Bubbleboy Posted September 22, 2014 Posted September 22, 2014 Just drove past Armidale Airport and looks like a plane has landed on it's belly. Bit hard to see but Ambos and Firies there. Scotty
Camel Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 http://www.armidaleexpress.com.au/story/2578123/breaking-plane-down-at-armidale-airport/?cs=469
Guest ozzie Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Why does this model need full power to taxy?
dazza 38 Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 I think that Lancair had a very short ground roll 1 1
rankamateur Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Another retractable pilot graduated from "those that will" to "those that have". 1 3 2
DrZoos Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 There are those who have retractables that forgot to lower the gear and those that will... I paid extra for fixed gear for a reason... 10 knots never equals $30000 1
av8vfr Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 Everyone has heard the "those that haven't, will" scenario. Yet I bet that there are heaps (including me) that run the landing drill and there is no problem.. How many get the "mixture rich" wrong and the engine won't start.. not a problem cause you are still on the ground but do a second take and they are away..
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 There are those who have retractables that forgot to lower the gear and those that will...I paid extra for fixed gear for a reason... 10 knots never equals $30000 Tends to be more expensive than that, in a Lancair of that generation, because sliding along the bitumen tends to abrade the wing main spar cap. 1
frank marriott Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 There are those who have retractables that forgot to lower the gear and those that will...I paid extra for fixed gear for a reason... 10 knots never equals $30000 Some people are more suited to road transportation
Admin Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 Come on guys, how do you know it wasn't mechanical failure and the pilot couldn't do a thing about it and perhaps should be congratulated for the landing
Geoff13 Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 Good grief Ian you wouldnt expect these guys to wait for the facts would you? That could stop a perfectly good character assasination. Cheers Geoff13 1 1
dlegg Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 Come on guys, how do you know it wasn't mechanical failure and the pilot couldn't do a thing about it and perhaps should be congratulated for the landing Because then these pilots couldn't display their intrinsic deeply rooted aviation retractable knowledge and just prefer to jump to conclusions anyway. It WAS mechanical failure.....
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 Any retractable- gear aircraft has the potential for a gear-up landing, for a variety of causes apart from pilot error. What surprises me is that so few of them incorporate a rub-strip or two on their belly*, to reduce the damage; or leave a part of the main wheels extended. But no, they seem to want to retract the gear sideways, and pull it all the way in. The small gain in performance from that, over the way Douglas did it in the DC-3, is important if you are actually in combat, where every ounce of speed counts - or if you are flying a high-altitude spyplane, where the drag may cost a bit of service ceiling. But in a recreational aircraft? * The Boulton-Paul Balliol advanced trainer had a sprung skid incorporated in its fuselage; one of the very few whose designers seem to have thought about this. It reminds me of the pattern of aircraft ownership that emerged amongst well-heeled owners in the '60s - their first aircraft was similar to what they trained on; the second was a retractable, with two engines for the really affluent ones, and the third one was single engine, fixed gear, but with sufficient disposable load to be useful - e.g. Cessna 206 or Cherokee six. One of the things one needs to watch for, in a retractable, is that no fuel drain valves project where they are liable to be damaged in a wheels-up landing. That's a requirement for certificated aircraft. 1 1
facthunter Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 In reality if you damage the nosewheel on a lighty, it is at least as serious as a wheel up. Most U/L's have a barely strong enough nosewheel to do a minimum job of it, so the plane has to be treated accordingly with the way it is handled. If you make having the gear down an important enough item you are less likely to transgress.. If you forget it, your situational awareness is not up to it, is it? Nev
Roundsounds Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 Dafydd, I'm pretty sure the Sportavia RF-5B Sperber motor gilder was also fitted with a couple if wear strips on the belly. There was one base at my local gliding club several years ago and I recall the strips were used on more than one occasion. The Yak 52 will also run happily on retracted gear, resulting in minor damage to flaps and often the leading edge of a wing will cop a ding from a broken propellor blade.
Old Koreelah Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 I am one of those who was grateful that the Blanic doesn't fully retract its wheel. 1
rankamateur Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 Because then these pilots couldn't display their intrinsic deeply rooted aviation retractable knowledge and just prefer to jump to conclusions anyway.It WAS mechanical failure..... Don't they have a little wheel to wind the gear down if it fails to function, or does that only work in the movies?
dunlopdangler Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 ^^^^ in the case of the Lancair, you have a dump valve to release the hydraulic pressure holding the gear up and the gear "freefalls" into place (supposed to anyhow). Don't know what happened here, maybe something seized..
DrZoos Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 Frank Iv never seen a fixed gear aircraft land with its wheels up...sure some have done a modification as they landed.. But i just couldnt justify the risk of failure by pilot or hardware, for the sake of 10 knots ... Especially given 99 % of our flying is local or short range The hassle of extra maint, extra checks , extra risk just cant be justified in my opinion a recreational aircraft, unless you where regularly commuting or covering long distances.. 1 1
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 I am one of those who was grateful that the Blanic doesn't fully retract its wheel. You're very far from being the only one! 1
red750 Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 ^^^^ in the case of the Lancair, you have a dump valve to release the hydraulic pressure holding the gear up and the gear "freefalls" into place (supposed to anyhow). PA28R has the same system. 1
facthunter Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 If your plane flys at less than 130 knots a retract doesn't justify its cost. The thing about drag reduction , it works for every minute you fly, like weight reduction or fuel economy, It's a plus all the time. Nev
facthunter Posted September 29, 2014 Posted September 29, 2014 If your plane flys at less than 130 knots a retract doesn't justify its cost. The thing about drag reduction , it works for every minute you fly, like weight reduction or fuel economy. It's a plus all the
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now