Undercarriage Failure Landings
Guest
Posts: n/a
Undercarriage Failure Landings
Here's a question for pilots who fly high-wing turbo-props which have the main u/c legs at the rear of the engine nacelles, but of course anyone is free to offer an opinion.
Consider this scenario: You have a failure in one of the main u/c legs. After several unsuccessful attempts to rectify the problem, you decide to land with the leg retracted.
With obviously the main consideration being the safety of all on board, in what configuration would you land the aircraft.
Would you land with the remaining main u/c leg plus the nose leg extended ? bearing in mind the possible resulting damage to pax & airframe as the affected wing slams down when dynamic controls become ineffective.
Or might you elect to land with all u/c legs retracted ? retaining a more stable condition during deceleration, and possibly landing on grass to limit damage to pax, airframe, engines and even runway surface, but at the expense of surface friction stopping power.
Your opinions please.
[This message has been edited by RAFAT (edited 28 January 2001).]
Consider this scenario: You have a failure in one of the main u/c legs. After several unsuccessful attempts to rectify the problem, you decide to land with the leg retracted.
With obviously the main consideration being the safety of all on board, in what configuration would you land the aircraft.
Would you land with the remaining main u/c leg plus the nose leg extended ? bearing in mind the possible resulting damage to pax & airframe as the affected wing slams down when dynamic controls become ineffective.
Or might you elect to land with all u/c legs retracted ? retaining a more stable condition during deceleration, and possibly landing on grass to limit damage to pax, airframe, engines and even runway surface, but at the expense of surface friction stopping power.
Your opinions please.
[This message has been edited by RAFAT (edited 28 January 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
While both BRAL main gear failures were on a low wing turboprop (ATP), both elected to land with the remaining gear extended. To the best of my knowledge both aircraft suffered minimal damage and were subsequently (after repairs obviously) returned to service. This was probably largely due to the professionalism of the flightcrew involved however perhaps a wheels up landing may have caused more serious damage to the pressure hull.
All things considered, the first priority has to be the main way of getting yourselves and the fare-paying passengers (in that order, no heroes here please!) on the deck without injury.
Regards
wizzy
All things considered, the first priority has to be the main way of getting yourselves and the fare-paying passengers (in that order, no heroes here please!) on the deck without injury.
Regards
wizzy
Guest
Posts: n/a
With regard to the choice of surface, what info is available would seem to recommend tarmac/concrete rather than grass.
The softer the surface the more likely you are to dig in and stop suddenly. When that happens your deceleration forces escalate rapidly. The longer you can take to come to a full stop, the less likely you are to have injuries.
------------------
-.-- --.- -..-
The softer the surface the more likely you are to dig in and stop suddenly. When that happens your deceleration forces escalate rapidly. The longer you can take to come to a full stop, the less likely you are to have injuries.
------------------
-.-- --.- -..-
Guest
Posts: n/a
Very strange that Fokker would recommend that procedure. Some years ago, be about 1970, QB undershot the runway at CYGV with a Fairchild F-27. The aircaft bounced back into the air, and they managed to keep it airborne to go around, but had an in transit indication on the right main. The right MLG lower member had broken at the scissors, and the wheel assembly turned through 90* so it wouldn't retract into the nacelle. They flew the aircraft back to CYZV and landed with the gear retracted, on the recommendation of Fairchild. All things considered, there was very little damage to the aircraft. It remained upright, and the belly took a licking, but otherwise nothing. Maintenance jacked it up, replaced the right main outer cylinder, repaired the belly with duct tape and ferried it back to base. They had another F-27 where the gear was inadvertently retracted with the airplane on chocks at the gate, and that one had far more damage.
Guest
Posts: n/a
pigboat,
I hadn't heard of that incident, but the outcome of it is exactly what got me thinking about this. The method adopted could actually mean the difference between life or death to those on board.
Code Blue - good point about deceleration forces.
I hadn't heard of that incident, but the outcome of it is exactly what got me thinking about this. The method adopted could actually mean the difference between life or death to those on board.
Code Blue - good point about deceleration forces.
