Belly Landing at Newark

[AmericanFlyer]

ABC News reports: Landing Gear Issue Leads to Plane's Belly Landing - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/landing-gear-issue-leads-planes-belly-landing-19207452#.UZd7L6WfeX0)

[electric-chris]

There is an amateur video of the landing and photo of the damaged plane posted on avherald: Accident: Piedmont DH8A at Newark on May 18th 2013, intentional belly landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=46273d9a&opt=0)

[pattern_is_full]

Pix here:

US Airways flight makes emergency belly landing at Newark Airport, authorities say - NY Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/airways-flight-emergency-belly-landing-article-1.1347729)

Dash-8 (which is what I expected with this route and airline). Looks like a textbook wings-level, full-flaps landing. Good job!

EDIT: also on avherald, with amateur video. The fact it was at night makes the fireworks show a bit more impressive.

Accident: Piedmont DH8A at Newark on May 18th 2013, intentional belly landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=46273d9a&opt=0)

[AdamFrisch]

Low approach to check the landing gear? This can't be right. It would be obvious to anyone from inside the cockpit or cabin to immediately see that they hadn't locked, as they're in the nacelles and clearly visible on the Dash 8.

[nnc0]

That was my first Engineering job out of University - Structural Eng group at DHC . Man I'm proud of that thing. The guy in charge of Landing Gear was a a bit.......close minded?.

[Hotel Tango]

The amount of emergency vehicles racing to the scene looks like typical American overkill. It was only a Dash 8, not an A380 :E

[Blues&twos]

Better to have redundant emergency personnel/equipment than not enough. Good practice for the response teams too. (Edit...smiley just noticed!)

[Pilot DAR]

The guy in charge of Landing Gear was a a bit.......close minded?.

R.S.? I liked him, and his designs. That's a long leg to get into a short nacelle...

I think the Dash 8 has a fairly enviable record for landing gear reliability, aside from a blip with a few -400's.

[RAFAT]

When I started my commercial career on F27s I questioned my peers on the subject of a single MLG problem, would they land on the remaining leg and nosegear or retract the whole lot and do a belly landing? My view was, as in this case, to carry out a belly landing, but I never managed to get a straight answer from anyone back then.

[pattern_is_full]

As I recall, the Q400 problems were with gear collapses after landing, rather than failure to extend. Root cause may or may not be the same.

[macuser]

Correct me if I am wrong but when the q400s had a gear problem on one side they had to get the pax away from the adjacent prop-line of seats as and when it settled on the deck. Looking at the 100 incident the props look ok? ie no prop impact on the ground landing straight and level.

[Clear_Prop]

Low approach to check the landing gear? This can't be right. It would be obvious to anyone from inside the cockpit or cabin to immediately see that they hadn't locked, as they're in the nacelles and clearly visible on the Dash 8.

AdamFrisch:

You must be joking, right? Nothing is obvious from the flight deck when you have gear indication issues. You always obtan a second opinion if you can get it. I do hope my use of thr word "You" only applies in the generic sense!

[Burnie5204]

I think what he means to say is that because of the high-wing design the entire engine nacelle and landing gear is visible out of the pax windows and therefore they could have simply gotten cabin crew to look out of the window rather than doing a low fly-by and thereby confirm the problem sooner.

[training wheels]

Why didn't the emergency gear extension system work on this occasion?

[Clear_Prop]

Burnie5204:

Yes, I understood that much. I'm familiar with the design layout of the Dash. That's not the point I was making.

training wheels:

emergency gear extension system is not a get out of jail free card. It is effective only in particular circumstances and cannot be expected to work in all types of gear failure situations.

[Burnie5204]

So what was your point then because I agree with the previous poster. What is the point in doing a tower flypast when the Cabin Crew can just look out the window and go "nope, its not down" thus confirming (i.e. the second opinion) the Gear Not Safe indication. Especially as CC are closer to the affected MLG with a much clearer view than a tower controller peering out the window, possibly through binoculars.

No doubt the Captain had his reason but I just dont see it (pun not intended) when theres 31 pax + crew in the rear cabin who have a better view than a tower controller.

[Herod]

I reckon they can use it again; means a good job done by all.

[Clear_Prop]

The point is that you have a gear unsafe indication. It might look like its down from your vantage point, but the lights don't agree that it is safe to land on. Whatever the problem is, you might not be able to see it by peering through a window (especially at night), but it might actually appear more obvious to somebody on the ground with a broader view of your aircraft. It may not... but its common sense to get somebody to look at it in a low level flyby. I have seen this done dozens of times and the aircraft type is irrelevant. Before you commit to an expensive belly landing its worth considering all the options. The report stated that the pilot chose to land wheels up after the observers on the ground commented that the suspect leg did not look fully extended, so their observation was clearly relevant to the decision tree process.

[Vc10Tail]

I vouch for the low pass fly by exam even if a cabin observer confirms an abnormality.The exterior inspection might have offered a view of any further abnormalities not observed from insider eyes.

Some companies(mine included) espoused the option of landing with any gear that is secured down even if one! I have not determined wheher the reason for that was to minimise fuselage damage as the plane would lose aerodynamic support at a later stage and lower speed before collapsing on the lame side... all views welcomed

A B727 with a faulty nosewheel was saved in the flare hollywood style by a truck that intercepted the landing and piggy backed the nose gear(effectively towing it and avoided a nose impact)..would a similar heroic stunt have been useful to shoulder the falling wing. With the failed MLG engine shut down before landing to minimise hazard for the rescue truck??..I wonder

[Vc10Tail]

It might look funny to you...but that truck can be a great resource...and I did not say in this instance the truck would intercept from the front.If I was the Captain and such assistance was psrovided..I would work with whatever resoutce that becomes available to ensure a safe outcome that day..and that includes a truck or whatever other device that comes to your imagination.In such dire circumstances it pays to think outside the box mate..SOPs are only guidelines and legal ass shields.

[FlightPathOBN]

low pass, why not? Can anyone inside see the nose gear?

[West Coast]

Someday, if I'm lucky, I can be an armchair warrior and second guess my fellow pilots.

[PT6Driver]

As I recall, the Q400 problems were with gear collapses after landing, rather than failure to extend. Root cause may or may not be the same.

The Q400 gear problem was that the threads stripped off one of the componants allowing the gear to fall down without any braking action. Several key parts were broken when this happened. The gear then hung down without any mechanism to ensure it stayed down and no means of raising it either.

When the first incident happened the RH engine (RH gear problem) was still running. When the props struck the ground one or two blades went straight through the fusalage injuring pax on the LH side.
On the second incident they shut the effected side engine and there were no injuries or fusalage penetration.

No idea if the design is in any way similar to a 100 series. They obviously had the ability to raise the gear for the landing.
I believe the revised procedures default to lower gear with alternate gear procedure and take it from there.

[Carbon Bootprint]

The amount of emergency vehicles racing to the scene looks like typical American overkill. It was only a Dash 8, not an A380 http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gifMost FDs in the US have a standard callout for an airplane in distress, which can be pretty impressive. They roll without giving a rat's ass about the aircraft type; for most of them, excluding the ARFF, it's not important. What type of response would you prefer if it were your aircraft?

[training wheels]

emergency gear extension system is not a get out of jail free card. It is effective only in particular circumstances and cannot be expected to work in all types of gear failure situations.

Yes, understood all that, so that's why I asked why didn't it work on this occasion :)

[MG23]

The Q400 gear problem was that the threads stripped off one of the componants allowing the gear to fall down without any braking action. Several key parts were broken when this happened. The gear then hung down without any mechanism to ensure it stayed down and no means of raising it either.

That's interesting to know. I was on a Dash-8 some years ago where the crew couldn't get the gear to stay up and we had to return to the airport; I guess we were lucky that it did lock down that time.

[PT6Driver]

MG23
The system is quite clever in that if it detects a fault it does not allow the gear to be raised. (the gear remains locked down) (fail - safe). Without knowing the full circumstances of your situation this is most likely what happened.
The SAS events were attributed (I believe) to maintenance procedures which caused the threads on an eye bolt to rust and fail.

This case could have been caused by any number of things including mechanical obstructions.

Good result though in that all safe.

[Sobelena]

What type of response would you prefer if it were your aircraft?

A proportionate one - and one which wouldn't endanger evacuating passengers with masses of redundant vehicles rushing in from all sides.

[Sky Wave]

The question is how does a low fly past change how you would land the aircraft?

If the tower says "it all looks ok to me" do you then assume your gear will not collapse? I think not, you have an unsafe gear indication so surely your landing will be the same regardless of what the tower tells you?

I've only flown 2 types but both of those have 2 independent gear detection systems, if both tell you it's not locked, then there's a pretty good chance it will collapse.

All a low fly past is going to do is lead you into a false sense of security, better to just assume it's going to collapse, land the aircraft accordingly and breath a sigh of relief if it doesn't collapse.

Incidentally on my types the manuals do not suggest doing a gear up landing in the case of an unsafe indication. I can"t speak for the Dash 8.

[pigboat]

RAFAT a local carrier had an F-27 that undershot a gravel strip out in the boondocks and broke the right main gear scissors. They went around and the gear retracted but the right main wouldn't enter the well because the wheels had turned 90 degrees. They came back here and bellied it in with the gear retracted. The airplane remained upright so they jacked it up, changed the right outer cylinder, slapped some duct tape on the belly and ferried it to Montreal for repairs. There was less damage to that particular aircraft than there was to another one of theirs where the gear retracted at the gate. The nose wheel had been chocked and the parking brake was on, it did a number on the front pressure bulkhead. I've got a lot of time on the F-27 and there would be no question in my mind about whether to belly it in or not if only one main came down.

500N I can't believe anyone would think that 727 vid was for real! :D:D

[RAFAT]

pigboat - thanks for the reply, it was a similar F27 incident to the one you speak of that stirred the thought in my mind many years ago. Of course each situation must be considered in its own right, but I've generally held the view that, as in this case with the baby DHC8, it's best to retract the gear and belly-land rather than on a single MLG.

[pigboat]

RAFAT the only instance I can remember where minimal damage occurred while landing with only one main was with a Gulfstream 159. The aircraft belonged to the State of New York and they had the Governor onboard, landing in Albany. The banana beams supporting the left wheel uplock had cracked and would not allow the uplock to release. I seem to remember seeing a video of the landing, made by the CFR services, and it was a textbook operation. The crew feathered the left prop and managed to hold the left wing off until the airplane was down to a trot, and as the wing tip touched down they selected ground fine on the good engine. They stopped on the centerline hash marks, I seem to recall.

[angels]

Sometimes you pilot chappies can be very funny!

A perfect gear up landing, lots of safety personnel around, all pax and crew safe. A brilliant ending to an awkward situation.

And yet some still go on to question things.

Let's just be thankful that everyone did their job well and everyone walked away from this. Well done to all concerned! :ok: