Gear fails - Put down on grass or tar?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortunately I have no experience of having to land with no gear, but I've seen the aftermath of a few on both tarmac and grass.
The first was on grass and was inadvertant (A v.senior training captain who said he was used to having an F/O remind him!) Luckily the grass was very smooth and the touch-down gentle. The damage was limited to the prop and the flaps.
The second was on tarmac and was intentional (I can't remeber the exact reason why). The touch down was again pretty smooth but the damage done was a lot greater.
At the end of the day I would always choose tarmac with a foam blanket or water sprayed on simply because of the guaranteed smooth surface which I feel is the most important factor.
Damage to the a/c is of very little importance as long as you get out ok, though if you do less damage to the machine, there is less force to be transmitted through to us.
Though if I had a choice between a smooth grass surface and tarmac I'd go for which ever had the better emergency cover and more importantly, which place had the best bar 'cos let's face it, you'll need a drink afterwards!
The first was on grass and was inadvertant (A v.senior training captain who said he was used to having an F/O remind him!) Luckily the grass was very smooth and the touch-down gentle. The damage was limited to the prop and the flaps.
The second was on tarmac and was intentional (I can't remeber the exact reason why). The touch down was again pretty smooth but the damage done was a lot greater.
At the end of the day I would always choose tarmac with a foam blanket or water sprayed on simply because of the guaranteed smooth surface which I feel is the most important factor.
Damage to the a/c is of very little importance as long as you get out ok, though if you do less damage to the machine, there is less force to be transmitted through to us.
Though if I had a choice between a smooth grass surface and tarmac I'd go for which ever had the better emergency cover and more importantly, which place had the best bar 'cos let's face it, you'll need a drink afterwards!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sussex
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgot the punchline to my post...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The only GA event I can recall, the pilot elected a foam carpet, that must be at least 25 years ago. I know the plane is still flying, and the pilot alive."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pilot missed the foam!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The only GA event I can recall, the pilot elected a foam carpet, that must be at least 25 years ago. I know the plane is still flying, and the pilot alive."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pilot missed the foam!
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consider this.....
The first thing we would ask you is,
1) do you have any other form of emergency which requires you to land ASAP?
and
2) What is your fuel endurance?
If your answer is to
1) No.
and / or
2) 1 hour +....
You can naff off somewhere else, we don't wnat you blocking our runway and creeating the subsequent loss of revenue.
This may sound very callous, but sadly, it's something you'll be asked about at most commercial / licensed airfields.
The first thing we would ask you is,
1) do you have any other form of emergency which requires you to land ASAP?
and
2) What is your fuel endurance?
If your answer is to
1) No.
and / or
2) 1 hour +....
You can naff off somewhere else, we don't wnat you blocking our runway and creeating the subsequent loss of revenue.
This may sound very callous, but sadly, it's something you'll be asked about at most commercial / licensed airfields.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To which my reply would be tough!! I'll make the decision about where I as the aircraft captain want to put it down not anybody else and I certainly won't be swayed by 'commercial' decisions.
Niknak, I do hope you are jesting? If someone even suggested that to me in this situation, there may well be a 'quiet' chat behind the bike sheds later on. I would expect better from our colleagues in air traffic.
Niknak, I do hope you are jesting? If someone even suggested that to me in this situation, there may well be a 'quiet' chat behind the bike sheds later on. I would expect better from our colleagues in air traffic.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a good pub (I wish!)
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Say again Slowly:
I very much agree with your comment, should we both take niknak behind the bike sheds for a chat?!
Go somewhere appropriate, at one time that could mean no end of military airfields where you could feel confident of a good service and a good beer afterwards.
Silverknapper, yes 'twas a single, would have done the same in a twin. However the important thing is to decide what and where are your best options at the time, what sort of gear, how it retracts (if it's partially up/down). High wing with narrow round fuselage, then it will more than likely roll onto a wing tip at some point.
Most importantly fly the aeroplane all the way, don't give up six feet above the ground. Then enjoy the beer afterwards.
I very much agree with your comment, should we both take niknak behind the bike sheds for a chat?!
Go somewhere appropriate, at one time that could mean no end of military airfields where you could feel confident of a good service and a good beer afterwards.
Silverknapper, yes 'twas a single, would have done the same in a twin. However the important thing is to decide what and where are your best options at the time, what sort of gear, how it retracts (if it's partially up/down). High wing with narrow round fuselage, then it will more than likely roll onto a wing tip at some point.
Most importantly fly the aeroplane all the way, don't give up six feet above the ground. Then enjoy the beer afterwards.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until around a year ago, I was in regular contact with someone who worked airside at EDI, responsible for operations.
His words to me may be paraphrased as 'We always keep a JCB on standby, for the event that a GA aircraft blocks our main runway. The cost of replacing a light single is cheaper than any penalties we have to pay for delay to commercial scheduled flights'.
Basically, the attitude was that any emergency for resulting in a blocked runway for which clearance would impede scheduled operations - bye bye GA aircraft! I didn't enter into the argument about preservation of evidence for AAIB, etc as the guy had a total down on GA ops at EDI!
His words to me may be paraphrased as 'We always keep a JCB on standby, for the event that a GA aircraft blocks our main runway. The cost of replacing a light single is cheaper than any penalties we have to pay for delay to commercial scheduled flights'.
Basically, the attitude was that any emergency for resulting in a blocked runway for which clearance would impede scheduled operations - bye bye GA aircraft! I didn't enter into the argument about preservation of evidence for AAIB, etc as the guy had a total down on GA ops at EDI!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOS/TD&H:
I agree fully that the pilot-in-command is the only person authorized to decide how critical an emergency is. Once an emergency has been declared, ATC has a moral and legal duty to render all possible assistance, not to be ostructionist.
Remember the old chesnut: "What is the similarity between air traffic controllers and pilots? If a pilot screws up, the pilot dies. If ATC screws up, the pilot dies."
"Controllers" don't control anything, except a radio microphone.
But let's not be too hard on old niknak: the last sentence of his post suggests that he is just reporting what most (all?) controllers would do, not attempting to justify it.
I agree fully that the pilot-in-command is the only person authorized to decide how critical an emergency is. Once an emergency has been declared, ATC has a moral and legal duty to render all possible assistance, not to be ostructionist.
Remember the old chesnut: "What is the similarity between air traffic controllers and pilots? If a pilot screws up, the pilot dies. If ATC screws up, the pilot dies."
"Controllers" don't control anything, except a radio microphone.
But let's not be too hard on old niknak: the last sentence of his post suggests that he is just reporting what most (all?) controllers would do, not attempting to justify it.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
niknak
Well another score for Bournemouth International then - no such issues here.
Have seen a few land with uncertain gear condition, had one myself (on CPL skills test! No extension on PFL, got 3 greens in the end). ATC are always helpful to emergency aircraft with inspections, lots of reassuring chat, calling operator if advice needed, and allowing the pilot to choose when to approach. Also helpful to other aircraft training in the area, warning them and letting them land first if the emergency PIC doesn't mind, just in case he fouls the runway (important for mine - the other aircraft was a Vampire, not overladen with fuel!).
Only seen one "expected" gear-up, he had one main unlocked which collapsed. A couple of accidental. All cleared up in under an hour.
Is Bournemouth the most GA-friendly International Airport around? Bigger than Southampton and twice as cheerful
Well another score for Bournemouth International then - no such issues here.
Have seen a few land with uncertain gear condition, had one myself (on CPL skills test! No extension on PFL, got 3 greens in the end). ATC are always helpful to emergency aircraft with inspections, lots of reassuring chat, calling operator if advice needed, and allowing the pilot to choose when to approach. Also helpful to other aircraft training in the area, warning them and letting them land first if the emergency PIC doesn't mind, just in case he fouls the runway (important for mine - the other aircraft was a Vampire, not overladen with fuel!).
Only seen one "expected" gear-up, he had one main unlocked which collapsed. A couple of accidental. All cleared up in under an hour.
Is Bournemouth the most GA-friendly International Airport around? Bigger than Southampton and twice as cheerful
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The damage was limited to the prop
as there could be significant, unseen internal damage, most importantly to the crank. 
As for a gear up landing, I have heard tarmac is to be preferred as (1) the damage done isn't that great and (2) it's smooth. Grass may look softer (not necessarily so in Texas though
) but if you're skidding along at sixty mph and you hit a little indentation, or a clump of something, It could get nasty fairly quickly.Then there's the airframe shape to consider. It's not likely you'll be flying an F16, but consider the ram ifications of landing that on the grass, with the air intake being where it is.
As for one MLG only, I'd definately take the tarmac, no questions. I wouldn't want the wing tip to dig in on grass and start a cartwheel.
Love the story about the belly up seaplane landing and subsequent go-around. I've heard of people doing that in land planes too
which sort of brings me back to the start of this post.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does this one count?
Pic shows two very relieved companions after the landing. Plus member of firecrew disconnecting the battery for safety.
I chose the grass next to the tarmac and found that the aircraft came to a stop very quickly in only a few yards. I would not have liked to have been skidding down the tarmac runway and developed a sideways motion. I did get the airport staff to check out the condition of our chosen landing area which seemed very good. Also shut down both engines.
Having not blocked the runway, the hard part was now removing the aircraft without damaging it. This we did by placing a skid beneath it (metal sheet) and dragging it away to the hangar, much preferable to a JCB to clear runway!
ATC were very helpful during planning, no hint of being sent away! AAIB were most amused when I phoned to report the event, as they already knew everything. It was very rare they said that they are phoned two hours prior to an accident by ATC to inform them that one was going to occur! Well,.. other than all my normal flights
So grass or tarmac ? I still do not know which way I will go next time. Best to fit your plan to the circumstances each time.
Cheers
FF
Last edited by Flyer Flier; 29th Apr 2005 at 20:13.
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, having posted in a somewhat cack handed manner, I have been taken behind the bike sheds and spoken to...
Seriously though, it is a question you may be asked, and many "airport authorities" (which is not ATC), and these airport authorities now have specific orders for specific situations such as the one here.
We often "standby" for the military, just in case the aircraft can't get into their own nearby bases, however, its very unlikely that we would accept a diversion for a military aircraft who had u/c problems, no other emergency, and sufficiant fuel to make it to their own base or a nearby one.
That mindset applies to many airport authorities when it comes to civilian aircraft, regardless of the size, due to the potential damage that could be caused.
Although, if you declared a Pan with u/c problems, I wouldn't think twice about doing whatever I could to help you, and to hell with the airport authorities opinion....
Seriously though, it is a question you may be asked, and many "airport authorities" (which is not ATC), and these airport authorities now have specific orders for specific situations such as the one here.
We often "standby" for the military, just in case the aircraft can't get into their own nearby bases, however, its very unlikely that we would accept a diversion for a military aircraft who had u/c problems, no other emergency, and sufficiant fuel to make it to their own base or a nearby one.
That mindset applies to many airport authorities when it comes to civilian aircraft, regardless of the size, due to the potential damage that could be caused.
Although, if you declared a Pan with u/c problems, I wouldn't think twice about doing whatever I could to help you, and to hell with the airport authorities opinion....
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry, we knew you didn't mean it!
I am however very surprised that anybody involved with aviation would put profit and hassle above safety.
If I was asked whether I would go elsewhere, unless the alternate had far better facilities (and a better, cheaper pub) then I would be pretty annoyed once I was on the ground, whilst that wouldn't be directed at the controller (I would bet that not one ATC'er would dream of sending a damaged aircraft away to somewhere with lesser facilities) they should really tell the 'airport authorities' to stick it where the sun don't shine as you say.
It is all a bit academic though, it's not as if even the most idiotic 'airport authority' could stop you landing somewhere once you've declared an emergency. They've simply got to deal with it and the conseqeunces.
It may cause headaches, but in that situation, it's not something I'm really going to give a fig about.
Flyer flier, it looks as if you got away lightly with your 'moment', nicely done.
I am however very surprised that anybody involved with aviation would put profit and hassle above safety.
If I was asked whether I would go elsewhere, unless the alternate had far better facilities (and a better, cheaper pub) then I would be pretty annoyed once I was on the ground, whilst that wouldn't be directed at the controller (I would bet that not one ATC'er would dream of sending a damaged aircraft away to somewhere with lesser facilities) they should really tell the 'airport authorities' to stick it where the sun don't shine as you say.
It is all a bit academic though, it's not as if even the most idiotic 'airport authority' could stop you landing somewhere once you've declared an emergency. They've simply got to deal with it and the conseqeunces.
It may cause headaches, but in that situation, it's not something I'm really going to give a fig about.
Flyer flier, it looks as if you got away lightly with your 'moment', nicely done.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Guildford
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182676-1.html
See "Select The Surface"
"There are some very interesting films made by NASA when it did full-scale crash tests of general aviation airplanes. The gantry arrangement that had been used for training Apollo astronauts for working under reduced G levels was modified to impact airplanes into the ground at specific angles and speeds. The initial tests crashed the aircraft on concrete. The data obtained showed that some impressively high-speed impacts were potentially survivable. At flatter angles the airplane would hit and then slide along the concrete. For a while though, everyone missed the obvious: The concrete simply redirected much of the energy of the crash. While it stopped movement downward, providing a significant deceleration in that direction, it did not absorb all of the energy of the moving airplane. The remaining energy was translated into a long slide. An engineer visiting from one of the manufacturers politely mentioned to the NASA scientists that, in his experience, not too many airplanes crashed on concrete. The light bulb lit and dirt was brought in and layered about three feet deep atop the concrete.
The same crash tests were rerun. The results were dramatically different. None of the impacts was survivable. The dirt compacted about six inches, and then stopped the airplanes cold."
See "Select The Surface"
"There are some very interesting films made by NASA when it did full-scale crash tests of general aviation airplanes. The gantry arrangement that had been used for training Apollo astronauts for working under reduced G levels was modified to impact airplanes into the ground at specific angles and speeds. The initial tests crashed the aircraft on concrete. The data obtained showed that some impressively high-speed impacts were potentially survivable. At flatter angles the airplane would hit and then slide along the concrete. For a while though, everyone missed the obvious: The concrete simply redirected much of the energy of the crash. While it stopped movement downward, providing a significant deceleration in that direction, it did not absorb all of the energy of the moving airplane. The remaining energy was translated into a long slide. An engineer visiting from one of the manufacturers politely mentioned to the NASA scientists that, in his experience, not too many airplanes crashed on concrete. The light bulb lit and dirt was brought in and layered about three feet deep atop the concrete.
The same crash tests were rerun. The results were dramatically different. None of the impacts was survivable. The dirt compacted about six inches, and then stopped the airplanes cold."
If it was representative of a firm soil surface topped by mature grass then Flyer Flier's C-337 would be a bit more bent as would FF and his fellow aviator.
Got quite used to the Canadian version of Rule 5 - "so long as your floats aren't actually touching the treetops you're high enough".
....at a distance less than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle or structure
At least over water you can see where the "persons" and "vessels" are, and in my experience, you get a friendly wave - at least they looked friendly to me!
I cannot get the link to work properly - try this instead - http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Re...6/Subpart2.htm and click 602.14
Last edited by India Four Two; 26th May 2005 at 18:54.