Belly Landing at Newark
 

ABC News reports: Landing Gear Issue Leads to Plane's Belly Landing - ABC News

Video
 

There is an amateur video of the landing and photo of the damaged plane posted on avherald: Accident: Piedmont DH8A at Newark on May 18th 2013, intentional belly landing

Pix here:

US Airways flight makes emergency belly landing at Newark Airport, authorities say - NY Daily News

Dash-8 (which is what I expected with this route and airline). Looks like a textbook wings-level, full-flaps landing. Good job!

EDIT: also on avherald, with amateur video. The fact it was at night makes the fireworks show a bit more impressive.

Accident: Piedmont DH8A at Newark on May 18th 2013, intentional belly landing

Low approach to check the landing gear? This can't be right. It would be obvious to anyone from inside the cockpit or cabin to immediately see that they hadn't locked, as they're in the nacelles and clearly visible on the Dash 8.

That was my first Engineering job out of University - Structural Eng group at DHC . Man I'm proud of that thing. The guy in charge of Landing Gear was a a bit.......close minded?.

The amount of emergency vehicles racing to the scene looks like typical American overkill. It was only a Dash 8, not an A380 :E

Better to have redundant emergency personnel/equipment than not enough. Good practice for the response teams too. (Edit...smiley just noticed!)

R.S.? I liked him, and his designs. That's a long leg to get into a short nacelle...

I think the Dash 8 has a fairly enviable record for landing gear reliability, aside from a blip with a few -400's.

When I started my commercial career on F27s I questioned my peers on the subject of a single MLG problem, would they land on the remaining leg and nosegear or retract the whole lot and do a belly landing? My view was, as in this case, to carry out a belly landing, but I never managed to get a straight answer from anyone back then.

As I recall, the Q400 problems were with gear collapses after landing, rather than failure to extend. Root cause may or may not be the same.

Correct me if I am wrong but when the q400s had a gear problem on one side they had to get the pax away from the adjacent prop-line of seats as and when it settled on the deck. Looking at the 100 incident the props look ok? ie no prop impact on the ground landing straight and level.

AdamFrisch:

You must be joking, right? Nothing is obvious from the flight deck when you have gear indication issues. You always obtan a second opinion if you can get it. I do hope my use of thr word "You" only applies in the generic sense!

I think what he means to say is that because of the high-wing design the entire engine nacelle and landing gear is visible out of the pax windows and therefore they could have simply gotten cabin crew to look out of the window rather than doing a low fly-by and thereby confirm the problem sooner.

Why didn't the emergency gear extension system work on this occasion?

Burnie5204:

Yes, I understood that much. I'm familiar with the design layout of the Dash. That's not the point I was making.

training wheels:

emergency gear extension system is not a get out of jail free card. It is effective only in particular circumstances and cannot be expected to work in all types of gear failure situations.

So what was your point then because I agree with the previous poster. What is the point in doing a tower flypast when the Cabin Crew can just look out the window and go "nope, its not down" thus confirming (i.e. the second opinion) the Gear Not Safe indication. Especially as CC are closer to the affected MLG with a much clearer view than a tower controller peering out the window, possibly through binoculars.

No doubt the Captain had his reason but I just dont see it (pun not intended) when theres 31 pax + crew in the rear cabin who have a better view than a tower controller.

I reckon they can use it again; means a good job done by all.

The point is that you have a gear unsafe indication. It might look like its down from your vantage point, but the lights don't agree that it is safe to land on. Whatever the problem is, you might not be able to see it by peering through a window (especially at night), but it might actually appear more obvious to somebody on the ground with a broader view of your aircraft. It may not... but its common sense to get somebody to look at it in a low level flyby. I have seen this done dozens of times and the aircraft type is irrelevant. Before you commit to an expensive belly landing its worth considering all the options. The report stated that the pilot chose to land wheels up after the observers on the ground commented that the suspect leg did not look fully extended, so their observation was clearly relevant to the decision tree process.

To Belly land or cripple land
 

I vouch for the low pass fly by exam even if a cabin observer confirms an abnormality.The exterior inspection might have offered a view of any further abnormalities not observed from insider eyes.

Some companies(mine included) espoused the option of landing with any gear that is secured down even if one! I have not determined wheher the reason for that was to minimise fuselage damage as the plane would lose aerodynamic support at a later stage and lower speed before collapsing on the lame side... all views welcomed

A B727 with a faulty nosewheel was saved in the flare hollywood style by a truck that intercepted the landing and piggy backed the nose gear(effectively towing it and avoided a nose impact)..would a similar heroic stunt have been useful to shoulder the falling wing. With the failed MLG engine shut down before landing to minimise hazard for the rescue truck??..I wonder

ok465
 

It might look funny to you...but that truck can be a great resource...and I did not say in this instance the truck would intercept from the front.If I was the Captain and such assistance was psrovided..I would work with whatever resoutce that becomes available to ensure a safe outcome that day..and that includes a truck or whatever other device that comes to your imagination.In such dire circumstances it pays to think outside the box mate..SOPs are only guidelines and legal ass shields.