Failed nose gear emergency landing at KPWK

<sigh>
The only thing dramatic about that video are the journalists who wrote it.

Nice and collected job by the pilot.
 
I love how they just hustle off. :)

They were over heard saying, "should I write that up?" "Nawh! Let the line guy tow it in." "Dooooduh! That was shawheeet!" "Let's find another plane and do it again!"

Joking aside, nice job guys! Glad to see it work out the way it did.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
 
Easy to armchair pilot, but over the threshold I would have made an attempt to kill the mixture and (2 bladed) prop and see if I couldn’t prevent the prop strike(s)
 
Easy to armchair pilot, but over the threshold I would have made an attempt to kill the mixture and (2 bladed) prop and see if I couldn’t prevent the prop strike(s)
I was watching for that, but I suppose he just said screw it, let insurance deal with it!
 
Easy to armchair pilot, but over the threshold I would have made an attempt to kill the mixture and (2 bladed) prop and see if I couldn’t prevent the prop strike(s)
In my experience over the numbers is too late for that. It's not going to stop windmilling that fast. When we made our gear up in the Cardinal I killed the mixture 500' up and tried slowing the plane to stop the prop and finally decided the effort wasn't worth the risk. The prop windmilled all the way down.
 
When we made our gear up in the Cardinal I killed the mixture 500' up and tried slowing the plane to stop the prop and finally decided the effort wasn't worth the risk. The prop windmilled all the way down.
Comments like this are why as an occasional and relatively new pilot I read POA so frequently. Thanks RyanShort1 for the real world summary of your experience in a similar situation. Most useful thing I've read in a while.
 
Update from local news stations:

"Believe it or not, it was actually Seferian's [pilot/owner] second plane crash. Six years ago he crash landed in Lansing, MI, and walked away from that crash as well. While his wife Barb said she wishes he would stop flying, she knew what happened was a mechanical error, and the choice is up to him." -- WGN​
 
Easy to armchair pilot, but over the threshold I would have made an attempt to kill the mixture and (2 bladed) prop and see if I couldn’t prevent the prop strike(s)

Why? Do you practice that very often - kill the mixture on short final and use the starter to get the blades horizontal?

If not, a known in advance gear up is probably not a great time to learn how to do it for the first time. The plane is expendable, and if it is insured what's the benefit?

As PIC you are supposed to exercise good judgement. If I ever have to make a gear up I am changing the fewest other things possible from a normal approach and landing. I couldn't care less about the engine or props.
 
Why? Do you practice that very often - kill the mixture on short final and use the starter to get the blades horizontal?

If not, a known in advance gear up is probably not a great time to learn how to do it for the first time. The plane is expendable, and if it is insured what's the benefit?

As PIC you are supposed to exercise good judgement. If I ever have to make a gear up I am changing the fewest other things possible from a normal approach and landing. I couldn't care less about the engine or props.

And a real challenge with a 3 blade prop x 2.
 
All that’s required is to pull the levers all the way back, nothing more. If it works, great, if it doesn’t, fine, I agree, let the insurance company fix it. It’d be worth a shot if you had things under control. I consider that good judgement.

And the benefit, again from the luxury of my chair, is if the insurance company decides to IRAN the engine(s), instead of replacing them, you’re now flying behind a crank with a prop strike, a condition with a higher probability of crank failure after a few hundred more hours (according to what I’ve read). Good luck getting the insurance company to pay for the engine(s) then.

Another benefit if it had been an engine out situation is less drag. Not an issue here.
 
Thats a pilot! He did what we were all taught- fly the plane... Kudos.
 
In my experience over the numbers is too late for that. It's not going to stop windmilling that fast. When we made our gear up in the Cardinal I killed the mixture 500' up and tried slowing the plane to stop the prop and finally decided the effort wasn't worth the risk. The prop windmilled all the way down.

But that’s in a Cardinal... the 310 can feather their props.

I 100% agree they should not feather or pull mixtures to save the insurance company money. Just pointing out that the Cardinal analogy doesn’t hold up here.
 
single engine perhaps, but a twin with feathering props will. Pretty important feature for OEI situations.
 
But that’s in a Cardinal... the 310 can feather their props.

I 100% agree they should not feather or pull mixtures to save the insurance company money. Just pointing out that the Cardinal analogy doesn’t hold up here.
Unless you’ve tested how fast it’s going to stop windmilling, worry about maintaining directional control and pitch. Aside from our prop, we set down softly enough that we didn’t replace a single rivet...
I wonder if he could have held the nose a tiny bit higher and longer as it looked like a pretty rough drop onto the nose there, but that’s nitpicking on a job well done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"Vartan Seferian was piloting the Cessna, climbing just above 2,000 feet when he tried to put the front landing ear up and "heard a pop."

Hmm... Wonder why he was futsing with the gear at "2,000 feet"?
 
Why? Do you practice that very often - kill the mixture on short final and use the starter to get the blades horizontal?

If not, a known in advance gear up is probably not a great time to learn how to do it for the first time. The plane is expendable, and if it is insured what's the benefit?

As PIC you are supposed to exercise good judgement. If I ever have to make a gear up I am changing the fewest other things possible from a normal approach and landing. I couldn't care less about the engine or props.
That’s right, that’s what insurance is for.

Not to mention the fact that an airplane like a 310 doesn’t glide too well. Cut the mixtures over the fence and you may very well exacerbate the situation if it’s not done correctly.
 
Unless you’ve tested how fast it’s going to stop windmilling, worry about maintaining directional control and pitch. Aside from our prop, we set down softly enough that we didn’t replace a single rivet...
I wonder if he could have held the nose a tiny bit higher and longer as it looked like a pretty rough drop onto the nose there, but that’s nitpicking on a job well done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When the prop is feathered there’s really no wind for it to mill.
 
That’s right, that’s what insurance is for.

Not to mention the fact that an airplane like a 310 doesn’t glide too well. Cut the mixtures over the fence and you may very well exacerbate the situation if it’s not done correctly.

Bingo.

All of us twin engine pilots practice single-engine procedures, including approaches and landings.

How many twin pilots here practice "no engine" approaches and landings? I did it for grins for the first time last year. Had lots of fun with it, but you won't ever find me shutting down two perfectly good engines to save the props and crankshafts.


All that’s required is to pull the levers all the way back, nothing more. If it works, great, if it doesn’t, fine, I agree, let the insurance company fix it. It’d be worth a shot if you had things under control. I consider that good judgement.

And the benefit, again from the luxury of my chair, is if the insurance company decides to IRAN the engine(s), instead of replacing them, you’re now flying behind a crank with a prop strike, a condition with a higher probability of crank failure after a few hundred more hours (according to what I’ve read). Good luck getting the insurance company to pay for the engine(s) then.

Another benefit if it had been an engine out situation is less drag. Not an issue here.

Do you own, or fly a piston twin regularly?
 
When the prop is feathered there’s really no wind for it to mill.
I get that, but there’s still the question of how fast the prop stops, killing the option for a go-around, and the possibility that it doesn’t stop spinning in the right spot anyway. I’d rather accept the likely tear down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I get that, but there’s still the question of how fast the prop stops, killing the option for a go-around, and the possibility that it doesn’t stop spinning in the right spot anyway. I’d rather accept the likely tear down...

The usual technique is to use the starters, after shutting down the engines and feathering the props, to try to kick the props close to horizontal. If you have time.

Here's a link to a thread from April 2017 of an Aztec that had a gear up at Daytona Beach after a hydraulic system failure. The pilot did a superb job and chose to bring it in dead engines. He makes it look easy. It's not. And it's not what I would do. But here's the rest of the story:

Turns out the airplane was in the fleet of the aerial survey division of Daytona Beach based Air America and the pilot had a ton of time in type. They run about 25 Aztecs with cameras all over North America in the warm weather months. I ran into two of their pilots at a lunch stop near Vancouver, BC later that summer. They told me that plane was back in the air in two weeks.

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/aztec-gear-up-daytona-beach-video.102324/
 
Last edited:
The usual technique is to use the starters, after shutting down the engines and feathering the props, to try to kick the props close to horizontal. If you have time.

Here's a link to a thread from April 2017 of an Aztec that had a gear up at Daytona Beach after a hydraulic system failure. The pilot did a superb job and chose to bring it in dead engines. He makes it look easy. It's not.
Yeah, but I betcha that pilot started that process 3-500 feet up if not higher and was obviously comfortable and competent in his aircraft and confident of his glide path to touchdown. My point earlier was that over the numbers is waaay too late for this kind of game.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I tried this in a Super Viking. Nothing, absolutely nothing, would convince the nose gear light to come on. The guys on the ground insisted the nose gear was down - but I knew better. So I planned an extra 10 knots over the fence. Gonna be a hero, save the prop/engine and all that. Well sir, I made the best landing in history, the prop was still windmilling, and just then the left main gear gently folded up. Best laid plans of mice and men and all that. DIdn't even wake the baby it was so soft.
 
Curiosity question, if its not a last minute event, wouldn't it make sense for them to spray the runway down with a bit of foam? Seems like it would cut down on the sparks and that to lower the chances of a fire after being on the ground... I know when a twin landed with no nose gear in GR years ago they didn't do it, nor have I seen it done in articles on others so likely a reason its not done so curious as to why it isn't?
 
Curiosity question, if its not a last minute event, wouldn't it make sense for them to spray the runway down with a bit of foam? Seems like it would cut down on the sparks and that to lower the chances of a fire after being on the ground... I know when a twin landed with no nose gear in GR years ago they didn't do it, nor have I seen it done in articles on others so likely a reason its not done so curious as to why it isn't?

Most airports don't have that equipment.
 
Yeah, but I betcha that pilot started that process 3-500 feet up if not higher and was obviously comfortable and competent in his aircraft and confident of his glide path to touchdown. My point earlier was that over the numbers is waaay too late for this kind of game.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There’s no way it takes 300-500 feet of altitude to stop a feathered prop. It’s nearly instantaneous. A few seconds probably.
Basically just like you pulling the mixture in the ramp.
 
Most airports don't have that equipment.

If they did, would it be wise to ask as a pilot? Not that I'm worried about the gear not going down on the old 140, but just curious...:) Or if one wasn't low on fuel would it make sense to fly to an airport that did have more emergency services available?
 
There’s no way it takes 300-500 feet of altitude to stop a feathered prop. It’s nearly instantaneous. A few seconds probably.
Basically just like you pulling the mixture in the ramp.
But bumping it, focusing on that aspect should be done by 100’ IMO... fly the plane is 1st job. Changing the props and killing power is going to change your glide and etc... and destabilizing the plane close to the ground isn’t the best way to make a better 1 chance landing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
But bumping it, focusing on that aspect should be done by 100’ IMO... fly the plane is 1st job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Certainly true that flying the airplane is job one. I’m not certain I would bump the starter, but I would feel totally comfy shutting down just over the threshold.
There was a different video here a while back where a guy did just that. Coincidentally both props stoped perfectly horizontal.
 
If they did, would it be wise to ask as a pilot? Not that I'm worried about the gear not going down on the old 140, but just curious...:) Or if one wasn't low on fuel would it make sense to fly to an airport that did have more emergency services available?

I suspect you'll generally only find that capability at the major international airports.
Can't see any reason why a gear extension problem in a small GA piston airplane requires blocking the runway at LAX or IAH. :rolleyes:
 
Curiosity question, if its not a last minute event, wouldn't it make sense for them to spray the runway down with a bit of foam? Seems like it would cut down on the sparks and that to lower the chances of a fire after being on the ground... I know when a twin landed with no nose gear in GR years ago they didn't do it, nor have I seen it done in articles on others so likely a reason its not done so curious as to why it isn't?

We don't foam runways anymore. It just waste resources and doesn't have any effect on the outcome. Better to save the foam for when the airplane stops, if you even need it. Most gear ups don't result in much of a fire anyway.
 
Certainly true that flying the airplane is job one. I’m not certain I would bump the starter, but I would feel totally comfy shutting down just over the threshold.
There was a different video here a while back where a guy did just that. Coincidentally both props stoped perfectly horizontal.
You and I are probably both high-enough time pilots that we could nearly shut it down in our sleep at 200’, and yes, maybe the twin’s props will stop quickly and all will be well. I also think a 5000 hour freight dog pilot is gonna do a better job on this kind of landing than a 200-hour newbie CFI multi candidate, too, which is why I would hesitate to advocate the late change. Proficiency certainly allows pilots to make last minute changes with more ease, but that does not stack the odds in your favor, either, say if something (flock of birds, coyote, whatever) makes a go-around a better option.
If nothing else is wrong, a practice approach and intentional go-around before the “real-deal” is also IMO a helpful thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We don't foam runways anymore. It just waste resources and doesn't have any effect on the outcome. Better to save the foam for when the airplane stops, if you even need it. Most gear ups don't result in much of a fire anyway.
Ya beat me to it. Foaming runways also decreases friction, so greasing the runways was discouraged in the 1980s IIRC. ICAO doesn't like foaming the runways just as much as the NFPA. Aluminum sparks don't seem to have the energy to ignite a fire, and titanium sparks don't care if there's a foam or not - they'll still start a fire. Foam is supposed to float on top of the organic fuels eliminating the oxygen from the fire triangle No water source other than what is on board a truck, deplete resources for the fire... bla bla bla, I'm a nerd.
 
All of your explanations all make a lot of sense once explained.
 
Here's a link to a thread from April 2017 of an Aztec that had a gear up at Daytona Beach after a hydraulic system failure. The pilot did a superb job and chose to bring it in dead engines. He makes it look easy. It's not. And it's not what I would do.

What you didn't see is that Aztec nearly overflew the entire runway. I'd wager the pilot had never done a no gear, no flap, both props feathered approach before, and wasn't prepared for how well a clean Aztec would float. Probably was high and fast anticipating shutting down the engines as well.

A. I'm not going out of way, or increasing my risk of bodily injury to save an airplane or insurance company.

B. I don't understand why such a big deal is made of gear up landings. They seldom if ever result in substantial damage to the aircraft or injuries. I saw a transcript of one where the pilot told the controllers to tell his wife he loved her before attempting a gear up. Was he really concerned he would die? I've known many people that have either been forced to, or accidentally landed gear up. Of those, none suffered the least amount of injury, and all of the aircraft were repaired and returned to service.
 
Ya beat me to it. Foaming runways also decreases friction, so greasing the runways was discouraged in the 1980s IIRC. ICAO doesn't like foaming the runways just as much as the NFPA. Aluminum sparks don't seem to have the energy to ignite a fire, and titanium sparks don't care if there's a foam or not - they'll still start a fire. Foam is supposed to float on top of the organic fuels eliminating the oxygen from the fire triangle No water source other than what is on board a truck, deplete resources for the fire... bla bla bla, I'm a nerd.

Exactly. Airports have foam to fight fuel fires. That is what foam is engineered for. Doesn't do anything for metal grinding on pavement. Not to mention the amount required to foam any appreciable amount of runway is ludicrous. Half the time the airplane would miss the foamed area anyway. I wouldn't even use foam to fight a fire that didn't involve fuel.
 
Back
Top