Miami Dade AW139 lands gear-up
 

Pretty much a non-event, looks like someone forgot something here:

So, I guess they inhibit the L/G warning during winching and then don't have a post-winching or pre-landing checklist! I believe there is also a CAS message that the system is inhibited....

On many types, that would have resulted in a lot of crushes antennas etc

Sorry, I don't get. First it lands very gently on its belly and then it is standing on its legs. Was that a gear malfunction or a brain malfunction?

I don’t see how this incident ”injured multiple people”…

The boat explosion they were responding to injured multiple people.

The video is not continuous. They must have lifted into the hover and lowered it.

Definitely a brain malfunction

We used to put the gear down when winching to stop the other low height alerts.

If you depart a ship low level you won’t get a landing gear warning if you remain below 150’ from my rusty old brain memoirs….

I think most people do, although when I had a quick search I see that Bristow in Netherlands seems to have non-standard SOPs!
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e996d5bfa3.png

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....9947de76b1.png

One of the reasons Bristow winch gear down all started with the 139 when CHC took the CG contract in 2008. With the then 139, the aural alerts when coming into the hover with gear up for winching, were an annoyance and detracted from safety. Lowering the gear stopped this. Although with the advent of phase 6/7, these annoyance warning could be hushed but the precedent had been set and some people were not flexible enough to change.
That carried over to the new contract in 2015 operated once again by Bristow, with the intro of the 139 into Lydd and St. Athan.
It's not required to do it now as the warnings can be managed depending on your flight regime but try changing something in a big company!

What Bristow did on the 139 carried to the 189.

I may be missing something and in no way mean to criticise crews doing a real time real life job...

Why would you not just drop the gear when winching anyway?

The performance penalty at hoisting speeds must be negligible at best, and the benefits of being able to just "lob it on" if you have to are considerable.

Does gear deployment compromise float deployment on the 139?

To me any system that allows you to inhibit gear warnings is facilitating a potential gear up landing

OH

That was later when the crew fronted the Chief Pilot... ;)

Ditching is supposed to be ‘gear up’ but that is more to do with carrying forward speed into the water. Having the gear down in the hover won’t inhibit the floats.

I can see how this could easily happen on over water ops.
My company ops require gear up so every approach over water you get a gear warning at 150ft.
I have hardwired myself to acknowledge every time aloud for rear crew to hear and state overwater. It’s annoying when you are expecting it and resetting CAS warning is quicker but this is exactly why I do it.

Very easy mistake for the crew, sounds like short leg multiple evacs, brain is considering a lot and every approach over water numbs you to a critical audio caution.

Captain isn’t going to live this one down any time soon

This is the secret! Though I have never flown a retractable helicopter, I have done a lot of amphibian airplane training. Regardless of whatever (if any) gear position warning system, I insist that the pilot state the surface for the intended landing, and the gear position observed. This extends to wheels skis (which work poorly on hard surfaced dry runways, and even for regular RG landplanes, if you're thinking to ditch: "wheels are up for ditching is a possible correct call out"! Flying can have distractions, you gotta get yourself out of the distraction for a moment for each landing, just to assure configuration.

AW139 is certified for ditching with floats deployed. Gear up is the normal ditching configuration because:
• Gear down increases the chance of a dynamic rollover if you ditch in water.
• Gear up + floats gives a more stable, level attitude on the water.

Was it a crew who got used to habitually cancelling the gear warning when approaching a manual hover with the gear up? I think the gear warning in the AW139 is designed to remain supressed if the auto hover mode is used because the designers expected that was how everyone would do hoisting.

However #ome crews flew hoisting manually and so had to constantly acknowledged the gear alert. They got used to cancelling the alert every time they came to a hover. I wonder if these guys had just finished a hoisting period where they had been spamming the audio alerts acknowledge for the last 2 hours

This exact issue took out a Spanish AW139 crew in 2010.

AW139 accident

That is an interesting HF case actually. What is the normal way that this is supposed to work? What is the system (the warning) designed to warn against? We all know the answer to that second question, but it helps to set it out in detail. Once crews have to work around built-in safeguards or warnings, something has gone wrong in the design.

Not the first time….very early 76 daze many years ago 2 Training Capts had a similar event in Australia. Disabled the gear warning while practicing something…then wandered back to the airport, shot an approach to land. Can’t recall if they touched down or just broke some antennas.

Heard of it nearly happening many years later . Saved by the PNF memory “Finals Check” : “ Brake, Gear, Radar, Floats, Deck ID”

Just like HTAWS alerts and landing offshore in the UK sector...

Regardless of the multitude of audio and visual warnings - a positive, from memory, check of gear and brakes is essential, and both pilots in a multi crew scenario should be doing it.

It was SOP for the ( NFP/ PM/ whatever the term in use ) and in 76 and 92 …your hand followed the check. you touched the parking brake handle, verified 3 green gear, verified floats, radar, pointed you right hand at the deck or runway and said “Final Checks Complete”.

Being an ex fixed wing taildragger guy some helicopter folks commented when I pumped the brakes during the pre-landing checks when landing on a runway to verify brake pressure. ( pressure up and equal )
One TRI instructed me to stop doing that as it was not SOP.
We had a discussion about why I did it when we debriefed back on the ground …he never mentioned it again.

Maybe you're mentioning our C & T, only person I know of to do so in a 76 in Oz, damage limited to antennas. One of those things that can happen to anybody, the worlds highest houred 747 Captain came extremely close to doing same, and that was with every member of the cockpit crew being C & T.

Not quite the way I heard it. A trainer was doing an OPC. He failed the engine, and expecting a continued takeoff he raised the gear. The candidate, with plenty of tarmac ahead decided to reject and they skidded down the runway on the belly.

Could happen to any of us, (except Bell drivers) it only takes a moment of inattention.

Yes, exactly that. I know both individuals

Hear's the story, as told in John Deakin's inimitable style:

https://avweb.com/features/pelicans-...ding-in-a-747/

Good Morning
Sent you a PM.

Once made an intentionaal gear up landing with a 76, well nose wheel up that is. Arrived home base and put gear down only to get the mains locked and green. Few recycles with no joy, a fly by of the tower showed mains down, nose wheel retracted with doors closed. Landed with the nose sitting on a pile of sand bags. Cause was the oleo didn't extend on the previous take off with the result the scissors jammed up against the hydraulic jack and bent the actuating rod protuding from the piston.

Revs, Gear, Brakes.

After every take-off, before every landing.

Actually I would say it is not always a good idea' to put the gear down, definitely not in strong winds (>30knots) , you want a clean surface below and no risk of getting lines or wires tangled up...which yes have happened....and the ditching config as mentioned are gear up on the AW139...

So how do you mitigate landing with the gear up if the warning is gone? Well if you use procedures built on the "three safety nets" you might have a better chance.

1. Aircraft systems (AWG, EGPWS)
2. Checklists
3. Callouts (SOP When PF calls "commited or landing" , PM check and respond "gear is down")

...then you have a better chance to catch it even with two of the safety nets failing...as it seams have happened here...