Four (4) Mooney Mishaps In Four (4) Days - Three (3) Gear-ups and One (1) Crash On FAA ASIAS

[1980Mooney]

https://www.asias.faa.gov/apex/f?p=100:93:::NO:::

Gear-up Landings

• 1967 M20G at Petaluma Muni, CA (O69) .  Looks like he was on the second "touch and go"
• 1976 M20J at Martha's Vineyard, MA (KMVY).   Last known flight appearing on FlighAware was one year ago on Aug 14, 2023.
• 1968 M20F at Waterbury-Oxford (KOXC).  Flying landings and taxi-back (on third landing).  Pic shows right main and nose gear collapsed - slid off runway into grass.  New owner in June 2024.

Crash

• 1966 Mooney M20F near Cottonwood, AZ (P52) ,  Destroyed.  Discussed in separate topic - appears to have been on take-off.  Pilot in stable condition.

[1980Mooney]

FYI - the 1967 M20G at Petaluma is on its fourth (4th) gear-up/collapse in 24 years.  2000 - gear-up, 2010 - porpoise and collapse, 2016 - gear-up and 2024 gear-up. Clean gear-ups/collapses in a Mooney are generally repairable.  It just takes time and money.

[ArtVandelay]

1976 M20J?

[Hank]

2 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

1976 M20J?

Some people read the manufactured year as the model year, despite the J being introduced in the 1977 model year.

[Ron McBride]

How many were manual gear?  3 possibly.

 

[1980Mooney]

5 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

1976 M20J?

 

2 hours ago, Hank said:

Some people read the manufactured year as the model year, despite the J being introduced in the 1977 model year.

This particular M20J/201 was built in September 1976,  If you search Aircraft.com some owners/brokers over time have advertised early manufactured M20J's/201's as "1976" models, 

The odd thing is if you look at the picture, it does not look like the propeller is bent in any way - not even the tips scraped.  And it is not a "gear collapse" as reported in the FAA ASIAS - the gear are completely up.

I wonder if he had an engine out and then landed gear up by accident.  Or his gear actuator failed, his emergency manual actuator failed/jammed and he elected to gear up intentionally shutting the engine down.  Doubly odd because this is a towered airport and the incident was in the early afternoon when the tower was open.  The airport was closed for 2 hours per to the article and also looking at FligtAware history.  If he had an engine out or jammed gear he would have declared an emergency to the tower controller.  This would have been reported to the FAA.

https://www.mvtimes.com/2024/09/07/landing-incident-temporarily-closes-mvy/

 

[Echo]

39 minutes ago, Aviationist said:

What’s the obsession with posting every single incident that happens?  I haven’t seen any meaningful discussion or anything useful come from these posts. 
 

they seem to just highlight other people misfortune. I don’t see the benefit in any of that. 

I would probably not come and read them. Otherwise you are a conspirator in their misfortune?

[Echo]

One man’s obsession is another man’s hobby. 

[Paul Thomas]

46 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

This particular M20J/201 was built in September 1976,  If you search Aircraft.com some owners/brokers over time have advertised early manufactured M20J's/201's as "1976" models, 

The odd thing is if you look at the picture, it does not look like the propeller is bent in any way - not even the tips scraped.  And it is not a "gear collapse" as reported in the FAA ASIAS - the gear are completely up.

I wonder if he had an engine out and then landed gear up by accident.  Or his gear actuator failed, his emergency manual actuator failed/jammed and he elected to gear up intentionally shutting the engine down.  Doubly odd because this is a towered airport and the incident was in the early afternoon when the tower was open.  The airport was closed for 2 hours per to the article and also looking at FligtAware history.  If he had an engine out or jammed gear he would have declared an emergency to the tower controller.  This would have been reported to the FAA.

https://www.mvtimes.com/2024/09/07/landing-incident-temporarily-closes-mvy/

 

The prop on my 84 stops at 10 and 4 o'clock. I wonder if the early J were different or if it is indicative of something else.

It looks like a good landing with minimal damage. If the pilot was trying to minimize damage, I wonder if flaps up would be better, or if we are better off putting the flaps down for a lower speed in order to do less damage to the belly.

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, Aviationist said:

What’s the obsession with posting every single incident that happens?  I haven’t seen any meaningful discussion or anything useful come from these posts. ...I don’t see the benefit in any of that.

There is rarely any discussion, let alone meaningful, in the "Safety and Accident Discussion" Topic.

But it happens, and more than most think, know or want to believe.  Perhaps you are right - maybe if we don't acknowledge or discuss it, then they will just go away on their own.....

If it offends you then just don't read it.

BTW - this isn't "every".....there are more if you are really interested.

[1980Mooney]

3 hours ago, Ron McBride said:

How many were manual gear?  3 possibly.

 

The J and the F are electric - Since it's one of the first J's built, they are both probably Dukes.  The G is a mystery - but none of the four (4) gear-up incident reports mention "forgot J bar" or "J bar came loose".  they just say "forgot the landing gear" - maybe it is electric also.

[Pinecone]

5 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

There is rarely any discussion, let alone meaningful, in the "Safety and Accident Discussion" Topic.

Some are pretty cut and dried.  Others have some discussion.

[Echo]

On 9/10/2024 at 10:41 AM, Aviationist said:

What I’m saying is you should find a more constructive hobby. 
 

there’s plenty of discussion that happens with incidents. 
 

4 mooneys had gear ups this week, or something similar every week isn’t constructive or useful, that’s why there is no discussion. If I had a really bad day with my airplane only to find that some random guy on the internet with nothing to do was using my misfortune to complain about insurance. 
 

if you want to build a community based on a common interest in Mooney airplanes, what is the benefit of calling out every minor incident?

Most men don’t like to be told what to do. I would go one step farther. Most men own their mistakes and try and educate others on prevention. Learning is knowing. Not talking about things because they are uncomfortable or awkward or embarrassing is NOT the way to go. Maybe a couple astronauts would not be stranded for months?  Maybe a couple airliners wouldn’t of crashed?  Maybe audible gear alerts that tell you with speech vs buzzers will be installed?  Maybe critical parts will be made?  Maybe the squeaky wheel will get attention?  The emperor has no clothes. There is a lot of that going around. 

[Schllc]

Does anyone know how many of these incidents occur at towered vs non?

I ask because I was on approach a few days ago, and tower informed me that my gear was not down.  I knew this of course because they vectored me all over prior and then instructed a short approach, but I am not able to put my gear down while in a bank and had to bleed off speed as well.  However, it was a pleasant surprise to be reminded by the people watching me land. 
I do realize towers may not have the ability to watch every single plane landing, and my intention is not to make it their responsibility, but training controllers to look seems to be a pretty easy way to help reduce these incidents. 

[Fly Boomer]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

I am not able to put my gear down while in a bank

Is that peculiar to the Aerostar?  I'm with you -- even if I know exactly what I'm doing, I appreciate reminders (even in the car).

[Schllc]

2 hours ago, Fly Boomer said:

Is that peculiar to the Aerostar?  I'm with you -- even if I know exactly what I'm doing, I appreciate reminders (even in the car).

Yes, it is in the poh.  Technically you can put the gear down if you center the ball, but it is not recommended.  Given the cost of the gear doors, I am not interested in finding out.

[natdm]

On 9/10/2024 at 9:20 AM, Aviationist said:

What’s the obsession with posting every single incident that happens?  I haven’t seen any meaningful discussion or anything useful come from these posts. 

Mine was posted on here and had a super meaningful discussion but for some reason @1980Mooney deleted it, I think. Frustrating since the reason I responded with such detail was so others could learn from the misfortune.

[EricJ]

5 hours ago, Schllc said:

Does anyone know how many of these incidents occur at towered vs non?

I ask because I was on approach a few days ago, and tower informed me that my gear was not down.  I knew this of course because they vectored me all over prior and then instructed a short approach, but I am not able to put my gear down while in a bank and had to bleed off speed as well.  However, it was a pleasant surprise to be reminded by the people watching me land. 
I do realize towers may not have the ability to watch every single plane landing, and my intention is not to make it their responsibility, but training controllers to look seems to be a pretty easy way to help reduce these incidents. 

Might've been an ex-military controller or they just happened to notice.     I popped the gear breaker on a go-around once years ago (it does that if you're too fast), and they let me know my gear stopped only partially up.   

[Schllc]

Seems like it would be super easy for them to drop a reminder when they clear you to land, just to add "check your gear"...  

But I of course don't know any of the rules for controllers and this may sound awful to them.  I am just thinking that while constant reminders of these incidents are probably helpful to people who frequent this site, it isn't doing much for those who dont.

If we really want to find a way to drive down the numbers, efficacy is the key, and those guys are in the best place on earth to see the problem before its an accident.....

Flame away!!

[Ragsf15e]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

Seems like it would be super easy for them to drop a reminder when they clear you to land, just to add "check your gear"...  

But I of course don't know any of the rules for controllers and this may sound awful to them.  I am just thinking that while constant reminders of these incidents are probably helpful to people who frequent this site, it isn't doing much for those who dont.

If we really want to find a way to drive down the numbers, efficacy is the key, and those guys are in the best place on earth to see the problem before its an accident.....

Flame away!!

They definitely do help in the military.  Someone looks at each aircraft on final with binoculars.  It’s easier there though because the landing light is on the nose so even if you can’t see it perfectly, No light means no gear.  
I do agree it’s nice when they look at you, but I suspect there’s one person in a civilian tower where there’s three in the military tower doing the same job.

[201Mooniac]

I once landed at a joint civilian/military airfield in a piper warrior and was told "cleared to land, check gear down".  I was later told I should have responded gear down and welded but as a new pilot I was just confused.

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

Seems like it would be super easy for them to drop a reminder when they clear you to land, just to add "check your gear"...  

But I of course don't know any of the rules for controllers and this may sound awful to them.

 

19 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

They definitely do help in the military.  Someone looks at each aircraft on final with binoculars.  It’s easier there though because the landing light is on the nose so even if you can’t see it perfectly, No light means no gear.  
I do agree it’s nice when they look at you, but I suspect there’s one person in a civilian tower where there’s three in the military tower doing the same job.

Aside from Mooney and most Beech (and a few percent of Piper and Cessna), the majority of SEP flying are fixed gear.  And turboprops like the large number of Caravans are fixed.  Saying that to every plane would sound ludicrous.  Alternatively they would need to quiz many planes - "Beech 24, Cessna 210, Cessna 182, PA-28, PA-32, etc.. Are you fixed or retract?!).  I suspect they would consider it a waste of time and distraction.

And a large portion of the rest are pro pilots.   I don't recall any tower tell a jet, turboprop or commercial to "Check your gear" as a normal reminder while cleared to land or on Final - perhaps it happens but seems unlikely.

[Paul Thomas]

When I fly into military fields, they ask if the gear is down. Even with a fix gear, I don't give them grief about it because it's part of their procedure. I think it's a good safety measure.

I put a warning into foreflight at 500 AGL to remind me to check the gear but I must not have set that up correctly. I need to do some testing with it. There are things we can do to help prevent gear up landings.

[1980Mooney]

On 9/10/2024 at 10:41 AM, Aviationist said:

What I’m saying is you should find a more constructive hobby. 
 

there’s plenty of discussion that happens with incidents. 
 

4 mooneys had gear ups this week, or something similar every week isn’t constructive or useful, that’s why there is no discussion. If I had a really bad day with my airplane only to find that some random guy on the internet with nothing to do was using my misfortune to complain about insurance. 
 

if you want to build a community based on a common interest in Mooney airplanes, what is the benefit of calling out every minor incident?

 

8 hours ago, Echo said:

Most men don’t like to be told what to do. I would go one step farther. Most men own their mistakes and try and educate others on prevention. Learning is knowing. Not talking about things because they are uncomfortable or awkward or embarrassing is NOT the way to go. Maybe a couple astronauts would not be stranded for months?  Maybe a couple airliners wouldn’t of crashed?  Maybe audible gear alerts that tell you with speech vs buzzers will be installed?  Maybe critical parts will be made?  Maybe the squeaky wheel will get attention?  The emperor has no clothes. There is a lot of that going around. 

 

You may have noticed that this post by "Aviationist" is gone (actually all of his posts are gone).  His profile says that deleted his 76 posts about 45 minutes ago.  I wonder if he is one of the MS members with multiple screen names.

 

 

[1980Mooney]

46 minutes ago, Schllc said:

 I am just thinking that while constant reminders of these incidents are probably helpful to people who frequent this site, it isn't doing much for those who dont.

Well you are right, logically it doesn't do anything for those that don't visit this site. 

Just an observation but it appears that:

• Only a minority of Mooney owners join MS as members.
• Only a minority of MS members are frequent visitors to MS.
• Only a minority of MS frequent visitors post or respond to anything.
• Only a minority of those posting and responding come to the Safety and Accident Discussion Forum (look at the number of posts and the number of views and responses as compared to General, Modern or Vintage Forums. - easily an order of magnitude less.  And it is like frozen in time with the first four (4) topics posted in 2019 -2021 and no responses since then.)
• Of those few MS members that respond on Safety and Accident Discussion, some only do it to complain either they are offended, that it just points out misfortune, that it is really just a way to complain about insurance, that is not constructive or useful and one even said it was voyeuristic.
• And some of those are vocal that we, like good children, should just keep our mouths shut, sit on our hands and wait for the NTSB Final to come out in a couple years (which rarely has any bearing on the epidemic of Mooney landing incidents).  Of course when the Final does come out most have forgotten, moved on and have little to no interest at that point.

So you are right.  Few are interested and it doesn't do much if anything.  It is not really worth the effort.  Might as well just delete the entire Forum.