Purchasing an aircraft which has had a gear up landing

[hindsight2020]

Agree...especially on Johnson Bar Mooneys! There is a single point of failure in the gear actuator assembly of the older electric gears which is subject to a recurring AD for inspection and lubrication. If that fails, the gear is going nowhere, either up or down, even with the emergency gear extension since that, too, goes through the same gear set. But those failures are pretty rare since people are aware of the issue and (at least for me) monitor it pretty closely.

If interested, there's a little write-up here:
http://www.mnaviationpro.com/mooney/gears.html

I disagree. The handle latch mechanism on manual Mooneys is flimsy and notorious for giving a false "locked" part to the business of "down and locked" indications. As weight is placed on the gear on touchdown, POP goes the handle bar (painfully into you or your passengers arm) and FLOP goes the gear. This is exactly how many a J-bar (Im willing to suggest the preponderance of them) Mooneys have been gear-upped through the decades and it has nothing to do with pilot error. Requiring of the pilot to triple yank and push up on the bar to test the locking plate and handle spring and effectively ensure pre-load of the latch is just bad design, not pilot error. Look up the guy taxiing on grass on youtube and FLOP goes the gear. That's just silly crappy design. Both the wear of the locker plate (original was cheap aluminum) and wear of the spring on the handle of the bar are gratuitous points of failure.

Having to hold the handle in order to ensure the gear doesn't flop is what we folks call having a fixed gear

Don't get me wrong, those short body Mooneys are efficient as hell. But that particular failure mode is just too much for my tolerance for what speed advantage one gets out of it... It only takes one instance and there goes the economy of operation.

 

[Ted]

A high percentage of accidents (some as trivial as locking the keys in the car) are the result of people "getting out of sequence" during some routine process that they normally accomplish without interruption. I think forgetting the gear falls into that same category.

I'd agree.

 

[Marauder]

I can only speak to the Mooney, other types I'm not sure, but in case of the Mooney, the damage is usually easily repaired and mostly cosmetic. Structurally, there is no damage and the gear is safely stowed in the gear wells. Like others said here, the worst thing you can do is flip the gear handle down after the event. It wrecks a bunch of stuff and doesn't fool anyone.

Typical damage besides engine and prop includes-

Belly pan, or pans.
Nose gear doors.
Flaps if landed with full flaps. (most do)
Boarding step if the plane is equipped.
All belly antennas.
Sometimes the electric gear actuator on some models gets ground.
Sometimes a wing tip.
Sometimes a motor mount.

The damage can also be worse if the landing drops down hard instead of being a greaser without the grease. Of the damage listed above, the majority is bolt on replacements. Airframe damage that requires riveting and sheet metal skills sometimes includes the stringers that support the belly pans, damage to the empennage from the boarding step and the outer win tip.

Now a gear collapse... that's another story.

Don't forget the exhaust pipe... That will hit as well.

 

[wabower]

Or the damage inflicted during the recovery if it's not done by somebody who knows what they're doing.

Don't forget the exhaust pipe... That will hit as well.

 

[flyingron]

When I bought my plane there was a big weld in the middle of the step. Many Navions have been geared up at one point (either because the pilot forgot to lower the gear or because the engine was cranked with the handle in the UP position... no squat switch).

I found out a couple of years later from a mechanic who had worked on my plane, that the plane hadn't been geared up, but had come close. One of the previous owners had dragged the step and put the power to it before hitting anything else.

 

[Dav8or]

Don't forget the exhaust pipe... That will hit as well.

Agreed, but I just sort included that in the "engine" category.

 

[Dav8or]

I still don't know how anyone gears up a Mooney, though. I can't get the Ovation slowed down for landing without it!

Sure you can. Pull the power to idle and pitch the nose up. It won't feel like a normal landing sequence at all, but I don't think gear ups happen in normal situations. They happen when everything about the approach to landing is going wrong, or abnormal.

Things like heavy traffic in the pattern, unusual controller requests, horrible turbulence, or winds, a passenger situation, or a problem with the engine can cause your brain to just accept the unusually long time it's taking to slow down as part of the screwed up approach and you try to fix it. Pull power, pitch up, put in more flaps, maybe use the speed brakes if you have them. You see, in your confused mind, the gear is down and eventually, the plane starts to behave normally and hits the correct airspeed.

I've never done a gear up, so I can't tell you blow by blow how it happens, but I don't presume myself to be superior and think it could never happen to me. I do know that once a CFI tested me on a check out of a complex airplane and distracted me in the pattern on downwind on purpose. Sure enough, I forgot the gear and went to the flaps. The plane was already slow from being in the pattern. Somewhere on base, the gear horn went off. I didn't ignore it, I misinterperated it. It added to the stress and I thought it was the stall horn because you see, in my mind, the gear was down.

So I immediately pitched down with no avail and checked airspeed and it was now reading on the high side. I was still committed to landing, so I turned base to final and got the airspeed under control. My brain was struggling to catch up and I think I would have gotten there before crunch time, but my instructor had enough and just pointed at the gear handle. Lesson learned.

I really don't think I'm perfect, or the ace of the base, so in my personal plane, I installed a Bitching Betty to play the role of the CFI pointing at the gear handle. Hundreds of hours since that checkout and I've never heard the Bitching Betty except during a test to make sure it really works.

Maybe it's kind of like writing something down to remember it. The mere act of writing it down is enough to ingrain it in your memory. Maybe doing a nearly gear up with a CFI and then later testing your Bitching Betty is enough to get you to always remind you.

to all, this is not mostly a Mooney problem, or more prevalent in Mooney drivers. It happens in all types. If it were a Mooney problem, our insurance rates would be much higher than others and in fact, we come out on the low end of the insurance rate scale for complex planes.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Sure you can. Pull the power to idle and pitch the nose up. It won't feel like a normal landing sequence at all, but I don't think gear ups happen in normal situations. They happen when everything about the approach to landing is going wrong, or abnormal.

Things like heavy traffic in the pattern, unusual controller requests, horrible turbulence, or winds, a passenger situation, or a problem with the engine can cause your brain to just accept the unusually long time it's taking to slow down as part of the screwed up approach and you try to fix it. Pull power, pitch up, put in more flaps, maybe use the speed brakes if you have them. You see, in your confused mind, the gear is down and eventually, the plane starts to behave normally and hits the correct airspeed.

I've never done a gear up, so I can't tell you blow by blow how it happens, but I don't presume myself to be superior and think it could never happen to me. I do know that once a CFI tested me on a check out of a complex airplane and distracted me in the pattern on downwind on purpose. Sure enough, I forgot the gear and went to the flaps. The plane was already slow from being in the pattern. Somewhere on base, the gear horn went off. I didn't ignore it, I misinterperated it. It added to the stress and I thought it was the stall horn because you see, in my mind, the gear was down.

So I immediately pitched down with no avail and checked airspeed and it was now reading on the high side. I was still committed to landing, so I turned base to final and got the airspeed under control. My brain was struggling to catch up and I think I would have gotten there before crunch time, but my instructor had enough and just pointed at the gear handle. Lesson learned.

I really don't think I'm perfect, or the ace of the base, so in my personal plane, I installed a Bitching Betty to play the role of the CFI pointing at the gear handle. Hundreds of hours since that checkout and I've never heard the Bitching Betty except during a test to make sure it really works.

Maybe it's kind of like writing something down to remember it. The mere act of writing it down is enough to ingrain it in your memory. Maybe doing a nearly gear up with a CFI and then later testing your Bitching Betty is enough to get you to always remind you.

to all, this is not mostly a Mooney problem, or more prevalent in Mooney drivers. It happens in all types. If it were a Mooney problem, our insurance rates would be much higher than others and in fact, we come out on the low end of the insurance rate scale for complex planes.

Great post!

Is your "bitching Betty" a vocal alarm?

I'd really like to find some data regarding gear-up landings. They don't always make it to the NTSB reports though, do they?

 

[Dav8or]

I disagree. The handle latch mechanism on manual Mooneys is flimsy and notorious for giving a false "locked" part to the business of "down and locked" indications. As weight is placed on the gear on touchdown, POP goes the handle bar (painfully into you or your passengers arm) and FLOP goes the gear. This is exactly how many a J-bar (Im willing to suggest the preponderance of them) Mooneys have been gear-upped through the decades and it has nothing to do with pilot error. Requiring of the pilot to triple yank and push up on the bar to test the locking plate and handle spring and effectively ensure pre-load of the latch is just bad design, not pilot error. Look up the guy taxiing on grass on youtube and FLOP goes the gear. That's just silly crappy design. Both the wear of the locker plate (original was cheap aluminum) and wear of the spring on the handle of the bar are gratuitous points of failure.

Having to hold the handle in order to ensure the gear doesn't flop is what we folks call having a fixed gear

Don't get me wrong, those short body Mooneys are efficient as hell. But that particular failure mode is just too much for my tolerance for what speed advantage one gets out of it... It only takes one instance and there goes the economy of operation.

Let's nip this one in the bud before there are even more OWTs out there about Mooneys. First of all, there is a big difference between a gear up incident and a gear collapse. One is pilot error and the other a maintenance issue.

The vintage Mooney with a J-bar gear is actually very reliable and highly sought after by buyers of vintage Mooneys because of it's absolute lowest cost of ownership for any retractable gear plane in the fleet bar none. The most likely part to fail is your arm.

The locking plate that does hold the gear in the down position, does get worn down after 40 years of use and gets rounded with less grip. It's a thing that should be, oh I don't know, inspected every now and again. Here's idea, how about at annual like it says to do in the manual? Proper rigging of the gear retraction system is critical and not to be taken lightly. Every annual you check it. If your AI just sees that the gear goes up and down without doing all the inspections required in the manual, then you really need to get another AI even if it does cost more. On manual gear Mooneys, the locking plate is one of the inspections.

If there is a concern about this plate, a brand new and improved one that will last even longer than 40 years can be had at LASAR for about $400. Not cheap for such a small and simple part, but probably the last money you will ever spend on the gear retraction system.

Please, not another goofy story about the Mooney. IMO, all of GA aircraft designers should have a long, hard look at how Al Mooney designed this wonderful retraction system and ask themselves why it's not in newer designs, particularly kit planes.

 

[Dav8or]

Great post!

Is your "bitching Betty" a vocal alarm?

I'd really like to find some data regarding gear-up landings. They don't always make it to the NTSB reports though, do they?

Yes. She says- "Check Landing Gear" and there is a red flashing light as well.

I think you're right. A gear up landing where no one is hurt and there is no property damage other than the plane is considered and incident and not an accident and so often goes unrecorded. The people that really know are insurance companies, but even there, uninsured planes never get written down. It's kind of like engine failures. A whole lot of them go unreported, but would be really nice to know.

 

[wabower]

So when you accompany the FAA inspector (at his request) to the Mooney sitting in the middle of the runway on its belly with the J-bar sitting at an angle, which was it? Did he forget (he says no) or did it collapse (he says yes)?

Let's nip this one in the bud before there even more OWTs out there about Mooneys. First of all, there is a big difference between a gear up incident and a gear collapse. One is pilot error and the other a maintenance issue.

The vintage Mooney with a J-bar gear is actually very reliable and highly sought after by buyers of vintage Mooneys because of it's absolute lowest cost of ownership for any retractable gear plane in the fleet bar none. The most likely part to fail is your arm.

The locking plate that does hold the gear in the down position, does get worn down after 40 years of use and gets rounded with less grip. It's a thing that should be, oh I don't know, inspected every now and again. Here's idea, how about at annual like it says to do in the manual? Proper rigging of the gear retraction system is critical and not to be taken lightly. Every annual you check it. If your AI just sees that the gear goes up and down without doing all the inspections required in the manual, then you really need to get another AI even if it does cost more. On manual gear Mooneys, the locking plate is one of the inspections.

If there is a concern about this plate, a brand new and improved one that will last even longer than 40 years can be had at LASAR for about $400. Not cheap for such a small and simple part, but probably the last money you will ever spend on the gear retraction system.

Please, not another goofy story about the Mooney. IMO, all of GA aircraft designers should have a long, hard look at how Al Mooney designed this wonderful retraction system and ask themselves why it's not in newer designs, particularly kit planes.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Let's nip this one in the bud before there even more OWTs out there about Mooneys.

Please, not another goofy story about the Mooney. IMO, all of GA aircraft designers should have a long, hard look at how Al Mooney designed this wonderful retraction system airplane

Fixed that for you.

I don't know why there are so many OWT's about Mooneys. They're GREAT airplanes! Fast, efficient, stylish, and comfortable - Despite what most people say about them (and those people probably don't have much if any time in them).

 

[Dav8or]

So when you accompany the FAA inspector (at his request) to the Mooney sitting in the middle of the runway on its belly with the J-bar sitting at an angle, which was it? Did he forget (he says no) or did it collapse (he says yes)?

Does it matter? The owner of the plane knows what really happened and if the owner was not flying, the post inspection of the gear system will probably find any defects or evidence of a gear collapse. Nobody goes to jail for a gear up. Any punishment the FAA can hand out, is not nearly as bad, or as good of a lesson as actually doing the gear up. I suspect there are next to zero pilots out there that have done two gear ups.

 

[wabower]

Or perhaps they have more time and ownership experience in Mooneys than the new fan-boys have in the chow line and know full-well of the plus/minus issues. Mooneys are no different than any other plane in that they're just an assortment of tradeoffs. if you happen to like that particular +/- list better that some other manufacturers list, a Mooney could be the perfect ride. If not, something else might be a better choice.

Fixed that for you.

I don't know why there are so many OWT's about Mooneys. They're GREAT airplanes! Fast, efficient, stylish, and comfortable - Despite what most people say about them (and those people probably don't have much if any time in them).

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Or perhaps they have more time and ownership experience in Mooneys than the new fan-boys have in the chow line and know full-well of the plus/minus issues. Mooneys are no different than any other plane in that they're just an assortment of tradeoffs. if you happen to like that particular +/- list better that some other manufacturers list, a Mooney could be the perfect ride. If not, something else might be a better choice.

Wayne,

I'm talking about the ones like "Mooneys are small and cramped." I'm 6'4" and nearly 300# and I've found the Mooneys to be some of the most comfortable planes I've flown (J and R models). That's the sort of OWT I'm talking about, not tradeoffs in the design. It's not a LearBaron, after all.

 

[JHW]

Wayne,

I'm talking about the ones like "Mooneys are small and cramped."

I'll go with that. I've always found them cramped and I feel like I'm looking out of a tunnel. And lest anything think the johnson bar is foolproof, it can and has come off in people's hand when the weld broke at the bottom. If that feature was such a great idea it would still be in production (like PA28/32/34 manual flaps)

 

[wabower]

So when you sell that pooch will a new set of shocks be part of the deal?

When I started flying Mooneys in the early 60's, pilots said they were fast little planes but tight inside. Did they just make it up, or was there some truth to the story? What's the difference between a PIREP and an OWT other than a subjective interpretation by the parties involved? When somebody says "KS says he is comfortable and he's only slightly smaller than the trucks he used to drive" somebody else might ask "compared to what?" Has he flown a 210 or Commander or Comanche or Commander single in order to get a comparison? What objective standard of comfort should we apply? Being able to get the door closed?

If I said that I always thought my F model Mooney Exec (that I liked a lot for other reasons and flew for a couple of years and a thousand or so hours) always felt cramped (even though I'm shorter and skinnier) and that I really didn't like the narrow cabin or sports-car geometry of the seats on the floor that meant my legs would be sticking almost straight out under the panel, is that a PIREP or an OWT?

Wayne,

I'm talking about the ones like "Mooneys are small and cramped." I'm 6'4" and nearly 300# and I've found the Mooneys to be some of the most comfortable planes I've flown (J and R models). That's the sort of OWT I'm talking about, not tradeoffs in the design. It's not a LearBaron, after all.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

When I started flying Mooneys in the early 60's, pilots said they were fast little planes but tight inside. Did they just make it up, or was there some truth to the story? What's the difference between a PIREP and an OWT other than a subjective interpretation by the parties involved? When somebody says "KS says he is comfortable and he's only slightly smaller than the trucks he used to drive" somebody else might ask "compared to what?" Has he flown a 210 or Commander or Comanche or Commander single in order to get a comparison? What objective standard of comfort should we apply? Being able to get the door closed?

Okay, I'll be more specific. It has WAY more leg room than most four-seat singles. Height is good too.

Width is less than the 182 by a hair, I think.

It doesn't *feel* as big as some other planes like the 182 because there's not much in the way of wasted volume (such as all the room above the glareshield - Unless you like waving your hands around up there.)

I'd also imagine that the short-bodies and even mid-bodies with the older, more upright windscreen probably feel quite a bit smaller. Haven't flown either one.

Haven't flown 210 or Commander, have flown 182 and Comanche.

I guess what I notice most is the comparison with the Bonanza, which has a reputation for being big and comfortable, but in which I tend to feel cramped and bang my head in turbulence whereas the Mooney feels comfortable.

You're right about tradeoffs, though - My fiancée's 90-year-old grandmother would like to get down to Florida to visit her son and see his new house, but she doesn't want to fly on the airlines (it's not particularly convenient or fast when departing from Ruthven, IA) and can't handle a car ride that long. We've offered her a ride down there in the Mooney, but so far she hasn't taken us up on it, and we suspect that the main issue is getting in and out. Her knees aren't what they once were, of course, and the right front seat is the hardest to get in and out of for that exact reason. (Not to mention, she's a classic southern belle, and it requires some very unladylike maneuvers.)

The back seat is a possibility and that would allow for one of us to help her get in and out... But for this mission, I sure wish I had an A36 or a Baron or a Seneca or something else with a back door that would be very easy to get in and out of.

At least we know it's not a fear-of-small-planes thing - Her husband was a pilot for over 65 years and she's probably got 5 times more right-seat time in a Bonanza than I have left-seat time in everything.

 

[rbridges]

I'll go with that. I've always found them cramped and I feel like I'm looking out of a tunnel. And lest anything think the johnson bar is foolproof, it can and has come off in people's hand when the weld broke at the bottom. If that feature was such a great idea it would still be in production (like PA28/32/34 manual flaps)

Not necessarily. Until recently, manual car transmissions were cheaper and more reliable. For several years, automatics have outsold manuals by quite a margin despite being more expensive to maintain and getting lower MPG. I guarantee it was due to market demand and driver convenience.

 

[Tom-D]

Like most threads here this one has a large amount of thread creep.

When looking at any aircraft as a possible buy, it is all about material condition, does it fly right? is it priced right? not what has happened in the past.

 

[rbridges]

Like most threads here this one has a large amount of thread creep.

When looking at any aircraft as a possible buy, it is all about material condition, does it fly right? is it priced right? not what has happened in the past.

true.

 

[Jaybird180]

Fly her in a Cirrus. Easy in-out....or a (gulp) Cardinal.

Okay, I'll be more specific. It has WAY more leg room than most four-seat singles. Height is good too.

Width is less than the 182 by a hair, I think.

It doesn't *feel* as big as some other planes like the 182 because there's not much in the way of wasted volume (such as all the room above the glareshield - Unless you like waving your hands around up there.)

I'd also imagine that the short-bodies and even mid-bodies with the older, more upright windscreen probably feel quite a bit smaller. Haven't flown either one.

Haven't flown 210 or Commander, have flown 182 and Comanche.

I guess what I notice most is the comparison with the Bonanza, which has a reputation for being big and comfortable, but in which I tend to feel cramped and bang my head in turbulence whereas the Mooney feels comfortable.

You're right about tradeoffs, though - My fiancée's 90-year-old grandmother would like to get down to Florida to visit her son and see his new house, but she doesn't want to fly on the airlines (it's not particularly convenient or fast when departing from Ruthven, IA) and can't handle a car ride that long. We've offered her a ride down there in the Mooney, but so far she hasn't taken us up on it, and we suspect that the main issue is getting in and out. Her knees aren't what they once were, of course, and the right front seat is the hardest to get in and out of for that exact reason. (Not to mention, she's a classic southern belle, and it requires some very unladylike maneuvers.)

The back seat is a possibility and that would allow for one of us to help her get in and out... But for this mission, I sure wish I had an A36 or a Baron or a Seneca or something else with a back door that would be very easy to get in and out of.

At least we know it's not a fear-of-small-planes thing - Her husband was a pilot for over 65 years and she's probably got 5 times more right-seat time in a Bonanza than I have left-seat time in everything.

 

[Dav8or]

And lest anything think the johnson bar is foolproof, it can and has come off in people's hand when the weld broke at the bottom. If that feature was such a great idea it would still be in production (like PA28/32/34 manual flaps)

Not sure about weld issues. It's not something anybody talks about in the Mooney community and there's no AD, or SB that I'm aware of and it's not on the checklist of things to watch out for when buying, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen to somebody somewhere. An airplane is a machine. Machines break. Mooneys are no different.

The reason Mooney went electric is 100% market driven. It was the 1960s and everything was going push button electric. To the new airplane buyer during these times, a manual gear activated by a lever must have seemed pretty old fashioned. In addition, the J-bar does require a bit of strength in your arm and a bit of instruction. Flipping a switch doesn't.

All of Mooney's competitors came standard with electric gear, so in the mid '60s, Mooney offered electric gear as an option and sold it as an upgrade. As the years went by, the electric option became ever popular as it seems that buyers of new airplanes that have warranties, don't worry about failures and maintenance as much as buyers of 40 year old planes. When Butler Aviation took over in '69, they did away with the manual gear altogether and made electric standard. It's been that way ever since.

Today, people flying on a budget seek out these manual gear birds for their simplicity and reliability. Some owners of later models lament that there is no kit to convert back back to manual. There are those that won't buy a vintage Mooney unless it does have the manual gear. Just one of those things that people don't appreciate until many years later.

For the record, my Mooney has electric gear. At the time of purchase, I was ambivilant as to which type the plane had and ended up with electric. I have not regretted it so far...

 

[wabower]

Does it matter to you that being priced right and what happened in the past are closely related?

Like most threads here this one has a large amount of thread creep.

When looking at any aircraft as a possible buy, it is all about material condition, does it fly right? is it priced right? not what has happened in the past.

 

[JHW]

Not necessarily. Until recently, manual car transmissions were cheaper and more reliable. For several years, automatics have outsold manuals by quite a margin despite being more expensive to maintain and getting lower MPG. I guarantee it was due to market demand and driver convenience.

not really. an automatic transmission is simpler to manufacture and in nearly all models, easier to overhaul than a manual. You evidently haven't rebuilt many transmissions. And in the last few years the efficiency tradeoff has reversed as well.

 

[JHW]

Not sure about weld issues. It's not something anybody talks about in the Mooney community and there's no AD, or SB that I'm aware of and it's not on the checklist of things to watch out for when buying, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen to somebody somewhere. An airplane is a machine. Machines break. Mooneys are no different.

do a search of SDR's, it took me about 5 minutes to find 6 of them. Surprisingly many for such a small population of planes.

 

[Tom-D]

Does it matter to you that being priced right and what happened in the past are closely related?

No...priced right is simply that. and that decision is the buyers.

I've paid good money for nothing but a data tag and a set of logs and the only thing that mattered was what was written in the logs.

Material condition and price is what really matters.

 

[wabower]

You'll notice I didn't include the Bo in the roomy group I concur with your assessment of their comfort for full-grown adults. Whenever I get in one my first question is "where is the vertical adjustment for the seat?"

Okay, I'll be more specific. It has WAY more leg room than most four-seat singles. Height is good too.

Width is less than the 182 by a hair, I think.

It doesn't *feel* as big as some other planes like the 182 because there's not much in the way of wasted volume (such as all the room above the glareshield - Unless you like waving your hands around up there.)

I'd also imagine that the short-bodies and even mid-bodies with the older, more upright windscreen probably feel quite a bit smaller. Haven't flown either one.

Haven't flown 210 or Commander, have flown 182 and Comanche.

I guess what I notice most is the comparison with the Bonanza, which has a reputation for being big and comfortable, but in which I tend to feel cramped and bang my head in turbulence whereas the Mooney feels comfortable.

You're right about tradeoffs, though - My fiancée's 90-year-old grandmother would like to get down to Florida to visit her son and see his new house, but she doesn't want to fly on the airlines (it's not particularly convenient or fast when departing from Ruthven, IA) and can't handle a car ride that long. We've offered her a ride down there in the Mooney, but so far she hasn't taken us up on it, and we suspect that the main issue is getting in and out. Her knees aren't what they once were, of course, and the right front seat is the hardest to get in and out of for that exact reason. (Not to mention, she's a classic southern belle, and it requires some very unladylike maneuvers.)

The back seat is a possibility and that would allow for one of us to help her get in and out... But for this mission, I sure wish I had an A36 or a Baron or a Seneca or something else with a back door that would be very easy to get in and out of.

At least we know it's not a fear-of-small-planes thing - Her husband was a pilot for over 65 years and she's probably got 5 times more right-seat time in a Bonanza than I have left-seat time in everything.

 

[rbridges]

not really. an automatic transmission is simpler to manufacture and in nearly all models, easier to overhaul than a manual. You evidently haven't rebuilt many transmissions. And in the last few years the efficiency tradeoff has reversed as well.

You're right. Never tore into a transmission, but I have purchased several cars. Being on the consumer side of things, automatics used to be an upgrade, and until recently shifted slower and got worse gas mileage. Despite this, people still bought automatics more than manuals.

 

[Dav8or]

do a search of SDR's, it took me about 5 minutes to find 6 of them. Surprisingly many for such a small population of planes.

Well, I guess I suck at SDR searches. I spent about 30 minutes (partly learning how to use their stupid search function) and was able to only find two Mooneys with a broken Johnson bar. One was a '58 M20A that did exactly as you described, broke off in his hand at the weld. The other was an M20D that was converted to retractable gear at some point that broke under the floorboards leaving the handle in the down and locked position, but allowed the gear to collapse.

I used the words "weld" and "landing gear" and searched all M20, M20A, M20B, M20C, M20D, M20E, M20F and M20G records. I couldn't find six Johnson bar failures, but maybe I'm using the wrong search key words. I encourage anyone shopping for a Mooney, or any other type, to use this resource, but what I found was mostly normal failures of old and sometimes poorly maintained equipment. 40-50 years of use does cause things to go south sometimes.

 

[Jaybird180]

What's an SDR search?

 

[poadeleted21]

Kerplunk.

 

[Dav8or]

What's an SDR search?

It's and FAA voluntary record keeping program. It stands for Service Difficulty Record and they have a searchable, online database. Basically, anybody experiencing a defect, problem or failure of an airplane can fill out the form and be recorded in the database. It's completely annonymous and is intended to encourage more mechanics and owners to report problems that might otherwise go unreported due to either fear of consequences, or bureaucratic headaches.

Here's a link- FAA SDR Database Search

 

[Dav8or]

Kerplunk.

Yeah, that's a classic! Love the way everyone pitches in, picks it up and gets on with things. Gotta love aviation fans where ever they may be. Last I heard, this incident is rumored to be due to poor maintenance on the plane, but others have suggested that the pilot got excited and pulled the gear too soon.

Irregardless, on the Mooney it is really important to check the rigging and failure points on the landing gear every annual. I suppose it is the same on all retractables, but I can only speak to the Mooney.

Now that we have scared nearly 90% of the people looking at this thread into buying fixed gear, I want to say that retractable gear does cost more to own and that cost is reflected in the annual cost mostly. On a rare occasion, there is either a part failure, or a part that doesn't pass inspection and it indeed will add a cost that you wouldn't have with fixed gear, but overall, retractable gear is not that big of a deal. I personally have no regrets and wouldn't have it any other way with the budget and requirements I now have.

 

[Marauder]

Kerplunk.

Yeah, that's a classic! Love the way everyone pitches in, picks it up and gets on with things. Gotta love aviation fans where ever they may be. Last I heard, this incident is rumored to be due to poor maintenance on the plane, but others have suggested that the pilot got excited and pulled the gear too soon.

Irregardless, on the Mooney it is really important to check the rigging and failure points on the landing gear every annual. I suppose it is the same on all retractables, but I can only speak to the Mooney.

Now that we have scared nearly 90% of the people looking at this thread into buying fixed gear, I want to say that retractable gear does cost more to own and that cost is reflected in the annual cost mostly. On a rare occasion, there is either a part failure, or a part that doesn't pass inspection and it indeed will add a cost that you wouldn't have with fixed gear, but overall, retractable gear is not that big of a deal. I personally have no regrets and wouldn't have it any other way with the budget and requirements I now have.

For years I read the incident reports on Mooneys and I can only recall a couple where the J bar failed. Both of the ones I remember we're due to the weld. As for the Mooney in the video, it sure looks like a premature retraction (pun intended). The fact they can push the plane on its wheels after lifting it suggest the gear was able to hold the weight of the plane.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Ooch that was painful to watch and it hurt to see it. I wish I had not seen it.

 

[Tom-D]

Hey! hold my beer, and watch this.

oops I forgot you must pull back on both at once.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Fly her in a Cirrus. Easy in-out....or a (gulp) Cardinal.

Cirrus? I don't think that'd be any easier than the Mooney. The problem is getting up on the wing and then down into the seat.

The best airplane I have for that mission is the 182. That might take a bit longer than she could handle for a day, tho.

 

[bajadrifter]

In my opinion, a major problem with buying an airplane with a history of a gear-up landing is the increased difficulty of resale. Many buyers won't consider the airplane despite the best repair work.

I once bought a 1974 C172 that had a completely new empennage installed after a another plane taxied into it and the prop chopped it up. The repairs were unnoticeable and the plane flew perfectly.

When it came time to sell it, I ran up against folks that couldn't get past the damage history.

Damage history adds uncertainty and this has a real impact on market value.

 

[wabower]

Fortunately, none of them are perfect, and bad paint, a ratty interior or old radios are equally repugnant to many buyers. If the plane was purchased at a fair price and properly operated and maintained, it will sell for a fair price. Your "entire airframe replacement" scenario is far different in scope than repairing a gear-up, which in some situations is actually favorable due to the engine inspection that accompanies it.

In my opinion, a major problem with buying an airplane with a history of a gear-up landing is the increased difficulty of resale. Many buyers won't consider the airplane despite the best repair work.

I once bought a 1974 C172 that had a completely new empennage installed after a another plane taxied into it and the prop chopped it up. The repairs were unnoticeable and the plane flew perfectly.

When it came time to sell it, I ran up against folks that couldn't get past the damage history.

Damage history adds uncertainty and this has a real impact on market value.