Two gear up landings within 2 days of each other - M20C at KFNL & M20M at KPAE.

[Mooney in Oz]

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/500642

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/500635

[Rwsavory]

The C in Colorado had a Johnson bar. Very well-equipped. Looking at FlightAware, it appears they were doing multiple touch and goes.

Don’t do that. 

[Aaviationist]

8 hours ago, Rwsavory said:

The C in Colorado had a Johnson bar. Very well-equipped. Looking at FlightAware, it appears they were doing multiple touch and goes.

Don’t do that. 

Yawn. Touch and goes are a normal part of training and staying current and proficient.   There is nothing wrong either way touch and goes.  

[Brian2034]

15 hours ago, Aaviationist said:

Yawn. Touch and goes are a normal part of training and staying current and proficient.   There is nothing wrong either way touch and goes.  

I agree if you want to be proficient you practice, in Canada you must have 5 takeoffs and landing every 6 months to stay current to take passengers. And if you fly at night you have to do the same at night to stay current to take passengers.

In our area we consider a good flying day anything with  30 knots of wind or less, there’s always a crosswind and or a good gust component. 

Proficiency in landing/ crosswind procedures are the most important part of flying here!

If you wait for calm days or winds directly down the runway you don’t fly here. ( CYYT)

Just my 2 cents

[Hank]

47 minutes ago, Brian2034 said:

I agree if you want to be proficient you practice, in Canada you must have 5 takeoffs and landing every 6 months to stay current to take passengers. And if you fly at night you have to do the same at night to stay current to take passengers.

Here in the U.S., currency for passengers is 3 landings in the previous 90 days; night currency is 3 landings to a full stop in the last 90 days.

It's not super windy where I am, but there are places where 30 knot winds are uncommonly frequent. 

[1980Mooney]

15 hours ago, Rwsavory said:

The C in Colorado had a Johnson bar. Very well-equipped. Looking at FlightAware, it appears they were doing multiple touch and goes.

Don’t do that. 

It's not just the T&G's.  Unfortunately this is a recently purchased plane and an even newer pilot that was in training when the plane was purchased.  The plane showed up in Loveland on Sep. 9, 2024 and was registered in October.  Owner got his Pilot ticket this January.  You can see what appear to be some training flights in between.

Yes it is well equipped.  N6099Q, a 1965 M20C has been all dolled up to look like a short body M20J. - 201 windsheild, J style cowling, wing tips, J style yokes, panel and glareshield that looks like a J with the bump in it, Aspen ProMax 2500, S-Tec autopilot, etc

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/233105531/n6099q-1966-mooney-m20c-mark-21

If you look at his tracks it looks like he was always forcing the Mooney to land.  Too fast, too high, diving descents and floating down the runway.  An 8,500 ft x 100 ft. runway spoils any pilot - it accommodates a lot of sloppiness when landing.:

• The Tower had just closed a few minutes before N6099Q took off. 
  • He announced on CTAF that the was going to "stay in the pattern and fly touch and goes"
• On every landing he would cross the runway threshold at about 50-75 ft. AGL.
• Based on altitude and speed, it appears that he would always touch down about 1,500 - 1,750 ft down the runway from the threshold on the 8,500 ft x 100 ft runway.
• When turning Final he would initially descend at about -900 fpm.  Many of the Final descents were varying between 500-900 fpm.  Sometimes he would slow the descent to 300 fpm. only to increase near the runway.  On the 3rd T&G, he extended his Base but his turn to Final was initially at -2,000 fpm.  The rate then slowed to -1,400 and then -1.200 fpm.
• His speed on Final was initially 91- 103 kts airspeed with the exception of the 4th at 86 kts on a Shorter Final
• On his 1st T&G, it appears that he was doing about 86 kts airspeed over the runway threshold and descending at -640 fpm over the threshold.  (Groundspeed was 81 kts plus weather showed a headwind straight down the runway of 6 mph).
• On his 3rd T&G he followed too close behind N2973B, a BE-35 that was on Final landing for a full stop.  Since the Bo was still on Runway 15 and turning off, he intentionally balked the landing.  Instead of immediately climbing to pattern altitude along along the centerline,  he drifted right of the runway just before the threshold and flew parallel R-15 about 100 ft. to the right and at about 150 AGL the entire lenght. (He announced his intention to balk on the CTAF). 
• The gear up landing occurred on the 5th T&G which was intended to be the last touch one. (which he announced that on the CTAF)
  • On this final  (5th) T&G, he turned Base to Final at about 91 kts airspeed and at -1,025 fpm descent rate.
  • Rate of descent dropped to about -600 fpm then back up to about -900 fpm and then dropping to around -500 fpm while maintaining about 89 kts airspeed.
  • I calculated his angle of descent to be 4.3 degrees to his approx. 1,500 ft "displaced Touchdown point"..
  • Over the runway threshold he was about 83 kts airspeed, at about 50 ft AGL and still descending at about -450 fpm
• On the CTAF he announced that he bellied in, skidded off the Runway 15 and wound up clear of the runway and in the grass.

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a7ec50&lat=40.457&lon=-104.988&zoom=13.5&showTrace=2025-04-20&trackLabels&timestamp=1745109083

Edited April 24 by 1980Mooney

[1980Mooney]

On 4/22/2025 at 10:30 PM, Mooney in Oz said:

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/500642

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/500635

The second one, the Bravo is actually still in the MooneySpace Classifieds.  The OP who posted it has not returned since February.  It was posted in ASO.com at the beginning of the year but it is no longer there.  Unknown if it got sold.

[midlifeflyer]

12 hours ago, Aaviationist said:

Yawn. Touch and goes are a normal part of training and staying current and proficient.   There is nothing wrong either way touch and goes.  

Without getting into the touch & go right or wrong battle, there will be far more proficiency created by a single gusty crosswind landing than 10 maneuvers created to fit more landing into a given amount of time. 

[Hank]

37 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Without getting into the touch & go right or wrong battle, there will be far more proficiency created by a single gusty crosswind landing than 10 maneuvers created to fit more landing into a given amount of time. 

Great! Can I please have some gusty crosswinds later this morning? If only it was so easy--we train and practice when we can, and accept whatever the winds and weather happen to be.

Any practice is better than no practice. And new pilots have to learn sometime, or should we sit around not flying while we wait on the desired winds for maximum learning?

[skykrawler]

14 hours ago, Aaviationist said:

Yawn. Touch and goes are a normal part of training and staying current and proficient.   There is nothing wrong either way touch and goes.  

Heh heh,  When I read it, I thought he meant don't land with the gear up.

I can't remember the last time I did patterns.    But landing practice needs to start with speed control practice.  Isn't that part of primary training?

As for landing long - perhaps not in this case, but I will landing long to avoid extended time taxing on the runway.

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

Great! Can I please have some gusty crosswinds later this morning? If only it was so easy--we train and practice when we can, and accept whatever the winds and weather happen to be.

Any practice is better than no practice. And new pilots have to learn sometime, or should we sit around not flying while we wait on the desired winds for maximum learning?

Of course not. But it’s usually a good idea to understand what your practice is giving you.

[A64Pilot]

It seems to me that T&G’s aren’t actually the root cause of most of Mooney gear-ups.

It’s very junior pilots that in my opinion shouldn’t be in a complex aircraft, actually now I think of it the gear ups sort of make my point.

Now I admit that anyone no matter how experienced can gear up, the FAA has a name for it, they call it SLOJ for sudden loss of judgement, but it’s something that is more likely for someone who is in over their head, if your having trouble landing, you are in over your head. A Mooney is actually I think a very forgiving and easy aircraft to fly and land, but it doesn’t land like a C-172.

[hammdo]

Gotta wonder if a LHS or Bitchen’ Betty linked to gear down would be better than gear horn. 3 one in a wee, ouch… - assuming all we’re gear forgotten…

-Don

[midlifeflyer]

12 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

It’s very junior pilots that in my opinion shouldn’t be in a complex aircraft, actually now I think of it the gear ups sort of make my point.

I wonder what the stats would show about that. Most gear ups are not reported, but the ones I hear about tend to involve what I think of as experienced pilots more often than newbies.

That might also depend on what we consider “very junior.”  

[Hank]

34 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Most gear ups are not reported, but the ones I hear about tend to involve what I think of as experienced pilots more often than newbies.

That might also depend on what we consider “very junior.”  

I bought my Mooney and started flying it with 62 whole hours in my logbook. "Junior pilot" would have been a complement! 

Now, eighteen years later, i know my Mooney well--what I should do, how far to move engine & flight controls, how the airplane should respond, where I should and should not try to fly. But to an airline pilot, my logbook still looks pretty junior.

On the other hand, I've paid for every single hour in it, and have sat squarely in the left seat after doing all of the flight planning, fueling and loading--when's the last time most airline pilots created and filed a flight plan, checked the weather (NOT read a briefing prepared by someone else), etc.?

[A64Pilot]

3 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I wonder what the stats would show about that. Most gear ups are not reported, but the ones I hear about tend to involve what I think of as experienced pilots more often than newbies.

That might also depend on what we consider “very junior.”  

I don’t know the stats, but bet it’s three groups, very junior, the old farts, and the person who rarely flies.

Very Junior to me is the guy that “I just got my PP and want a Mooney” and or the person who buys a Mooney as their first complex airplane. If you look at these gear ups it seems to be pretty common that many occur soon after being bought.

Insurance people aren’t stupid, if your insurance quotes are stupid high, that should be a clue that maybe you need to gain experience first or that you’re too old etc. What’s wrong with renting until you get 100 hours or whatever insurance wants?

Old fart is sort of self explanatory, but admit people lose cognition at different rates as they age, but we all lose some. I hate growing old, I don’t recommend it.

The person who rarely flies is sort of self explanatory too I think, I fly every week, usually twice or more, but it’s easy for me, I’m retired and the airplane is at my house, when I was working the last couple of years my airplane was over 20 miles away so I didn’t fly much, except I flew for work just not my airplane. I understand though that someone who works and the airplane is an hour away etc it’s tough to fly.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

don’t know the stats, but bet it’s three groups, very junior, the old farts, and the person who rarely flies.

Don't forget the twin and Part 135 guys, including even with a crew of two.

Out of curiosity, I went to the NTSB accident database and input Part 135 flights landing accidents with the word "gear" in the narrative. I wasn't  sure what I would find because many gear-ups are not reported and others are going to involve mechanical failures or other factors (the second hit was a pilot who hit an Elk).  But by sheer coincidence, of the 138 hits I got, the third one involved a 15,000 hour scheduled air taxi pilot landing a Baron gear up simply because he forgot to put it down.

Obviously one of those junior old farts who rarely flies  

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

I hate growing old, I don’t recommend it.

 

Well, I don't recommend the alternative

[MikeOH]

Throwing in my $0.02.  I think it's easy to blame youth/age/inexperience when it happens to the 'other guy', but I think that's a lot of 'whistling past the graveyard' logic to convince yourself it won't happen to YOU, frankly.  IMHO, it comes down to distractions, external or self-made.  It's the reason I check for gear down four times.  And, yes, I've missed a couple when 'stuff' was happening; thankfully, never missed all four

At the time of this story John Deakin was about as far from any of those 'reasons' as you could get: https://www.avweb.com/features/pelicans-perch-80-gear-up-landing-in-a-747/

 

[A64Pilot]

55 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Don't forget the twin and Part 135 guys, including even with a crew of two.

Out of curiosity, I went to the NTSB accident database and input Part 135 flights landing accidents with the word "gear" in the narrative. I wasn't  sure what I would find because many gear-ups are not reported and others are going to involve mechanical failures or other factors (the second hit was a pilot who hit an Elk).  But by sheer coincidence, of the 138 hits I got, the third one involved a 15,000 hour scheduled air taxi pilot landing a Baron gear up simply because he forgot to put it down.

Obviously one of those junior old farts who rarely flies  

I think I covered SLOJ didn’t I?

However if there was a crew of two, there almost certainly wasn’t then that would make forgetting extraordinarily unlikely.

There was I’m sure two rated people, but they weren’t operating as a crew, or the non flying one would have caught the gear. Second guy was a passenger I bet, actually I bet no duties were even discussed.

I understand the whistling past the graveyard, this section of the forum is full of it, it’s part of normal behavior, it’s the reason why you can get infantrymen to charge a machine gun for instance, the belief of it won’t happen to me.

Anytime someone posts about an incident etc on here almost immediately people post why it won’t happen to them. Again, normal human behavior.

However insurance companies mostly operate on statistics, if your insurance quote is high, might consider why.

I know about age 70 or whatever it is I’ll essentially become uninsurable in a complex aircraft, the fact that I’m Commercial /instrument, over 10,000 hours won’t matter. I’ll likely sell the Mooney then not because lack of insurance is overly concerning, the Mooney is the only airplane I’ve insured, but because they likely have a point.

I’m paranoid as hell about forgetting the gear, it’s the reason I insure the Mooney. 

[midlifeflyer]

20 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Throwing in my $0.02.  I think it's easy to blame youth/age/inexperience when it happens to the 'other guy', but I think that's a lot of 'whistling past the graveyard' logic to convince yourself it won't happen to YOU, frankly.  

Just a little of that FAA "invulnerability" hazardous attitude mixed in? 

There's really no guarantee about this, just ways to mitigate the risk. All most of us do is choose the methods we think will do the job for us. 

I can guarantee one thing: no one who ever landed unintentional gear up thought they would. 

[midlifeflyer]

1 minute ago, A64Pilot said:

I’m paranoid as hell about forgetting the gear, it’s the reason I insure the Mooney. 

Paranoia can be a pretty effective mitigation strategy. 

[A64Pilot]

19 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Throwing in my $0.02.  I think it's easy to blame youth/age/inexperience when it happens to the 'other guy', but I think that's a lot of 'whistling past the graveyard' logic to convince yourself it won't happen to YOU, frankly.  IMHO, it comes down to distractions, external or self-made.  It's the reason I check for gear down four times.  And, yes, I've missed a couple when 'stuff' was happening; thankfully, never missed all four

I concur distractions are probably a leading cause of accidents, another is complacency, the idea that I fly complex Jets or Military aircraft for a living, this little piston popper I can fly in my sleep.

However I know that when I was first starting out that I was much more easily overwhelmed by events than now, being overwhelmed is a distraction, getting target fixated on the airspeed indicator because your having trouble landing for instance 

[A64Pilot]

4 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Paranoia can be a pretty effective mitigation strategy. 

I hope anyway. My Wife often flies with me, I brief her that she has one job, to ensure I put the gear down, and to look at the lines on the floor to ensure they are aligned.

 

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

I hope anyway. My Wife often flies with me, I brief her that she has one job, to ensure I put the gear down, and to look at the lines on the floor to ensure they are aligned.

 

Paranoia is definitely one of mine. So's a consistent point in time when I deploy it (habits are hard to break), although IFR and VFR and different. 

But one is actually a bit counterintuitive. I fly a number of different airplanes. Some fixed gear, some retract but, what they have in common is different target landing speeds. As a result, I pretty much always have to use the before landing checklist as a pre-landing briefing. That acts as a big reminder and is the trigger for the later multiple flow/memory confirmations.