And the word is - it's totaled.

(Actually, there was at least one other gear up on this aircraft that was not well documented but actually quite well repaired. Likely that part was a lot newer, but the logs won't prove it.)
 
That sucks man, sorry to hear about it.

Also glad you didn't try to "save the engine," that line of thinking has killed a lot of pilots. The last thing you want to do is cut it off early and be a little short...stalling on short final would be no fun. When the engine dies it's the insurance company's plane- do whatever it takes for you and your passengers to be safe.

Actually insurance companies would rather you not worry about the engine as well. They have to pay out much more for bodily injury than for a new engine.

Glad you are ok...hope you find something fun to fly with soon!
 
brian] said:
Something to think about ...
Click to expand...

It's funny how that works...one one of my first long x-c I landed in Podunk OK on a weather divert. Ended up walking to town and out to the airport the next morning. I was happy to be out of the weather but decided future diverts would be class D or better.

Well when a mag went bad I tried to make it to a D and ended up in Podunk TX....and the A&P came out and fixed it on a Saturday. Even loaned his car so I could get lunch....ya just never know...
 
What is the mechanism by which killing the engine kills pilots once the runway is made? Is it generally landing short or the lack of the ability to go around?
 
arnoha said:
What is the mechanism by which killing the engine kills pilots once the runway is made? Is it generally landing short or the lack of the ability to go around?
Click to expand...
Incorrect focus of attention and the need for abnormally slow airspeed to stop prop windmilling.
 
arnoha said:
What is the mechanism by which killing the engine kills pilots once the runway is made? Is it generally landing short or the lack of the ability to go around?
Click to expand...

Most of my thoughts come from a article a read a while back. From what I remember the author's main point is that we don't train for these landing conditions so why try it in a emergency?

For example, How often do you practice an approach by shutting off the engine and having a windmilling propeller (in a single)? It is different than just practice engine out with the throttle at idle.

I believe most of the evidence cited had to do with landing short and subsequent stall trying to glide a little further. Also really hard landings, remember, if you are sinking really fast you cant add the power you normal would to smooth out the landing. I read about it a few months ago and the case for not killing the engine was pretty compelling. I'll see if I can find it.
 
I guess my thinking is - why increase risk even .0000001% if the insurance company is having to open their wallet regardless of what you do?
 
Clark1961 said:
It's funny how that works...one one of my first long x-c I landed in Podunk OK on a weather divert. Ended up walking to town and out to the airport the next morning. I was happy to be out of the weather but decided future diverts would be class D or better.

Well when a mag went bad I tried to make it to a D and ended up in Podunk TX....and the A&P came out and fixed it on a Saturday. Even loaned his car so I could get lunch....ya just never know...
Click to expand...

For me it depends on the cause for a diversion. Weather? Don't care, just get me on the ground. Check fuel prices if that's relevant, but that's a second priority. I'll sit in the plane if I have to. Maintenance? Definitely want to make it to an airport with better services if possible, unless I know definitively of on-field MX. When we had a mag failure in the 310 4 years ago while on a dog flight, we ended up diverting to a Class C. They had MX on field, but no mags (nor would they rebuild them). Aviall ended up not overnighting the mag (despite our specific statement of AOG with 25 dogs and OVERNIGHT IT I DON'T CARE WHAT IT COSTS). I carry a spare mag at all times now.

arnoha said:
What is the mechanism by which killing the engine kills pilots once the runway is made? Is it generally landing short or the lack of the ability to go around?
Click to expand...

There are a few mechanisms that happen:

1) Need to go-around occurs, but can't. Crash into whatever's on the runway.
2) People shut down the engine while high above the runway. Glide characteristics change. Crash on the runway or overrun the runway (more likely in a twin with feathering props) and crash.
3) Focus on shutting down the engine and bumping the prop instead of flying. Crash because you're not paying attention to flying the plane.

I'm not saying it's impossible to do without hurting yourself. There have been people who've done it successfully and likely have saved the plane from the scrap yard. There have even been people who've flown above the runway with someone standing out of a sunroof to pull the gear down and allow a landing without a gear up. But it's like I tell my 3 year old when he throws things around and doesn't hurt anything or drives the tractor way too close to another tractor or the barn: "Just because you didn't hurt someone this time doesn't mean that it's a good idea."
 
brian] said:
(Actually, there was at least one other gear up on this aircraft that was not well documented but actually quite well repaired. Likely that part was a lot newer, but the logs won't prove it.)
Click to expand...

Probably $500 a pop discouraging proactive replacement. An easy way to get them old airplanes out of service, a quick gear up.

Old rod ends, bolts & fork/clevises in older aircraft landing gears are a known problem, and they keep getting ignored.
 
Hmmm... sounds like there are two aspects. Killing the engine and stopping the prop. Sounds like stopping the prop is the bigger killer.
 
Consider this: do EXACTLY what is in the POH unless you have a good reason not to. And be ready to explain yourself.

My call to Wichita Radio did get the attention of an FAA Airworthiness Inspector. (The NTSB didn't care - I had to bend the firewall to get their attention and in a -35 bending the firewall would likely mean my ghost would be writing this.) I did have to meet with the inspector. Luckily he turned out to be the kind of guy that has seen and done a lot over the years - you know the kind of guy you learn something from if you just close your mouth and listen - time well spent.

But, I still had to talk to "the man" because I did declare an emergency. I even got the number to call when I closed my VFR flight plan. (Oh - and saying everyone is ok except the aircraft gets the lady at FSS using her high pitched voice!) All was good and the failure was what he expected. Here are the words that kinda made me both happy and rather scared at the same time:
"you did nothing wrong ..."
 
So far I agree with everything everybody has said. Glider pilots practice dead stick landings every time. I think it's good to review some of their thought process when they have to land out. Their initial aim point is the center of the field they've chosen. They do not want to land short so they set the approach up to make the field for sure and once established, they can move the aim point closer. With a 7000 foot runway, you'd have to really screw it up to land short if you flew a dead stick approach like a glider pilot. I'm certainly not advocating someone shutting down the engine unless it's something he's comfortable doing which eliminates most pilots. Still, the discussion is good.
 
Sorry to hear about your Bo. Sorry it had to happen in Liberal. Don't they still roll up the sidewalks at night there? Been there a few times delivering/picking up airplane at the museum. Haven't been there in many years, but recall it wasn't a really active place and the airport was big, but slow. :D
 
Glad you're OK! Airplanes can be replaced, that's why we pay insurance premiums! You handled it well, no sense in turning an emergency landing into a catastrophe! :)
 
Actually I do have a question about that electric prop. Would it have gone full coarse had you pulled the prop all the way back? With a normal hydraulic CS prop the blades go fine as a result of the lack of oil pressure and the springs IIRC.
 
You have full control over the Beech Electric 215 prop, but ...

Chair flying this a year ago, my though was to move the prop to full coarse (low RMP) in this scenario because you have full control over the 215 prop through a toggle switch (at least in the -35 - or manual mode in the later models). Reading what others have posted: even with the prop pulled all the way back, that 88" prop just wants to turn.
 
Witmo said:
This is in no way a criticism. You did a fantastic job getting her down and safely stopped with only some bent metal. Given a 7000 foot runway, would anyone have considered purposely shutting down the engine and goosing the prop horizontal and doing a dead stick landing? I've done a ton of power-off 180s prepping for the commercial and I think I would given a nice long runway. I know some would say the insurance company owns the airplane as soon as something goes awry so why risk it, but given optimum circumstances, how many would attempt to minimize the payout?
Click to expand...
I know in theory how to stop a prop, AND have done so in a 172 before (not in a 5C1 plane), but I couldn't get the prop stopped in the Cardinal without going to a corner I didn't want to put myself in. Best to accept that a prop may be damaged and make sure you maintain control.
 
Glad you're okay... sorry about the plane.
 
Congrats on a safe outcome. Sorry about your plane, but no doubt on the proper priorities you chose. I hope I can make similar sound risk based decisions when I get to 400 hours (hope I don't have to!).
 
You're safe.

All else is trivia.

Well done, and congratulations for being alive and healthy enough to replace the plane. Go out and celebrate.
 
Heck, it can even happen to Air Force One.

Well, almost and only then on The West Wing*.

Spoiler alert...

...they did finally get the nose gear down and were cleared to land on RWY 39 at Andrews!


*Karen and I missed it the first time around and are now binge-watching it on Netflix. Quite engrossing.
 
Sucks that the airplane is gone but all the retracts seem to go out that way eventually.

Glad you put it down properly and walked out of it.
 
Couple of comments -
One, always have a spare bulb at hand for the gear lights
Two, never be in a big yank to move the airplane off the runway in situations like this and cause more damage than the landing did - wait until you have competent help with a dolly and a tow vehicle so people don't crush aluminum pushing and pulling on it (especially a ruddervator)
Three, congratulations you finally got that off the bucket list, clear sailing from here on is likely
Mine was in my beloved Super Viking 25 years ago and the NG would not go up and it would not go down and the emergency release made no difference (shrug)
 
FastEddieB said:
...were cleared to land on RWY 39 at Andrews!
Click to expand...


Uh, that would be a magnetic heading of 390 degrees???

(I'm sure there's some sort of joke in here about the country being headed in the wrong direction, but I'm too sleepy this morning to go after it.)
 
FastEddieB said:
Heck, it can even happen to Air Force One.

Well, almost and only then on The West Wing*.

Spoiler alert...

...they did finally get the nose gear down and were cleared to land on RWY 39 at Andrews!


*Karen and I missed it the first time around and are now binge-watching it on Netflix. Quite engrossing.
Click to expand...
Yep... one of the great howlers on a series I otherwise thought was well-researched. Probably shows how much I know about the inner workings of the guv't... makes one wonder what else they got so badly wrong. :redface:
 
Finally, after nearly two entire pages of on-topic posts, we are talking about mistakes in movies and TV. The talk of Runway 39 in The West Wing reminds me of the line in Catch Me if You Can when Abagnale spots LGA from the window and mentions Runway 44. Was that an example of the filmmakers not knowing anything about flying or was that an inside joke from the filmmakers to those of us who do know about flying about how little Abagnale really knew in order to fake his way through. That and his reference to the 707 as a puddle jumper (what would have been the shortest scheduled route in a 707 in the 1960s, anyhow?) made me smile. They made his lawyering and doctoring knowledge gaps much more in-your-face so, if these were intentional, they were at least subtle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top