Those Crazy Sweedish Dash Drivers! (gear collapse)

[lineflyer1]

Your posts do not apply to the topic. Stick to the situation at hand. How often do props not feather when commanded? Give me a break. All four of the turboprops I have flown feather in one second or less, consistantly, when commanded. Three of those failed to feather, the EMB-120 does not. The 120 didn't fail me, neither did my FO.

Actually my posts have everything to do with the topic at hand. Every emergency you have, you need to consider the hypotheticals and the possible out comes of your actions.

Now if you had stated that in the traffic pattern, they might have shutdown the right engine and feathered it before landing I might agree that would be a prudent action. But to shutdown and feather both engines in the flare I just cannot agree with.

So, please explain what your little mechanical issue was that you felt it neccassry to shut both engines down in the landing flare so we can all have a better understanding of your thought process.

After all, you said you are done with the QRH at some point and relying on technique's and skills that have been instilled in you over the years. I for one would like a better understanding of you thought process.

 

[The_Russian]

Hey Russian! You wanna know what it's like to land a DHC8 with no hydraulics? It's been done at Horizon before following a massive engine fire. You can check out the results here:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001213X25438&key=1

The airplane was totalled when it hit the jetway and several people were hurt, one critically. It's by the grace of God and the skill of the FA in evacuating everyone that nobody was killed.

This is the same incident in which the hyd lines were burned through. Nice try, but it doesn't apply. Keep fishing.

Not to mention that a Q400 gets a big portion of its lift from propwash over the wing & flaps and landing without power results in a scary hard landing, and using pitch to get the oh-so-soft landing you demand would break the tail off the airplane!

So does every other multi with engines on the wings.

Now go back to telling us how to fly a B1900 you've bought a job on, and shut the he|| up on telling us how to fly Q400s/DHC8s when you know nothing about the airplane.

The original post was on technique not specific to one aircraft. And guess what? I didn't buy my job! HAHAHAHAHA!

 

[The_Russian]

Actually my posts have everything to do with the topic at hand. Every emergency you have, you need to consider the hypotheticals and the possible out comes of your actions.

Thats affirm. However, you cannot account for things that cannot be forseen. Your FO will do a precise job and the props will feather. If they don't (they will), you tried. You are going to crash anyway if the gear isn't down.

Now if you had stated that in the traffic pattern, they might have shutdown the right engine and feathered it before landing I might agree that would be a prudent action. But to shutdown and feather both engines in the flare I just cannot agree with.

The other prop may make ground contact and catch fire or fragment the prop. The engine will also create thrust working in the direction of the turning moment caused by any ground friction on the airframe. Not such a good idea because this is something that will happen.

So, please explain what your little mechanical issue was that you felt it neccassry to shut both engines down in the landing flare so we can all have a better understanding of your thought process.

Nosewheel unlocked emergency landing.

After all, you said you are done with the QRH at some point and relying on technique's and skills that have been instilled in you over the years. I for one would like a better understanding of you thought process.

Refer to the Airplane Flying Handbook and the AIM.

 

[lineflyer1]

Thats affirm. However, you cannot account for things that cannot be forseen. Your FO will do a precise job and the props will feather. If they don't (they will), you tried. You are going to crash anyway if the gear isn't down.

The other prop may make ground contact and catch fire or fragment the prop. The engine will also create thrust working in the direction of the turning moment caused by any ground friction on the airframe. Not such a good idea because this is something that will happen.

Nosewheel unlocked emergency landing.

Refer to the Airplane Flying Handbook and the AIM.

How is the left prop even going to come close to striking the ground. The left gear was down and locked?

With the left engine running you would have reverse thrust to help offset the drag created by the right wing contacting the ground.

In your scenerio I might agree with feathering both engines after touchdown while holding the nose wheel off the ground. But not with only one main gear not indicating down and locked.

 

[DashTrash400]

This is the same incident in which the hyd lines were burned through. Nice try, but it doesn't apply. Keep fishing.

*Sigh* You're not REALLY this ignorant, are you? Please tell me you're just egging us on. There was no hydraulic pressure to run anything that requires hydraulic pressure. The same applies when both engines are shut down on the Q400. Simple as that. The two ways to get hydraulic pressure with one engine shut down - the PTU and the Stby Hyd Pump - are both dependant on the other engine running. Trust me, I fly the airplane. I've run the scenario in the sim with left engine shut down and right AC gen fails. You lose all of your #1 hydraulics cuz there's no AC to run the standby hyd pump. No inverters on standby batt busses or crap. OK? Same end result as 819PH.

 

[The_Russian]

*Sigh* You're not REALLY this ignorant, are you? Please tell me you're just egging us on. There was no hydraulic pressure to run anything that requires hydraulic pressure. The same applies when both engines are shut down on the Q400. Simple as that. The two ways to get hydraulic pressure with one engine shut down - the PTU and the Stby Hyd Pump - are both dependant on the other engine running. Trust me, I fly the airplane. I've run the scenario in the sim with left engine shut down and right AC gen fails. You lose all of your #1 hydraulics cuz there's no AC to run the standby hyd pump. No inverters on standby batt busses or crap. OK? Same end result as 819PH.

Ok, so here's my point:

Unsafe gear in a prop, shut the engines down before you start skidding across the pavement. You won't need any hydraulics with the friction you'll be getting from the runway surface. If you flew a stabilized approach and landing, you won't need too much (if any) rudder at that point.

If the gear doesn't collapse, you slow to a nice stop on the runway assisted by aerodynamic braking and emergency brake at low speed. If you picked a suitable airport, you should have no problem rolling to a smooth stop in time.

 

[Wiggums]

If you flew a stabilized approach and landing, you won't need too much (if any) rudder at that point.

You don't need rudder or nose wheel steering when you rollout on a crosswind landing (as seen in the video)? Don't worry about that whole weathervaning thing I guess...

 

[lineflyer1]

Ok, so here's my point:

Unsafe gear in a prop, shut the engines down before you start skidding across the pavement. You won't need any hydraulics with the friction you'll be getting from the runway surface. If you flew a stabilized approach and landing, you won't need too much (if any) rudder at that point.

If the gear doesn't collapse, you slow to a nice stop on the runway assisted by aerodynamic braking and emergency brake at low speed. If you picked a suitable airport, you should have no problem rolling to a smooth stop in time.

Nose gear unsafe, I see your point if you are flying an aircraft where the props would contact the ground.

Gear up landing, I see that as well.

One main gear unsafe, sorry I disagree with shutting both engines down. One perhaps, both never.

I would rather have the systems available from one engine.

 

[The_Russian]

Nose gear unsafe, I see your point if you are flying an aircraft where the props would contact the ground.

Gear up landing, I see that as well.

One main gear unsafe, sorry I disagree with shutting both engines down. One perhaps, both never.

I would rather have the systems available from one engine.

No problem. Do what you need to do to make the landing as safe as you can. Thanks for the discussion. The class I am in is quite boring, and I needed the debate!

:nuts:

 

[lineflyer1]

I love it when people Monday Night Q/B and criticize.

If you were not in the plane you do not have all the facts to ascertain whether the judgment calls were good or bad.

Was it a concrete runway or asphalt. Watching the video I almost believe it was asphalt. It's like the right gear dug into the pavement and the airplane took an immediate right turn.

No amount of braking, reverse thrust or rudder could have stopped it from turning if the gear did indeed dig into asphalt.

 

[lineflyer1]

No problem. Do what you need to do to make the landing as safe as you can. Thanks for the discussion. The class I am in is quite boring, and I needed the debate!

:nuts:

Debate and discussion are good. Sometimes we can actually learn from different perspectives.

To criticize another crews actions having never flown the aircraft is something I try to avoid. There are way too many variables in an abnormal situation and way too many different systems setups.

In all circumstances one needs to reflect on whether we are adding to a safe outcome or injecting more variables into the game.

I have come to the belief that if something breaks in flight and the aircraft can be safely flown, don't try to be a hero and fix it while flying. Let maintenance look at it on the ground. Especially flight controls, ie. stab trim, flaps, spoilers, ailerons, yaw dampners. You may just may your problems worse.

Oh yea, and electrical problems!

 

[LR25]

What I am talking about has nothing to do with the QRH.

Not my words, but yours.

Heres the problem with your way of thinking.

If you bend up an airplane, because you decided that you were going to depart from the QRH, or go outside the aircrafts capabilities becuase of "your" precieved tecnique seemed to be the best solution, you will most likely never fly for a 121 operation again. And with your hell bent attitude on what you think is right wrong, you may not even hold a commercial license after the full review. But thats only if everything you did resulted in a costly (dollar amount) amount of damage, or if you killed, or maimed people becuase of something you could have prevented by following proven precedures, this is a worst case senario.

Best case is, everything worked out, and you become the hero, you follow what I'm getting at?

All were talking about here, is a gear problem that may or may have been fualty.

But, the simple fact remains, whether you are a DASH expert or not, if you only have AC powered pumps, which will be lost with no motors running, no rudder because the pumps are not running, who is going to deadstick the DASH in this case? And if you did, and the end result was the exact same that did happen to them, they wont even be able to fly rubber dog sh!t to Hong Kong......can we both aggree on that? Please say yes.

I do believe that we will all be well versed in DHC-8 hydrualics by the time this is all through, so if we can all learn something from this, I guess its worth the time to debate.

 

[atrdriver]

All aircraft certified under Part 25 must meet the same conditions. While performance may be different, all aircraft fly the same. The same overall technique and airmenship must be used to pilot them. Refer to the AIM and FAA AFH.

This is an emergency. The airframe will most likely be totaled if it doesn't need major repairs. People were injured as a result of this crews decision to use poor technique.

They may have no manual reversion, but they require a standby system. If the primary is mechanical, then there must be an electical hydraulic system or a manual reversion. An electic backup hydraulic system can pressurize any hydraulic system for more than enough time to stop an aircraft IF the gear does not collapse as expected.

And again, you show that you don't know what you are talking about. For example, on an ATR if you feather the props you lose all hydraulics if the gear handle is not in the down position. If you are attempting a belly landing where is the gear handle going to be? Yes, this is an emergency. Why on earth would you intentionally make a bad situation worse by failing both engines? Sorry, that just doesn't add up.

 

[Captzaahlie]

Might I suggest "Crow?"

Crow or maybe another bullsh1t sandwhich perhaps?

Sig, Wsurf stop it my sides are hurting from the laughter! I owe you guys a cold one next time we get stuck on an overnight together.......
Keep up the good work! I'll try to get a link to all the dash 8 systems here for ruskie so he can redesign the airplane for DeHavilland........ wish i had time to do it now!

 

[The_Russian]

My point is that the systems have absolutely nothing to do with the technique. Everyone is so obsessed with the QRH and systems that they don't see the point. This is basic stuff folks. Secure the engines prior to impact, touch down smooth, and hold the bad side up as long as possible.

 

[Singlecoil]

My point is that the systems have absolutely nothing to do with the technique. Everyone is so obsessed with the QRH and systems that they don't see the point. This is basic stuff folks. Secure the engines prior to impact, touch down smooth, and hold the bad side up as long as possible.

...and if the gear doesn't collapse, now all you have to control the plane is the rudder in the standby mode and the emergency brake handle with no antiskid. You'll probably blow a tire since you've never once used the emergency brake and don't know how hard to pull it.

The probable cause of that NTSB report would read:
The failure of all four main landing gear tires due to skidding/friction with the runway surface.
Related factor: The deactivation of all hydraulic systems including antiskid and normal braking by the pilot in command.

I get it now. You are either a flamebaiter or one of "those that will" out of the "those that have and those that will" equation.

 

[Flooder305]

I'm going to say a prayer tonight. One that I never work at the same place as The Russian, Two that I or my family or anyone I care about at all never fly with anyone as arrogant and incompetent as she appears here, and three that God give her a good wake-up call somehow before she ends up playing hero in the graveyard.

God save the future of American aviation if we're issuing pilot certificates to someone like this.

 

[The_Russian]

...and if the gear doesn't collapse, now all you have to control the plane is the rudder in the standby mode and the emergency brake handle with no antiskid. You'll probably blow a tire since you've never once used the emergency brake and don't know how hard to pull it.

With proper planning you can perform the landing with ease. You forgot to add aerodynamic braking in there, homey. I think I can figure out how to use it just fine.

The probable cause of that NTSB report would read:
The failure of all four main landing gear tires due to skidding/friction with the runway surface.
Related factor: The deactivation of all hydraulic systems including antiskid and normal braking by the pilot in command.

What NTSB report? For blown tires? Give me a break! Read NTSB 830, please.

I get it now. You are either a flamebaiter or one of "those that will" out of the "those that have and those that will" equation.

Wrong. Get off the bandwagon and start using your head. Read my posts, do not re-interpret what I say.

 

[The_Russian]

I'm going to say a prayer tonight. One that I never work at the same place as The Russian, Two that I or my family or anyone I care about at all never fly with anyone as arrogant and incompetent as she appears here, and three that God give her a good wake-up call somehow before she ends up playing hero in the graveyard.

God save the future of American aviation if we're issuing pilot certificates to someone like this.

Thanks for this completely unprofessional post. You obviously haven't the slightest idea of what I am talking about. No one is being a cowboy here, we are talking safety.

 

[atrdriver]

With proper planning you can perform the landing with ease. You forgot to add aerodynamic braking in there, homey. I think I can figure out how to use it just fine.

I seem to remember a 737 a few years ago that tried to use aero braking (against procedures) and ran off the end of the runway. Aero braking is fine for an F-15, not so much for a 121 aircraft. Also, I don't think that you have any idea how much braking you get from having those props flat, which of course you would lose in your scenerio.