how do Cirrus hull rates compare to Mooneys with similar value and pilot experience?

If instrument rated, 500+ total time, Cirrus are probably somewhere in between a Cessna 182 and a Mooney in rate.  Kind of their own animal.  I've seen them written exceptionally inexpensively and also the opposite.

[mikey757]

I've examined my own habits many times while thinking about avoiding the dreaded gear up and here is a different take. My thought and action process seems to be a little different than most. I tie the actions to airspeed, not a geo position for gear down. Not abeam the numbers or at the marker, or 5 miles out or whatever a lot of guys do. We all need to slow down to land every time. I start slowing in relation to a geo position like we all do to land. But the referencing of airspeed is what drives my brain to start the actions.  As I slow, as soon as I'm well below the max gear speed, my brain says put the gear down. As soon as I'm well below the max flap speed, I start using flaps. I still use gumps, and talk to myself on final but the initial action is tied to airspeed, not to a position. Yes, if you're cruising around the local area or doing pattern work you may never get above gear speed, but you still reference your speed when your getting ready to land and I train my brain to take the action when I'm below the max speed. I'll stand by for the critics. But just another way to think that has served me well.

[dkkim73]

12 hours ago, Justin Schmidt said:

We do have a loud incredibly annoying buzzer

I never noticed. 

[Mooney in Oz]

21 hours ago, dkkim73 said:

The "UPS" check on short final: Undercarraige, Propeller, Switches. 

Good idea, but I prefer just “UP”.   On short final you don’t want to be messing with switches.

[ttflyer]

2 hours ago, mikey757 said:

I've examined my own habits many times while thinking about avoiding the dreaded gear up and here is a different take. My thought and action process seems to be a little different than most. I tie the actions to airspeed, not a geo position for gear down. Not abeam the numbers or at the marker, or 5 miles out or whatever a lot of guys do. We all need to slow down to land every time. I start slowing in relation to a geo position like we all do to land. But the referencing of airspeed is what drives my brain to start the actions.  As I slow, as soon as I'm well below the max gear speed, my brain says put the gear down. As soon as I'm well below the max flap speed, I start using flaps. I still use gumps, and talk to myself on final but the initial action is tied to airspeed, not to a position. Yes, if you're cruising around the local area or doing pattern work you may never get above gear speed, but you still reference your speed when your getting ready to land and I train my brain to take the action when I'm below the max speed. I'll stand by for the critics. But just another way to think that has served me well.

This is more or less what I do as well.  The way I think about it, when it's time to land the gear is the MOST important thing. So it's FIRST.  When it's time to land I have to slow down.  As I slow down below gear speed, I always put the gear down before I do anything else.  Then flaps, pumps, prop etc...  But the gear is my first action when it's time to land...

Then obviously checked again on base and final with GUMPS. 

I'll also note that this is different then the way I fly a jet.  But Mooneys and jets are different airplanes...

[Echo]

16 hours ago, Justin Schmidt said:

Son that's why you fix things, it's an airworthy item 

Do you normally hear your gear alarm?  I do not. Son? PFFT.

[MikeOH]

46 minutes ago, Echo said:

Do you normally hear your gear alarm?  I do not. Son? PFFT.

You need to check your hearing aid batteries

[Echo]

19 hours ago, Justin Schmidt said:

Son that's why you fix things, it's an airworthy item 

Lol.  Lost in translation.  They are called son-alerts.