Twin hits runway with wheels up and then takes off!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My have saved his life, just before the power is added the A/C appears to slew to the left, its not possible to see from the video but if the the line of parked A/C went to the end of the airfield he was likely to hit one of he had stayed on the ground?
Simon
I hope you are not advocating attempting to go around with badly damaged props after a runway prop strike?
Far better to take his chance on a runway which is clear of obstacles than attempting to take to the air with a more than likely stall/spin or an under control crash into trees.
I saw a Cessna push pull aircraft with gear problems land on its belly at Gloucester. The pilot did a perfect job burning off fuel and then cutting both engines at 30 feet before making a smooth belly landing onto the runway.
to advocate going around in this situation is complete madness and extremely bad airmanship on his part he was very very lucky to get away with it
Pace
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,625
Received 296 Likes
on
164 Posts
And to then fly 100 odd miles down the coast past six or seven large airfields... Glad I wasn't aboard.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pace
to advocate going around in this situation is complete madness and extremely bad airmanship on his part he was very very lucky to get away with it
Originally Posted by Pace
Far better to take his chance on a runway which is clear of obstacles than attempting to take to the air with a more than likely stall/spin or an under control crash into trees.
Originally Posted by Pace
Far better to take his chance on a runway which is clear of obstacles than attempting to take to the air with a more than likely stall/spin or an under control crash into trees.
The rights and wrongs in aviation help keep it interesting. Irrespective of the stupidity of any action I find it difficult to say a different choice was the correct one where the outcome could not have been better than with the choice made.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Oz
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft is now for sale!
I read an ATSB report of a plane here in Australia that did a wheels-up approach. The Pilot figured out something was wrong when the wheels failed to make contact, and executed a go around. Only damage was a broken antenna on the bottom of the aircraft. Very very luck pilot.
Investigation: AO-2015-008 - Wheels-up approach and go-around involving PA-31-350, VH-TXK, at Townsville Airport, Queensland, 9 January 2015
I read an ATSB report of a plane here in Australia that did a wheels-up approach. The Pilot figured out something was wrong when the wheels failed to make contact, and executed a go around. Only damage was a broken antenna on the bottom of the aircraft. Very very luck pilot.
Investigation: AO-2015-008 - Wheels-up approach and go-around involving PA-31-350, VH-TXK, at Townsville Airport, Queensland, 9 January 2015
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rights and wrongs in aviation help keep it interesting. Irrespective of the stupidity of any action I find it difficult to say a different choice was the correct one where the outcome could not have been better than with the choice made.
He had no idea of the extent of damage to the props or the thrust they would generate.
the aircraft was right on the edge of stalling at one point. He was lucky it wasn't a windy day and a down draught didn't catch him.
My concern is trying to justify this action to other pilots who probably won't have such a kind God looking over them if they followed such an action as in any laws of airmanship it was a crazy choice to make I hope he thanked that God for letting him get away with it because thats all it was! Getting away with it and a huge helping of luck.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Though not at all defending nor recommending what the Aerostar pilot did I can stretch my mind to the point where he realized the error much earlier than might appear, and initiated the go around, then the plane settled on, and most of the damage occured, as it began to accelerate.
I cannot advocate a prolonged flight following such an abnormal event, but I can see the wisdom in flying to the next suitable airport to handle the aircraft once on the ground. There are aircraft which have been sadly written off, simply because the location of the minor event made it major.
But, in the end, I think that we'd all agree that assuring the configuration is the best of all....
I cannot advocate a prolonged flight following such an abnormal event, but I can see the wisdom in flying to the next suitable airport to handle the aircraft once on the ground. There are aircraft which have been sadly written off, simply because the location of the minor event made it major.
But, in the end, I think that we'd all agree that assuring the configuration is the best of all....
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Andover
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon
I hope you are not advocating attempting to go around with badly damaged props after a runway prop strike?
Far better to take his chance on a runway which is clear of obstacles than attempting to take to the air with a more than likely stall/spin or an under control crash into trees.
I saw a Cessna push pull aircraft with gear problems land on its belly at Gloucester. The pilot did a perfect job burning off fuel and then cutting both engines at 30 feet before making a smooth belly landing onto the runway.
to advocate going around in this situation is complete madness and extremely bad airmanship on his part he was very very lucky to get away with it
Pace
I hope you are not advocating attempting to go around with badly damaged props after a runway prop strike?
Far better to take his chance on a runway which is clear of obstacles than attempting to take to the air with a more than likely stall/spin or an under control crash into trees.
I saw a Cessna push pull aircraft with gear problems land on its belly at Gloucester. The pilot did a perfect job burning off fuel and then cutting both engines at 30 feet before making a smooth belly landing onto the runway.
to advocate going around in this situation is complete madness and extremely bad airmanship on his part he was very very lucky to get away with it
Pace
I cannot see from my post that I advocated anything, rather that I asked a question (the clue is the sign at the end of the sentence).
From the limited data available, i.e. the video who can say if he made the right call or not?
If he had crashed into a line of parked aircraft would the right decision still have been not to go around? (note the sign at the end of the sentence)
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace, I agree with what you say, there is no justification before the event, however....
We know he was lucky, that he could not have had a better outcome re lack of injury, however we don't know what would have happened had he not taken off again. Therefore there is no argument to support it being the wrong decision in this specific case. Since the outcome could not have been better there is compelling evidence it was the right decision, even if a one of.
Now if you listen to his comments it opens up a different argument.
link
At 85 I very much think his flying days are over.
We know he was lucky, that he could not have had a better outcome re lack of injury, however we don't know what would have happened had he not taken off again. Therefore there is no argument to support it being the wrong decision in this specific case. Since the outcome could not have been better there is compelling evidence it was the right decision, even if a one of.
Now if you listen to his comments it opens up a different argument.
link
At 85 I very much think his flying days are over.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all honesty, there is no argument to be had one way or another.
The fact of the matter is ; at the point of the propellers striking the runway, the gear clearly was not down. Whether the gear had been down previously and then retracted, we do not know. It's called 'accident' and 'being human'.
Age does not even come into it. I have seen a few 20 and 30 something s do exactly the same. He is still here to tell the tale, which is what counts.
The fact of the matter is ; at the point of the propellers striking the runway, the gear clearly was not down. Whether the gear had been down previously and then retracted, we do not know. It's called 'accident' and 'being human'.
Age does not even come into it. I have seen a few 20 and 30 something s do exactly the same. He is still here to tell the tale, which is what counts.
The story takes me back to Liberia in the early 70s with I watched an army Air Recon Unit officer flying circuits in a Cessna 337 who forgot to put the gear down, slid along the runway on the under fuselage panier, power on, flew another circuit, landed (with wheels), taxied in and parked up for the night. The aircraft then flew the next day in the same condition which it landed.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Chicago
Age: 47
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quoted from wpbf.com
"Georgaklis said he was flying to visit friends on the Treasure Coast, and when he attempted to land his plane, something went wrong. He said just one thing went through his mind."I said, 'We've got to get out of here,'" Georgaklis said.
Georgaklis said he's been flying for almost 50 years, and he hopped in his Aerostar for a routine flight to Aero Acres in Fort Pierce with his dog, Buddy, on April 11.Georgaklis said it's an annual trip, but he approached the runway too fast.
"The gear was down, and I saw that I was going a little faster than I liked, because you have to stop quickly," Georgaklis said.
That's when Georgaklis said he raised the gear and skidded across the runway.
Georgaklis said flight controllers told him there were no parts to fix the plane.
"I thought about it, and I said, 'Forget it. Let's go back home,'" Georgaklis said.
Georgaklis said neither he nor his dog was injured. He flew to the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, where he landed safely"
"Georgaklis said he was flying to visit friends on the Treasure Coast, and when he attempted to land his plane, something went wrong. He said just one thing went through his mind."I said, 'We've got to get out of here,'" Georgaklis said.
Georgaklis said he's been flying for almost 50 years, and he hopped in his Aerostar for a routine flight to Aero Acres in Fort Pierce with his dog, Buddy, on April 11.Georgaklis said it's an annual trip, but he approached the runway too fast.
"The gear was down, and I saw that I was going a little faster than I liked, because you have to stop quickly," Georgaklis said.
That's when Georgaklis said he raised the gear and skidded across the runway.
Georgaklis said flight controllers told him there were no parts to fix the plane.
"I thought about it, and I said, 'Forget it. Let's go back home,'" Georgaklis said.
Georgaklis said neither he nor his dog was injured. He flew to the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, where he landed safely"
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry adhguy, all commanders get it wrong from time to time.
I saw one commander of a country once state that we were going to war to
combat weapons of mass destruction and he wasn't no 85, although he did have
a 'buddy'.
I saw one commander of a country once state that we were going to war to
combat weapons of mass destruction and he wasn't no 85, although he did have
a 'buddy'.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what the FAA will do with him? My guess they will pull his licence not for landing gear up but for flying the aircraft 100 miles with known bent props and the risk to those on the ground!
The vibration and lack of thrust from the props must have been terrible.
Felt a bit sorry for him in that video as for 85 he looked in good nick and obviously loved his flying. His hand flying ability must have been good to coax that aircraft up to a cruise altitude without stalling/spinning
Its hard to tell in the video but maybe he did as he said have the gear down but was too fast, elected to go around! raised the gear too soon before getting a positive rate on the VSI and altimeter and descended onto the runway making contact ? but still in a mental go around mode.
How the heck do you live something like that down? Think I would want to crawl under a bush
Pace
The vibration and lack of thrust from the props must have been terrible.
Felt a bit sorry for him in that video as for 85 he looked in good nick and obviously loved his flying. His hand flying ability must have been good to coax that aircraft up to a cruise altitude without stalling/spinning
Its hard to tell in the video but maybe he did as he said have the gear down but was too fast, elected to go around! raised the gear too soon before getting a positive rate on the VSI and altimeter and descended onto the runway making contact ? but still in a mental go around mode.
How the heck do you live something like that down? Think I would want to crawl under a bush
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 24th Apr 2015 at 06:57.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The prop blades are scrap - no repair of the blades would be possible. Perhaps hubs can be returned to service.
The crankshafts would require an MPI inspection, and dial check of the prop flange, but might be okay. I certainly would not discard the engines because of what happened to them, if the specified inspections showed no defect. Even if the crank(s) did not pass, they can be replaced at engine rebuild.
There are specified prop strike inspections for a reason. If all of the inspected items pass, the engine is airworthy. I worked in an engine shop for years, and saw engines come in with worse prop strikes than that, and they were found to be undamaged following the specified inspection.
That prop damage was gradual, even, and symmetrical. I would not rush to judgement. Same for the airframe - I expect that it will not be scrapped, unless there is difficulty obtaining the needed repair parts.
The crankshafts would require an MPI inspection, and dial check of the prop flange, but might be okay. I certainly would not discard the engines because of what happened to them, if the specified inspections showed no defect. Even if the crank(s) did not pass, they can be replaced at engine rebuild.
There are specified prop strike inspections for a reason. If all of the inspected items pass, the engine is airworthy. I worked in an engine shop for years, and saw engines come in with worse prop strikes than that, and they were found to be undamaged following the specified inspection.
That prop damage was gradual, even, and symmetrical. I would not rush to judgement. Same for the airframe - I expect that it will not be scrapped, unless there is difficulty obtaining the needed repair parts.
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
. There are specified prop strike inspections for a reason.
I doubt, but of course could be wrong, that anybody, even in their wildest fantasies expected a Full Power, Gear Up Go Around with the props banging into the pavement for an extended period of time. And if so, an inspection would be suffice to to go fly again.
There could be vibrations and cracks or other hidden damage making these motors useless, dangerous and worthless
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vibration flying it for 100 NM would 100% been atrocious! I had a chunk of ice come off a seneca once when the three cables to the anti ice sheared and I was left with no anti ice on the one side.
It was 1 in a million but the ice chunk was thrown forward and came back hitting the three blade counter rotating prop on the other side very slightly bending the tip.
The vibration to landing was noticeable although not severe. This would be something else.
A friend flew with a bent prop and the vibration damaged the sensitive electronics causing no end of avionic problems ahead
Pace
It was 1 in a million but the ice chunk was thrown forward and came back hitting the three blade counter rotating prop on the other side very slightly bending the tip.
The vibration to landing was noticeable although not severe. This would be something else.
A friend flew with a bent prop and the vibration damaged the sensitive electronics causing no end of avionic problems ahead
Pace
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There could be vibrations and cracks or other hidden damage making these motors useless, dangerous and worthless
Following a complete inspection for a prop strike, there would be no damage which would remain hidden. If a crankshaft were found to be cracked, it could be replaced - would you want to own an engine which could not be so repaired?
Though I won't extend to agreeing with what the pilot did by flying a great distance with known damaged engines, it is possible that by doing this, he saved the plane from being scrapped. If he felt that the aircraft could not be safely flown, or vibration was intolerable, he could always come back around, and land it....
