"Icebound" wrote in message ...

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message m...
houstondan wrote:
reading stuff like yours is why i do the net groups. thanks for posting
that. would there have been any sense to "bumping" it on the runway??
planning not to put all the weight on it and just kinda bumping it then
pulling up to do another circuit with whatever new info you just
gained??


And what would that tell you. Frankly, unless there's something dangerous
(like something in the way on the runway), it's probably safer to continue
the landing and take the possible collapse. A gingerly executed landing
is going to be better than bumping things and taking off... I've seen
a plane land without the nosegear and I've seen one land without one of the
mains. While the first yielded a bunch of sparks and the second caused the
plane to go off into the dirt, both pilots walked away uninjured and without
too much damange to the plane either.

Half-way through the post, I thought Len was involved in this (with video):

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/u...?storyid=32215

from a day or so ago. Pretty standard 1-main-up landing.



Reminds me of the C-310 with the nose wheel unlocked. The guy did a number of flybys that confirmed that it was down but
not locked; it was just dangling there. They went off and tried 60° bank turns and other things to try and flick it
down, but no luck. They finally came in to land, a little hot, shut down the engines in the flair, sorta bounced it, and
the nose wheel flicked out, looked like it might stay, but then folded back. The nose settled down on the runway and
wore off a patch of aluminum maybe one foot long. Very minimal damage to the plane...