How NOT to land a 701/Savannah thingo

[Ultralights]

 

not sure what it is, looks like a cross Savannah/Ch701.

 

anyway, not the best way to land after a rather large bounce.

 

 

[Ultralights]

according to comments on another video after the event, the pilot was unhurt, and he claimed to have a control failure, elevator jammed.. and the aircraft is a Brazilian copy of the Zenith 701, but with a fixed vertical stabiliser and separate rudder, like a Savannah.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qxin0XA0Ro

 

according to the google website video translator

 

During the descent, the pilot landed on the grass beside the runway, hit an embankment and rolled over, getting completely "upside down". Deczka said the aircraft would have "lost the stick." "I just went to the side and had no control whatsoever pilto. So we stopped on the grass instead of going to the track," he said. "He was very calm to return to the airport to make the emergency landing. We are born again," sighed with relief.

 

Although the aircraft was completely destroyed, pilot Mark Brolo suffered only minor injuries. He was rescued by a team from the Fire Department to be hypertensive, but is doing well."

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I thought any landing you walked away from was a good one.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Looked to me as though at the second touchdown, which was front wheel first, the nose wheel collapsed. With a high bounce like that it is never good to try and pull it back onto the deck. Except for the control failure, which may have made it impossible, he should have gone around after the bounce.

 

 

[facthunter]

At least with a tailwheel plane you don't have that problem, but they can bounce even higher. Once the nosewheel breaks off or digs in, things happen fast. Nev

 

 

[foxy]

wowee......lucky to walk away with only minors....agree with iggy...definately didnt expect the flip!!!

 

 

[kaz3g]

At least with a tailwheel plane you don't have that problem, but they can bounce even higher. Nev

You said it, Nev! When I got my Auster those who knew told me I would sooner or later find the bounce that had been built into its design.

 

Well, it has made several appearances now, but never when I have expected it, dammit.

 

On each occasion, by the time I've got things back together again it's disappeared back to wherever it hides until the next time it decides to wake me up....

 

I quickly discovered there are rules for Austering---

 

One bounce and maybe try again if only a modest embarassment (perhaps a blip of throttle and re-assume a 3-point attitude).

 

Two bounces and you MUST apply take-off power and go around or things will undoubtedly deteriorate rapidly and the embarassment will be proportionately far greater!

 

TW aircraft generally have longer mains than tricycles which adds to their bounce-ability. Prop strikes are the main worry.

 

The potential for structural damage early on is worse in tricycles because, not only are the fragile bits closer to the ground, but the CoG is further forward. The second bounce will almost inevitably occur with the nose wheel contacting the ground first. If the first bounce is anything more than a skip I think it pays to go around!

 

kaz

 

 

[facthunter]

Bounce Correction.

 

The Auster is a bit famous for bouncing. Undamped rubber bungees are supposed to be the problem.

 

When I converted onto the Auster I had done plenty of time on Chippies and Tigers. Everybody "bagged" the Auster so much That I was surprised that it flew at all.

 

Keith Robey started my conversion at Bankstown and informed me that several Austers had come to grief on TAKE-OFF, if they got a bounce up. I put that away in the dark recesses of my mind, but some years later I found that to be true. Usually happens on a rough strip when you are a bit too fast to stop and have to pull it into the air and keep the wheels from touching the ground again while you build up a bit more airspeed. (You fly in ground effect for a little while).

 

The problem with tailwheel planes, (rather a difference than a problem) is the wheels being well ahead of the Cof G, pitch the nose of the plane UP if you are descending a bit fast, so you get all the stored energy in the springs plus a good nose up attitude change.

 

PS Austers are OK. The worst thing was the window vibrating open in flight. I used to jamb it with a folded cigarette pack. Oh I just remembered the "heel brakes". Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

I saw one real debacle a few years ago at Old Station. I think it was a harman Rocket, first bounce was a beauty, second bounce equally as good but the third bounce had him landing at about a 45 deg nose down angle.

 

The plane wasn't too badly damaged, but the prop tips were bent 90deg by the first bounce and another 90deg at the second, looked like some fantastic design of prop.

 

 

[farri]

I stood and watched a similar accident,in total disbeliefe to what was happening.The guy was test flying a SkyFox with the intention of purchasing it,he had the original owner in the right seat.

 

This particular strip being used started on a hill,ran downhill to the middle then up hill to the ended on the second hill.I`m not sure of the hight of the ends of the strip relative to the middle, but it was significant,The two ends were fairly even in height though.

 

This guy was coming in to land and touched down very close to the begining of the strip......The aircraft bounced back in the air......He held the nose up and kept holding off......The ground was falling away and the height between the AC and the strip was increasing......All of a sudden the AC stalled and came down heavily enough to do a lot of damage, requiring it to be removed on a trailer.

 

Fortunately, other than the AC,only pride was injured.The guy felt compelled to buy the AC and did.He repaird it to fly another day......Another leson learnt.

 

I did a lot of flying off this strip in the early days.

 

Frank.

 

Ps, Maj (Ross) will remember this one.

 

" Flying Is Easy,Crashing Is Hard".

 

 

[JG3]

Having watched that video multiple times, I'm inclined to believe his claim that the elevator jammed.

 

He was unable to round out at all before the first contact, and unable to raise the nose at all before the second contact.

 

The aircraft never got anywhere near a stall angle of attack.

 

When the ground is looming up like that, the tendency is to haul back on the stick to raise the nose, but no sign of that at all.

 

I reckon all he might have been able to do is a short burst of power just before final impact in order to flatten the attitude and take the weight more on the mains.

 

Easy to say now after the fact, but not so easy in the heat of the moment......

 

I've had a jammed stick in a Savannah, but in my case it was on take off.

 

The bottom end of the stick only clears the floor by about 8mm, and a ballpoint pen had jammed under there.

 

In my case a strong heave on the stick crushed the plastic pen.

 

If it had happened on a landing round out, and been a harder object under there........

 

Now I've made a flexible boot around the bottom of the stick so stray objects can't get under there.

 

JG

 

 

[kgwilson]

Having watched that video multiple times, I'm inclined to believe his claim that the elevator jammed.

I tend to agree. The approach slope looked OK but the aircraft attitude was quite nose down as you could see the top of the wing. It sounded like he hit the throttle for a couple of seconds after the bounce & then closed it completely so without any ability to flare he hit the deck fairly hard. It looked almost like a 3 pointer although the nose wheel could have contacted first. The nose wheel assembly didn't seem that strong. Maybe something broke/bent at the first bounce.

 

It's easy to say from the sideline but if he had an elevator problem once applying power he should have kept it on & gone around as he seemed to be able to fly it OK. If he had elevator control after the bounce he should have held it & let ground effect assist with the second landing.

 

Been there done that.

 

Kevin

 

[facthunter]

I'm inclined to think there was a problem with the controls. Power can help to flare, but as far as going round, you don't put a suspect plane back into the air. The elevator is the most important of all the controls. I believe the function should be duplicated. Nev

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I was also thinking along the lines of the nose gear damaged on the first wack.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Yes slowing it down to frame-by-frame seems to back up what others were saying about a jammed elevator. The actual damage occurred, though, when the nosewheel collapsed. Being a knock-off/rip-off design of a Zenith CH-701 probably meant that the cost-cutting 'designer' cut a few corners and strength where it counts may not have been the uppermost consideration. If the nose wheel assembly had been a true CH-701, it may not have collapsed and the pilot AND plane may have come out of this incident unscathed.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I've had a jammed stick in a Savannah, but in my case it was on take off.The bottom end of the stick only clears the floor by about 8mm, and a ballpoint pen had jammed under there.

In my case a strong heave on the stick crushed the plastic pen.

 

If it had happened on a landing round out, and been a harder object under there........

 

Now I've made a flexible boot around the bottom of the stick so stray objects can't get under there.

 

JG

This sounds like a pretty scary experience. I wonder of Savannah now supplies a boot as a standard inclusion in their kits?

 

 

[facthunter]

Realistically, It is nigh impossible to build a nosewheel strong enough to withstand the possible loads it can encounter in wheelbarrowing episodes etc on an ultralight. The nosewheel has to be handled fairly delicately on any plane, but on an ultralight you "nurse" it always. ( or leave it off and have a smaller one at the back). Nev

 

 

[poteroo]

If the elevator was 'jammed' as the pilot says - he could have used his trim controls to act as the elevator. In this case, you use them in the opposite sense.

 

Saw a C182 landed using just power + elevator trim once - he'd forgotten to remove the bent 2 inch nail used as the control lock.

 

happy days,

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

If the elevator was 'jammed' as the pilot says - he could have used his trim controls to act as the elevator. In this case, you use them in the opposite sense. Saw a C182 landed using just power + elevator trim once - he'd forgotten to remove the bent 2 inch nail used as the control lock.

 

happy days,

Ha ha remember a similar . ol harry on take off, a little more vocal than normal. I looked up ( i was sitting on floor) noticed him wrestling with column and trying to remove nail in lock (C182) too far down strip to stop. got nail out, leaped over fence, decided to go under wires, then climbed out. Few choice words from jumpers.

Why opposite sense for trim? wind nose up nose goes up trim down nose down.

 

C206, canopy over tail and takes off elevator on that side. remaining half is jammed. pilot landed using trim. the tab was on the other side.

 

 

[Spin]

Why opposite sense for trim? wind nose up nose goes up trim down nose down..

Counterintuitive it may be, but it is true. The trim surface normally works by moving in opposite sense and deflects the control surface so as to achieve the desired change. If control surface is jammed, this cannot happen, so trim then acts as a mini elevator, but this requires you to use it in opposite direction to what is usual. Try it next time you're preflighting....

 

Now if the control linkage broke, that would be a whole different story:oh yeah:

 

 

[facthunter]

You've covered it. IF the horizontal stabiliser is the trim medium, it still works in the normal sense . Also if the control is restored suddenly you have NO problem. The Plane is just "IN TRIM". With the trim tab (elevator) when the elevator is frozen (Jammed) you could use the TAB, which is fixed usually to ONE elevator, in the opposite sense. It's pretty small and ineffective, but it's something. IF the control unjammed, you might be out of trim, but you should be easily able to control it except perhaps at high speeds in a larger aircraft. Sometimes power ON /OFF can be used for control for quicker response, but you need to know what you are doing. It is suggested this chap did try that. Nev

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Yep i picked that up in the traffic on the way home. And rigged a few in past.

 

 

[PapaFox]

Just getting a little side tracked... I can vouch for the strength of the 701's nose leg, after witnessing a prop strike (hard to imagine) onto the sealed rwy following an aborted takeoff. Damage to plane practically nil apart from a significantly smaller prop

 

 

[eightyknots]

Just getting a little side tracked... I can vouch for the strength of the 701's nose leg, after witnessing a prop strike (hard to imagine) onto the sealed rwy following an aborted takeoff. Damage to plane practically nil apart from a significantly smaller prop

Here is a hard landing with a CH-701 (and a bounce) and it didn't seem to harm the plane one bit!

 

 

 

[pylon500]

That's not a hard landing, THIS is a hard landing:bye: