Sabre wheels up - video clip

[Spin]

The Sabre reportedly lost its nosewheel on rotation for take off, which was spotted by a second aircraft. Fortunately a very experienced microlight instructor on board, I'm told this was forced landing #37 for him! Anyhow they elected to land gear up, engine off. Although there are arguments for and against the latter step, they carried out a text book belly landing, which resulted in minimal damage apparently. Video here;

 

 

 

[facthunter]

Shutting the engine down when there is only one is debateable. IF you don't make the aerodrome it would be bad but if you get away with it and have the prop blades horizontal you save a bit of money. From an absolute good airmanship point of view the safety of the occupants must be a priority. Looking after the plane must come second. Nev

 

 

[Spin]

Shutting the engine down when there is only one is debateable.

Nev I'm curious, why would having more than one engine make any difference in this situation?

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

That looked to me pretty well 'text book.' As for stopping the engine, help reduce the need for a bulk strip of the engine, help reduce damage to the gear box. Could help prevent the aircraft swinging around if the prop hit the ground under power and dug in. May help prevent mount damage which in turn could damage things like fuel lines. Shutting down the engine and turning the fuel off would obviously be a help if the landing did not go as expected. Having a twin engine aircraft would only mean that there are two mixture levers to pull back to cut off instead of one. I watched a Chieftan do a wheels up and pilot was told by the 'experts' in the tower to land on the ashphalt and leave the engines running. Aircraft floated for ages and did not want to settle, when it did touch down the props banged away bent back before the aircraft had made contact lost that last bit of airspeed it needed to settle neatly it thumped on and the aircraft swung and slid off onto the grass under very little if any control aircraft received more damage than what it would have if it landed on grass with the engines stopped. With the aircraft swinging around there would be increased risk of injury especially head and neck. Obviously one would not shut down untill sure your touchdown point was well past the threshold. There should be very little difference flying the circuit other than where on final you shut down. final say must be the 'master and commanders' always.

 

 

[facthunter]

my point is the need to reach the field. You might not LIVE if you don't. Saving gearboxes etc is irrelevant in that context. It's a question of what you value most. IF you are sure that you will make it, (salt lake or similar) then there is no issue. A retracted U/C landing is very different from a normal one as there is lots more drag when you land with the gear down. For commercial reasons no-one practises gear up landings unless in a simulator. so the plane will float further with the gear up. IF the runway is short then this is a problem. Wouldn't it be nice therefore, to have go-around capability? You could easily muck up the approach without the "normal" drag and end up hot and high. as the plane is much cleaner. Spin I mentioned the two (or more) engines as a possibility where you might want to "save' one but the main thing is that the plane is capable of continued flight on ONE. You certainly complicate it by going assymetric and I don't recommend it. Idling engines do not put big loads on red. gears and from what I have seen blades bend/ break off fairly easily. The main aim is to land where you will have plenty of room and as slow as reasonably possible . This is limited by the fact that you are not advised to "hold off" and stall on, and have the rear hit first and throw the nose down at contact.

 

Also there is no rush. You still have a perfectly normal plane except for the wheels. Consider going somewhere more suitable, ie longer strip, more into wind, grass, more assistance available , even to burn most of the fuel off.etc. This is not the sort of problem that gets discussed in U/L circles as it is not broadly applicable, but we do have a few retactables, and no doubt there will be more. Nev

 

 

[Spin]

Thanks Nev, I see where you're coming from, although going asymmetric with the average light twin in the hopes of extending your glide or going around, sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting hurt. While I'm playing devils advocate though, I notice the reference to grass above. I've managed to avoid the necessity of landing sans undercarriage up until now, however more than one experienced aviator has suggested that wheels up on asphalt is preferable to grass as there is less chance of it catching, digging in and either flipping or spinning off laterally. All else being equal I think that would be my choice.

 

As regards this particular incident, the instructor is both experienced, and familiar with the aircraft and strip, so I'd say it was a reasonable course of action in the circumstances - he certainly did slide her on rather nicely, you could hear the the flaps brushing through the grass for a while before the belly touched and she went more nose down from the drag.

 

 

[facthunter]

Certainly Spin. Not all of what I am saying is a direct referrence to this incident. The reason I don't like asphalt, is ,you slide further, The hard bits get a lot hotter and therefore more chance of fire, with the inevitable sparks, If you do go to one side the aircraft is likely to yaw violently, when you encounter the grass, and end up going sideways and maybe more damage and risk to the occupants. They will certainly pull up quicker on grass. Nev

 

 

[eyecast]

The result of Engine Off on the Grass and Walking away, sounds and looked like if it isn't it should be Textbook.

 

 

[facthunter]

I don't know what "textbook" means in a flying context. There are so many considerations often that no ONE way should be suggested as a one size fits all solution. One factor is pilot experience and ability. If a procedure leaves NO room for error, it shouldn't be recommended for everybody. An informed decision taking into account all the pros and cons, works better than a prescribed rule. A wheels up landing is not something that you don't have time to prepare for. (Unlike an engine failure at 50 feet). Nev

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Because he lost his nosewheel after takeoff, it would be the best choice to land gear up. As stated he is an experienced UL instructor, and this was his 37th emerg landing (?).

 

Being that it was probabily a controlled situation, with time to look at and consider all options, I don't find it unusual or risky that he decided to perform a power-off, gear-up landing. I am assuming he was probabily familiar with the field, and had landed there before so was familiar with approach and strip length etc.

 

The key here of course in this particular incident, is that the pilot was highly experienced.

 

Shutting down and securing the engine overhead the field, and then making a safe circular and controlled descent to land, should be well within this pilots' capabilities, and as demonstrated appears to have certainly been the case.

 

He's certainly saved heaps by chosing that course of action, and I'm sure that he considered all his best options well, including his personal safety.

 

I know how negativly GA trained pilots view power-off arrivals, and stopped propellers, and I feel it's really their loss that it is not in their primary training agenda.

 

Anyone who has done it knows that most planes fly just fine with the prop stopped, in fact some fly better. It should be within every pilots' abilities to land an unpowered aircraft on a selected field everytime..

 

Who knows, you just may have to do it next flight.

 

After viewing the video a couple of times I would have been happy to offer him a 'well done' had I been there.......................................................................Maj..

 

 

[facthunter]

I would probably offer him a "well done", too. My point is that the procedure would not necessarily be right for a less experienced and competant pilot. I'm not trying to judge this pilot. I want others to be able to assess the situaton for themselves, by considering the factors involved. Having the prop stationary is one thing. The aircraft approaching with the gear up would probably vary the flying characteristics of the plane by a greater degree. I have flown U/L's with retract gear and they are very good gliders with the gear up..You really need to "dangle the dunlops" to get them down. .Nev

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

I hear what you say facthunter, but in this case he had no choice but to land gear up, as putting a nose leg on, less tire, would not be pretty, and could get pretty ugly at that speed. Of course every emergency can be quite different to the next, and one must be extremly flexible in dealing with a particular situation.

 

Of course we always get judged by our actions at a later time, and it is always good to actually have some options, which beats the hell out of having none !..................................maj...

 

 

[Spin]

Options?? Made me sit and consider what I would do if a nosewheel decided to part company with one of the (fixed gear) aircraft that I fly these days.

 

The Tecnam's stabilator is pretty effective and you can keep the nose up until the speed drops fairly low, but short of 20kts plus of wind on the nose, you're still going to be travelling at a couple of clicks when it drops to the ground. Depending on what remains of the strut, you may well be in for some unpleasantness on a soft surface:yikes:

 

Of course in the good old days when men were men and .....(fill in your own:oh yeah:), some clown would volunteer to ride on the bonnet of a handy Landrover and leap onto the tail plane whilst the pilot proceeded down the strip with enough power on to keep the nose up, causing the aircraft to slither to a halt on its tail skid. There was a well documented case at the airfield where I first trained, C150 flared and landed squarely on top of a Cherokee 140. The meeting of C150 nose strut and Piper propellor was not a happy one and both broke off, leaving the hapless Cessna to take power and stagger back into the air without the requisite trio of wheels. After some headscratching on the ground, an apprentice from the workshops volunteered (so they say) to give it a go. The Piper was cleared off the runway and they duly proceeded to try and match speeds. I believe they overestimated the old Jeeps acceleration first time around, but the exercise was brought to a successful conclusion, all within 900m of available runway.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

I hit a wallaby once during a touch and go on the Ingham runway. I had a canefarmer in the back for his first ride. I heard a bang just after lift-off, and thought it must have been a stick on the runway.

 

I got a tap on the shoulder with the ride pointing to the left wheel spat, which was now vertical instead of horizontal !. The 3/16" axel bolt had sheared when said wallaby impacted the left wheel.

 

My first reaction was to go up top and think about it a bit, but as it was close to last light I didn't have too much time.

 

I got the farmer to put his leg out and kick the spat back horizontal, which he did without too much fear on his face !.

 

I then stuck it as slow as I could on the grass with no problem, and we actually taxied back to the hangar. Pretty tough those Drifters. (Tougher than the large deceased wallaby on the center line) The farmer hasn't come back for another ride, which I can't understand:roflmao:...............................................................Maj...

 

 

[frank marriott]

"I know how negativly GA trained pilots view power-off arrivals, and stopped propellers, and I feel it's really their loss that it is not in their primary training agenda."

 

Interresting comment Ross - must be a different GA licence to the one I got - This GA V RAA stuff is crazy, I fly both and don't change my flying because of what is painted on as a rego.

 

Frank

 

 

[sfGnome]

The thing that struck me about the video was the proximity of photographers to the strip. Given that the plane skewing and spearing off the runway to one side was a strong possibility, I wonder how fast they thought they could run??

 

 

[kaz3g]

Because he lost his nosewheel after takeoff, it would be the best choice to land gear up....Maj..

Wouldn't happen in a TW aircraft!

 

kaz

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Frank Marriot,

 

I have also done a fair bit of GA flying with a fine GA instructor, and I hold a GA PPL with NVFR . At no point during my GA instruction was it suggested we do an engine-off full landing, either by the GA instructor or any subsiquent check instructor. We would often do emergency similated landings with the engine at idle, which just isn't the same, as you are not commited to landing, and the aircraft reponse is completely different.

 

I don't foster any RAA vs GA animosity, a pilot is a pilot. But when someone tries to indicate that a guy landing an RAA aircraft after choosing to switch the engine off as unsafe, then I must disagree. He is simply exercising the privilages of his license, and using his best judgement for the situation.

 

I was taught power-off landing techniques by my UL instructors as par for course. You needed that ability back then as the early engines did quit on occasions. (Some still do !)

 

I did my first three unexpected full deadstick landings in my first 200 hours of flying, and I have made a point of keeping the skills current ever since. When the noise goes silent, you are now in a glider, and you had better know how to fly one !.

 

I can tell you from first-hand experience that when looking at a stopped prop for the first time, is not the best time to learn just how good your plane handles and glides, (or dosn't).

 

It is dissappointing that many GA instructors I have encountered over the years, would view it as "dangerous and reckless operation of an aircraft". Possibly the same folks who view a good side-slip as a dangerous manouver also..How many power-off full landings (not Idle) have you done Frank ?.......................Maj...

 

sfgnome:....... I thought exactly the same thing myself, when watching the video............Maj...

 

 

[maddogmorgan]

A beautiful landing indeed. I was taught deadstick landings, spins, spiral dives as a par for the course during my training....It is all very well for us to pontificate from the safety of our computers. I actually think this is a good thing as it gets us all thinking, but, Remember to respect the man (or woman!) in the moment. At the end of the day he did what he is supposed to do...stay alive.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Well said Maddog.........are you cyclone ready ?........................................................Maj...

 

 

[maddogmorgan]

Hey Maj, Don't mean to hijack the thread, but as ready as can be mate. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best. I've only been here 2.5 years, spent most of my life in Townsville so am pretty used to them by now. Also heading around Oz on the bike in april for 3 months, will be back home in the Ville mid april, let me know if you're free for a beer.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Should be around, always up for a beer and a chat. Enjoy your trip ok......................................Maj...

 

 

[frank marriott]

Ross

 

One in a single and one in a twin. Obviously depends on where (and possibly when) one does their training.

 

Frank

 

 

[Exadios]

Very nice landing. I'm not impressed with all the people standing at the side of the runway though. If any thing went wrong they would have no place to go.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The twin must have been interesting Frank, but probabily no difference once they have stopped....................................................................Maj...