Gear Up Landings

[Bob Bevan]

At present owners of light aircraft with retractable landing gear are charged up to 25% more for hull and liability insurance than those with fixed gear. This suggests the former are 20% more likely to have an accident than the latter, with all such accidents being due to gear up landings!!!

I just do not believe this is true because the FAA or CAA would take action pretty quickly if they felt retractable gear were such a terrible risk. There may be a small additional risk but certainly not enough to justify the big premium hike. The problem is I need some stats to prove my case.

Gear up landings where the pilot is at fault are classified by CICTT as ‘abnormal runway contacts’ (ARC) while gear ups because of mechanical failure are recorded under ‘system component failure – non powerplant’ (SCF-NP). The problem is other types of incident are also recorded under these headings (hard/heavy landings, long/fast landings, off center landings, crabbed landings, nose wheel first touchdown, tail strikes) so I need a more granular breakdown.

To cut a long story short (well shortish!), does anyone know of any stats, studies or market reports which I have been done in to the issue of gear up landings.

Cheers

[IRpilot2006]

At present owners of light aircraft with retractable landing gear are charged up to 25% more for hull and liability insurance than those with fixed gear

Definitely not true universally - ask for ex. Hayward Aviation for a quote for a standard retractable and for an SR22.

You are an insurance broker....

[Big Pistons Forever]

Over the years I have personally been associated with several clubs and schools that rented retractable gear aircraft ( 2 singles and 1 twin). Everyone of these aircraft was eventually landed gear up by renter pilots who forgot the gear.

The result was that insurance became prohibitively expensive and now no one rents retracts.

[astir 8]

Been there, done that, glider with vomiting passenger in front, distraction, straight-in landing instead of full circuit.:sad::sad:

Arrival on wet grass, zero damage, except to wallet for "wheels up beers" bought in bar.:ok:

There's a saying in gliding "There are those who have landed wheel up and the rest who are going to"

The BGA now discourages warning devices actuated by the airbrakes being opened while the wheel is up - on the grounds that low level attempts to put the wheel down have resulted in serious accidents while a wheel up landing has never hurt anyone.

[RTN11]

Indeed, I've witnessed four aircraft land wheels up for no particular reason, and one was during an MEIR lesson! So that's two CPL holders who both managed to forget the wheels, and ignore the buzzer.

The result was that insurance became prohibitively expensive and now no one rents retracts.

Hit the nail on the head there.

the FAA or CAA would take action pretty quickly if they felt retractable gear were such a terrible risk.

What exactly do you expect them to do? There's already the three green lights, and a buzzer that sounds a low power. You can train as much as you like, but private pilots will always forget one check or two, and why wouldn't the gear end up being one of them eventually? Certainly as a low hour PPL I've landed flapless by mistake in a PA38, and only after thought, "yeah, that approach did feel a bit weird."

Perhaps we should adopt the RAF way of stating "three greens" in the ATC call when cleared to land.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The Yak52 has no gear unsafe warnings at all. There are the usual lights, and 'pointers' that come into sight above the wings and nose when the gear is down (on the one I flew the nose one was obscured by the coaming-mounted GPS) but no warnings you are about to land wheels up (horns etc). One of our group (not me!) did just that!

My mate used to fly for BA, including at one stage the 1-11. A training captain and 2 qualified captains managed to land a 1-11 gear-up at (I think) Tees side one day. It was a training flight and they were practicing flapless landings. To get the weight up they had full fuel. The final approach speed flapless at that weight was above the threshold of the gear-unsafe warning horn so it didn't sound! So even professionals in an airliner can do it!

[Pilot DAR]

Gear warning systems are great, but not absolute or infallible. My gear warning system is speaking aloud before every landing: "Wheels are down for landing on land", or "wheels are up for landing on water". Other than my voice, my RG has no aural warning system for the gear. Passengers think I'm a little off the first time, but they catch on quick, when I explain the outcome of landing in error on the water with the wheels down.

Even a working gear warning system can be tricked into not sounding an alarm. I found while flying the Navajo, it was content to be landed by carrying some power across the threshold. Then I realized that I was defeating the gear warning system, 'cause I was not actually retarding the throttles onto the idle stops and gear warning switches, until it was too late for a warning to be of any use. I changed my procedure after that, and closed the throttles on approach, after the gear was down, then used the desired power, after listening for the gear warning horn.

Yes, the flying club at which I earned my PPL had a Cessna Cardinal RG as the "advanced" plane in the fleet (and back in the day, it was $55 an hour wet). In a four month period, it was landed gear up twice. The second time, it did not return.

And, you'll find that most RG singles include in the emergency procedures for forced landing: "Select gear down", and "Master switch off". Depending upon how rushed you are, turning the master off shortly after selecting the gear down, may turn off the gear pump, leaving the gear part way down, and no gear warning horn, so everything will sound right, even though the wheels may not be down. About the only gear selection worse than "up" for a ground landing, is partly down.

In 37 years of flying, I have had 9 landing gear system failures, but I always knew I had the failure, and got them down for a no damage landing.

[Dan Winterland]

I'm afraid even the anecodotal evidence is damming enough. In my experience, it's true. I even had my motor glider landed wheels up by someone we let have a go in it. Luckily, the only damage was to the wooden prop and the pilot's wallet as it was a RF4 which the designer had thoughtfully put strakes in the bottom of the fuselage for such an eventuality.


I did a wheels up in my glider once - deliberately. I could only get the UC down half way, so I chose to land sans gear to prevent the doors being ripped off. No damage to the glider, apart from a grass stain. the cause was a camera lens cap jammed in the gear mechanism. We didn't recognise it, so it must have been there many years, probably dislodged from it's resting place by a negative g bunt after a cable break a few launches earlier.

[Bob Bevan]

My origins were in insurance underwriting which is why I like to understand the statistical or other rationale behind the structure of premium calculations.

The high load is not universal but to be fair I did say 'up to' and it is a rate I have seen quoted.

From the subsequent posts it is clear that gear up landings do occur and with some frequency. Given this I would hope there has been some sort of formal research in to both their frequency and potential further mitigations. It is something like this that I am trying to get my hands on.

Cheers,

[mad_jock]

What gets me is the number that are done by pilots who have a day job of flying machines that always have retractable gear.

I always feel I have missed something in a none retractable when I haven't selected down because it not there.

Also the plane just doesn't look or feel right on approach with out it down. Power to low and the handling is different.

[IRpilot2006]

They do happen but to say it happens to every retractable eventually is very wrong. It was true the premiums would be MUCH higher. It might happen to one in a hundred, maybe, unless one is renting out to anybody who comes along.

[FerrypilotDK]

GUMP GUMP GUMP GUMP

[Pace]

Part of the problem is that we have too many bells horns and whistles and pilots tend to ignore them.
A voice command " Gear, Gear, Gear " would get far more attention than stupid bells horns and whistles.
The answer has to be in running proper approach and landing checklists as it will always be when you are distracted that the gear is missed.

I can remember being inches from a prop strike.
It was in a twin in very bad weather with no instrument approach.I had another pilot in the right seat. visibility was very bad and on the approach bits of scud cloud kept appearing below the aircraft.

I selected gear down and flaps and had full concentration on looking for the runway.
It appeared and I kept my eyes glued outside to make sure I did not loose it again.

then we went IMC into scud cloud.

" Its no use I am going around" I said to the right seat pilot.
Just as I said that the runway reappeared, i tipped the nose over, reduced power and settled on the profile to land still peering outside.
Something felt slightly odd in the way the aircraft was handling and coming down to the flair point I started looking around to why it felt odd just in time to see NO greens.

I went full power and pitched the nose up waiting for prop contact with the runway as I was then in the flair

The aircraft climbed away and I breathed a sigh of relief.
What had happened was my friend on the word I am going around had reached over and retracted the gear for me but forgot about it.

So beware it very easy to do when you are distracted! A voice command Gear Gear Gear would solve the problem.

Pace

[2high2fastagain]

As previous posters have pointed out, there are additional risks for renters who don't have a regular system and a close relationship with the aircraft, but I think there are also increased risks for us owners, particularly when we find ourselves in a non-standard approach, such as an unexpected offer of a long final. I had one such scare early on where I found that could couldn't slow the aircraft down on final. fortunately I picked up the problem more than 2 miles out. Since then I've found that a triple check system works. bumpffitch (beware the ipad spell corrector if you type that!) before arriving in the circuit, followed by a further red-blue-green-flap10 check downwind and a red-blue-green-flap40 on final seem to do it nicely for me. It gives me three chances with the wheels. Process protects as they say. I'm sure everyone will have a different system that works for them, but the important point is to have a system that protects. red-blue-green-flap40 on final is my last line of defence to catch the long final trap.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

A few posters have commented on how the aircraft 'feels' wrong on short final with the gear up, because of the lack of drag associated with extended gear. I think this is another reason (along with no gear unsafe warning system) why Yak52s feature highly among the 'gear up' accident stats.

The gear doesn't actually retract on a '52. It folds horizontal, but is still out in the slipstream creating quite a lot of drag.

Of course, the Russians weren't daft when they designed the aeroplane. If landed gear-up (it is a trainer, after all) it touches down on the folded-back but still rotatable main wheels and the tail skid. Even the brakes can still be used in the roll-out!

Ivan simply jacks it up, fits a new prop, straightens the flaps, and goes flying again (that's why it has a wooden prop and brick-built reduction gearbox). But in UK we condemn the engine as shock loaded and the incident becomes ver very expensive indeed!

[172driver]

I was trained from my very first lesson to ALWAYS use GUMPS. Three times: downwind, base, final. No matter which a/c I'm flying, retract or not. That way it becomes a totally ingrained routine that will - hopefully! - prevent a gear up.

Btw, I agree with Pace re the horns and whistles. On Cessna RGs if the microswitches are just a tiny bit out, this will give you spurious warnings which you very quickly learn to ignore.

[jecuk]

Just forgetting indicates bad check procedures but I am also very wary of pump or circuit breaker problems. Hence, I do not remove my hand from the gear lever until I see three green.

I have previously had a gear in transit when a circuit breaker went. You had all the feel of a gear coming out. And more drag. Had I not kept my hand on it and seen that the three greens did not appear, I can only hope I would have picked it up on short final.

[Tinstaafl]

I check multiple times prior to landing. Gear gets selected down prior to any descent to land and my finger stays on the handle until 3 greens & the extension cycle is complete. I check on downwind, base, after turning final, x-ing the FAF, the OM, 1000', 500', approaching DA/MDA & lastly just prior to closing the throttle to land. Not all of those points happen during every landing eg VFR circuit pattern vs ILS, but at least 3 or 4 of them do.

[India Four Two]

SSD,

I have a Yak52 question for you.

As a preamble for those who don't know the Yak, the gear is raised and lowered (with a very satisfying pneumatic hiss) by a robust lever on the lower left of the panel. The lever is mechanically locked in its position by a bolt that slides horizontally across the gear lever slot:

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c309/india42/YakGear_zps18db8046.png

After a landing during my checkout last year, I noticed that I had forgotten to slide the bolt across after lowering the gear.

So, without the bolt, is there a risk of the gear lever moving to the Up position on its own or is the bolt only there to protect against pilot stupidity?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

India, my memories of the '52 are fading now (it's been a while!), but I always considered the bolt to be there as a reminder not to retract the gear when one intended to retract the flaps post-landing. Other than that, I don't know the answer to your question.

It would certainly 'sit down' if you pulled the gear lever after landing - no squat switches.

[wsmempson]

I'm not sure that retractables are more prone to accidents than fixed gear aircraft, merely that both types are prone to different specific kinds of accident.

I would guess that fixed gear aircraft are more prone to accidents bourn of miss-handling and inexperience (wheel-barrowed landings, flight into unplanned IMC, etc) whereas retractables suffer more from errors made with complex systems (gear-up, fuel management in complex fuel systems etc).

In terms of premiums, I now run a PA32R-301 but used to run a PA32-300 and can confirm that even with the same hull values, there was very little between them in terms of premiums.

Similarly, I used to own an Archer and then traded up to an Arrow - very little between them in terms of premiums.

The hull value and the number of seats were the things that triggered the big price jump; presumably the insurers felt that in the event of an accident, having to pay out to 6 sets of relations looked much more expensive than paying out to four.

[Tinstaafl]

PA31 uses a similar concept to prevent a ground retraction. In the PA31's case, a squat switch controls a solenoid behind the instrument panel that puts a pin through a hole in the gear handle to prevent the gear handle being selected up. Anytime an engine is running then the hydraulic system is powered and can operate the gear. Not much else they can do I suppose except provide some sort of selector lock-out like that.

I imagine it's similar with the Yak. If the pneumatic system is charged it can operate the gear. In the Yak's case a manual lock-out instead of an automatic one but the effect is the same (as long as it gets used....)

[Big Pistons Forever]

In the Nanchang and Yak series the slider bar will block the handle from moving pass the neutral position. The handle has to move farther up then where the lock is for the gear to retract.

I teach that the handle down and lock across are done as one motion and find that for me it is now so automatic that I don't consciously tell my self to move the slider bolt. I of course still do the gear down, rods up, 3 green, slider over check on final every time.

[Sensible Flyer]

I also do not beleive retractable pilots are 25% more likely to have an accident, however a wheels up landing is likely to be vastly more expensive than other accidents. At a minimum, there will be a new prop and shock loaded engine to sort out, pluss all the structural and paint damage from skidding down the runway on the belly.
So it's not just extra risk, it's extra risk and potential higher repair costs.

[Pace]

sensible F

in 25 years of flying and thousands of hours in retractable twins I have never landed gear up!
I was very close to doing so once (see previous post of mine in this thread)
Correct use of checklists will reduce the majority but I firmly believe the bells and whistles fitted to most aircraft (some up to 30 years old plus ) are inadequate.
Pilots are often not alerted by bells and whistles but are alerted by electronic voice commands! Gear Gear Gear! is something no pilot would confuse and fitted to modern aircraft.
It is when a pilot least expects it that the Gear can be missed! Under extreme concentration or poor checks

Pace