Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Landing with a gear problem.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Land on all available gear. Why would the airplane type/configuration make a difference ? If you're in a twin prop, why would you chose to bang up both props and engines and have belly damage when you might be able to get by with damage to one prop/engine and a wingtip.

Same for wing-mounted turbojet engines. Definitely the case with aft-fuselage-mounted turbojet engines.

Maybe I've overlooked something in this discussion ?
 
bafanguy said:
Definitely the case with aft-fuselage-mounted turbojet engines.

Maybe I've overlooked something in this discussion ?

Nope. Not for me, at least.

Here's what my checklist says:

Both main gear up Nose up: LAND
Both main gear down Nose up: LAND
Both main gear up Nose down: EJECT
Only one main gear down Nose up OR down: EJECT

(Of course, if you have a "must eject" condition, try to at least achieve a landable configuration before electing for a controlled bailout... i.e.: with only one main and the nose gear down, try to pull them all up and then belly it in.)


I agree with my guidance. I don't want to cartwheel at 150KIAS. No thank you. To hell with the aircraft/paint job...I'm going to belly it in with full flaps and speedbrakes extended.
 
Make low passes down the runway while your buddy riding in the back of a truck tries to extend the gear manually. Repeat until successful or you run out of fuel.
 
nosehair said:


Doesn't matter. Belly in. On the grass if you can. Pull the mixtures on short final as soon as you are sure you have the runway made and are not going to overshoot. Bump the props parallel to the runway, switches and fuel off, and slide it on. Little or no damage to the belly.

Try it with one or two down, and yeah, maybe all those variables come into play, but still the damage is worse over-all regardless of skill and conditions.

Obviously an unqualified, uneducated guess.

Other than water, grass is probably the worst surface for a gear up landing. The soil gets in every seam and creates a tremendous force, which shears rivets, peels back sheet metal skins and bends bulkheads, not to mention what it does to wing attach fittings when you catch a wing tip. The smoother and harder the surface, the less damage will be done.
 
pilotmiketx said:
Other than water, grass is probably the worst surface for a gear up landing. The soil gets in every seam and creates a tremendous force, which shears rivets, peels back sheet metal skins and bends bulkheads, not to mention what it does to wing attach fittings when you catch a wing tip. The smoother and harder the surface, the less damage will be done.

Yep, you are right, my man. I had totally forgotten about that. I've seen it, but forgotten about it.
 
Fury220 said:
Nope. Not for me, at least.

Here's what my checklist says:

Both main gear up Nose up: LAND
Both main gear down Nose up: LAND
Both main gear up Nose down: EJECT
Only one main gear down Nose up OR down: EJECT

(Of course, if you have a "must eject" condition, try to at least achieve a landable configuration before electing for a controlled bailout... i.e.: with only one main and the nose gear down, try to pull them all up and then belly it in.)


I agree with my guidance. I don't want to cartwheel at 150KIAS. No thank you. To hell with the aircraft/paint job...I'm going to belly it in with full flaps and speedbrakes extended.

Not everyone has the "eject" option. I've not flown an air carrier airplane where belly landing was recommended unless, of course, none of the gear came down.

The only case of this that comes to mind ( and I can't swear to all the details ) was a 727 in MIA some years ago. None of the gear would come down. The crew made a textbook belly landing with congrats to all concerned until it was discovered that there was no gear crank onboard in the airplane. This prevented any attempt to manually lower the gear.

ooops....those preflights are tricky...
 
Last edited:
Flying a Twin Commander - Gear up, belly in. The props/engines won't touch the surface, the fuel is in between the engines, so no tipping over/fire hazard, nice flat bottom, just watch yourself getting out, might strain a hamstring.
 
Land with what you have. In most civilian airplanes, you have a substantial amount of control authority to hold the wing with the affected landing gear off the runway.

I actually had something like this happen to me. Was in a C172RG, and upon return to the home airport, the right main did not extend. I was giving instruction at the time, so we followed the checklist, did a fly by to check the nose (C172 has only one light for gear down), and flew around for a while thinking about our options. Other people have used the truck idea, but I had my student fly, opened the door (with my seatbelt securely fastned), and reached down to grab the landing gear and yank it down. A month later some clown lands with the gear up. so much for saving the airplane...
 
bafanguy said:
Not everyone has the "eject" option. I've not flown an air carrier airplane where belly landing was recommended unless, of course, none of the gear came down.

I hear ya on that. I consider the "EJECT" option a last ditch option. If I can, in any way, achieve a "landable configuration," I'm happy with a belly-in.

Of course, there are different considerations for different types of aircraft.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top