Trainee pilot lands plane without wheel

[Contacttower]

Just one final thought on the video itself...

The outcome could have been a lot worse, if he had plonked the wing on and just left it there without lifting it again or trying to maintain directional control the plane would probably have pivoted towards the missing wheel and departed the runway at much higher speed in the other direction. Would have resulted in more damage to the plane and ended up further away towards the trees on the other side of the runway.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

It's true, you never know if you're going to panic in an emergency until it happens. My worst (and there've been a few in my 30 plus years of tailwheel strip and aeros flying, all of which I'd have gladly swapped at the time for this guy's non-threatening predicament) was a partial engine failure at 300' off a short runway (engine nearly jumping off the aeroplane, instruments unreadble due the vibration, radio inaudiable due the banging and backfiring) expecting the engine to sieze at any moment, with nothing but real estate in front of us and the aeroplane just barely flying albeit downhill a bit. Don't turn back? I had to, and we made the runway, just.

Flying mostly old aeroplanes, I've had others that I'd call 'mis-fires' rather than the real partial failure that this one was.

I was gratified to discover that when it happened the training kicked in immediately, so me and my pax are still around. Everything seemed to happen very slowly, and we both had time to notice three beautiful white swans flying past the other way - serenity in the midst of that cacophony.

I know people who have dealt with far worse than that. And my mate did indeed land a high-wing taildragger with the whole main gear missing from one side, not just the wheel so it needed some effort to keep right-side-up on landing (it had hit a rock on T/O from a strip). He conformed it was no big deal.

So really, although this guy 'only' had 120 hours (to put it in perspective that's about 3 times what most of us took to get our PPLs back in 1978 - by 120 hours most of us were flying aeros and tailwheel aeroplanes into farm strips - so he's no neophyte) he really didn't do very well at all in a situation that wasn't particularly threatening and alot of time to plan his landing.

[taxistaxing]

I will reserve any judgement on the flying. As a low timer myself I'd be pretty happy with that result after flying around for 4 hours, burning off fuel, stewing about the upcoming controlled crash!

As a general point, in this type of situation, wouldn't it be better to aim for a grass strip? The additional friction of the grass might help deceleration and presumably less risk of sparks than an asphalt-on-metal landing.

I appreciate presence of emergency equipment and space are probably the overriding considerations in this type of situation.

[jas24zzk]

I agree with you mate, reading analysing without finger pointing might just be helpfull to one of us one day. Finger pointing serves no purpose to anyone other than a lawyer.

True, although what are you referring to (apologies for perhaps not completely understanding what you are saying)? Environmental/human factors as you posted about previously? The quality of the training he received? Other factors that lead to the accident playing out the way it did?

My original post came from SSD's post about the pilots 'poor' ??? performance in the landing phase of this incident. As he say's at 120 hours as a CPL student with china southern, a poor performance is not tolerated and they get cut from the course. A china southern student does not get to 120 hours with landings like that. I'm not agreeing with SSD, but if it had all 3 feet still on, that landing would be well below acceptable standard.

So for me, i accepted SSD's assessment that the landing was substandard, and then asked myself the question of what could have produced such. The only answer I came up with was that the student was in some way impaired, and then i looked at the possibilities of impairment. The only answer I had was dehydration.............dessication..i still gotta get the book back out on that one.


Humour me and say that de-hydration was the cause of the lowered performance (in SSD's view). If i was put in exactly the same situation, would I fly for four hours to burn off fuel? or fly long enough to let the emergency services get into place and then have a go?

I'm not exactly sure atm, but i am leaning towards having a go earlier than later whilst my motor skills are still in place. heck i might even be able to pull the mix 2 foot of the deck and save the insurer some money

[Contacttower]

I'd be interested to know whether the pilot made the call to stay up for four hours or whether the chief pilot effectively told him to. It would be a difficult call though either way. There could have been a lot of sparks in a situation like that and while it looks like the wings stayed intact I would have thought there was a significant risk of fuel getting out somewhere with the stress on the wings.

[jas24zzk]

Taxistang

As a general point, in this type of situation, wouldn't it be better to aim for a grass strip? The additional friction of the grass might help deceleration and presumably less risk of sparks than an asphalt-on-metal landing.

In short NO.

Sparks first. Very real risk of them occuring. Risk of fire? only exists if you have a fuel leak really. (only considering the a/c type in this incident)

Grass vs bitumen. The imminent risk with either is groundloop. If that is going to happen, you want it at the lowest speed. (you cannot predict it, therefore must assume it will happen) The only way this is going to happen is the leg without the wheel penetrates the surface and digs in. I think on that you can work out for yourself which is the better surface....if not ask your cfi.

Cheers
Jas

[BabyBear]

Originally Posted by jas24zzk

The only answer I came up with was that the student was in some way impaired,

Maybe it was the stress of thnking about paying for a 4hr flight.

BB

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

And of course holding the brakes on as the aeroplane yawed left off the runway forced the right gear leg harder into the runway, and sideways, with a real danger of starting a fuel fire especially had the leg failed due the sideways forces.

Why didn't he release the brakes as the yaw started, to stay on the runway? Panic?

And if staying airbourn for 4 hours in the Oz heat lead to him becoming dehydrated or otherwise incpacitated so his performance was seriously affected, then that again shows poor judgment of how to handle the situation. He's the captain, he makes the descisons!

[jas24zzk]

Maybe it was the stress of thnking about paying for a 4hr flight.

BB

Thats almost funny you know...until you realise the guy is a fully funded cadet that will be flying an A380 or similar long before you stop flipping burgers to pay for your PA28R upgrade.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

..until you realise the guy is a fully funded cadet that will be flying an A380 or similar long before

Crikey, I hope he learns a bit of stick and rudder piloting technique before that happens. Mind you, with AF 477 and the Colgan Dash 8 accidents in mind, perhaps this incident is demonstrating a flaw in modern airline training?

[jas24zzk]

SHAGGY SHEEP SHAGGER!

Now i know you are truly a ****...and the post you just made since i began this isn't even worthy of a response!

And of course holding the brakes on as the aeroplane yawed left off the runway forced the right gear leg harder into the runway, and sideways, with a real danger of starting a fuel fire especially had the leg failed due the sideways forces.

You are right, its going sideways. AND BACKWARDS AWAY from the tank which hasn't, and nor will it present a danger of splitting and offering fuel to the equation. Know a lot about PA-28's you do.

Why didn't he release the brakes as the yaw started, to stay on the runway? Panic?

I'll offer you a question mark on that....possibly, but maybe the instruction he was given was to stand on the left brake....they did have some time to discuss a plan.

And if staying airbourn for 4 hours in the Oz heat lead to him becoming dehydrated or otherwise incpacitated so his performance was seriously affected, then that again shows poor judgment of how to handle the situation. He's the captain, he makes the descisons!

Given what I have presented as reasons for poor performance, I will back down to you here conditionally. Low time pilot, on the radio, receiving instructions. Where he trains, they are under full oversight, there was plenty of time to consider and take appropriate action. The advice given to him to stay airborne may not have been appropriate.

I think you need to read my posts a lil more carefully, and take the time to consider what is going on. Your responses may have been different at that level of experience, but i doubt it. at 120 hours someone gets on the radio and tells you what you should do...you won't question it.

[jas24zzk]

Crikey, I hope he learns a bit of stick and rudder piloting technique before that happens. Mind you, with AF 477 and the Colgan Dash 8 accidents in mind, perhaps this incident is demonstrating a flaw in modern airline training?

do you walk around with blinkers on?

you can now be right seat on and a380/747 with ZERO command time!!!!!!!!!!


look up the mpl you muppet!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I see jas has reverted to insult, always the last resort of those can't argue their corner. He also completely misses the points:

at 120 hours someone gets on the radio and tells you what you should do...you won't question it.

If you think that, you are not a pilot. At 120 hours (indeed at any time you are flying as a qualified pilot) YOU are CAPTAIN! YOU make the decsisions, not some guy on the ground! If you don't understand that you don't understand what being a pilot is about.

you can now be right seat on and a380/747 with ZERO command time!!!!!!!!!!
look up the mpl you muppet!

I think you'll find that was the point I was making. I refer you again to the basic lack of pilot skills demonstrated by AF 477 and the Colgan Dash 8. And before you call me a 'muppet', perhaps you should consider that the airline industry, in the light of those two pilot-induced disaters and some others as well, realise they have a problem.

But hey, you sound like some sort of expert. maybe you know best?

[BackPacker]

nor will it present a danger of splitting and offering fuel to the equation.

Agree. The PA28 tank (at least the -161 I know) is a separate unit that is bolted/riveted into the inboard portion of the wing, in front of the spar. Aerodynamically it's part of the wing, but structurally it isn't.

You would have to grind the wing off all the way to the tank, or have a catastrophic failure of the wing spar at the tank location, for the tank to have any chance of rupturing. (Or hit an external object, or something like that.)

But this is information that's not (or not very clearly) written in the POH and I would not assume your average PA28 pilot to know about it. It could just as easily have been a wet wing or bladder tank.

So unless proven otherwise, I would assume that a fuel leak would be possible in such a situation, and make sure all mitigation measures are taken to prevent fire.

[Halfbaked_Boy]

SSD,

Although I must disagree with your general consensus on how the pilot performed under the circumstances (due to reasons given by other posters), there is absolutely no denying that your thoughts regarding training and the airline industry are correct and I wholeheartedly agree.

And to take it a notch further, it is mildly frightening when you learn that this pilot was an airline cadet who was presumably selected against the majority due to certain attributes.

I've attended them airline assessments, they're a load of bollocks (no bitterness here, I passed them) and can never determine who will snap and who will stay still like a rock under pressure.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

So you thought he did OK? I can't see how he could have done it much worse! As I said, my cat wouldn't have done worse (better actually, as although she wouldn't have flared, niether did he, and she wouldn't be able to stomp on the brakes like he did!).

Are you a pilot?

PS - if you want to see how a light aircraft should be landed, take a look at the vid in the next thread, about the Luscombe. Could you do that?

[studentaviator]

120 Hours ?! Im not sure if he was a student. But a good landing anyway! Wish I had that many hours as a studednt....

[jas24zzk]

SSD,
i'm glad you fly in another country where everyone is perfect., if it wasn't for the Chesire location next to your name, i would have assumed you were a frenchman.

My pillow calls, and in the 'morrow i will address your responses.

What I would like you to think about, is how you expected a pilot to perform perfect execution in a situation of duress, and how you really think you would perform.

I have gone about it a long winded way, but i doubt you or I could have done any better. Admit that much and our relationship may improve.

Cheers
Jas

[packo1848]

At 120 hours (indeed at any time you are flying as a qualified pilot)

I think you may be missing the point, even with 120 hours this guy will not be a qualified pilot, he will not hold a licence (unless he got it elsewhere beforehand). He is in a similar situation to a PPL student on their solos, albeit with more experience. I would think it fairly reasonable to assume that in this situation he may be being advised by an instructor from the ground, and as he will have had no experience of being truly on his own I would also think it fair of him to heed the advice of that instructor, correct or incorrect.

As a low hours pilot myself, I would be more than happy with walking away from that. However, as has been said before, maybe having read this I might remember at least one of the points raised and handle the situation better should I be unfortunate enough for it to happen to me.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Like I said, my cat couldn't have done it worse. Perfect execution isn't expected, but basic pilot skills are.

If you are saying you could not have done better, then fine. Please accept that some pilots might have, though. In fact of all the pilots I know I can't think of one that wouldn't have done it better than that - which, in all honesty, isn't saying a lot.

I know quite a few guys who know the PA28 well and would have demonstrated perfect technique. That is:

Have that PA28 back to minimum possible speed on short final, right wing high so in a slight left slip, then flared to grease the left main on at minimum touchdown speed with the power at idle. Then used course left aileron and opposite rudder to hold the right wing up while keeping straight. Eventually, with full back elevator and full left aileron the right leg would have touched down followed by the nose wheel at the slowest possible speed. If the aircraft looked like departing the right side of the runway they'd use a touch of brake to keep it straight until it stopped.

That's perfect technique, and I wouldn't be expecting that at 120 hours. Indeed, I'm pretty sure I couldn't do that either as most of my time is in types other than PA28 so I don't know that aeroplane type well enough to fly it to those limits.

I have a lot more than 120 hours, so I'd expect to do it better than that guy did. At 120 hours I'd have expected to do it a lot better than he did.

I don't know how many hours and what sort of experience you have, but if you have any post PPL experience to speak of and you don't think you could have done better than that you need to question how you'd cope when you are faced with a requirement for some real piloting skill - because if you fly for long enough, one day you will be.