Mooney successfully belly's in

Point taken. I think I'll have to read that book that tells you how to
crash an airplane.

Rick Durden wrote:
Dan,

The major reason for NOT shutting the engine down on a gear up landing
is that, after searches of accident reports, NO ONE has been hurt or
killed in a gear up landing in a civilian airplane since World War II
where the pilot left the engine running. When the pilot attempted to
shut down the engine(s), there were a number of serious injury and
fatal accidents.

One has to ask the question as to why a pilot who has an emergency (a
gear up landing) would willingly create yet another emergency (total
power loss), especially when he has never, ever practiced either one?
How many pilots have done prop stopped glides? Or have even gone
through the procedure to shut down and stop a prop on a single? By
the time you have slowed enough to stop the prop (if you can), the
descent rate at that speed has become massive...then, the pilot has to
stuff the nose down, further increasing the descent rate, develop
enough speed to either glide or flare and hope to hit the runway. Too
many die in the attempt. Guess they have to be thought of as a great
pilot for saving an insurance company some money (if it does so), and
there are always some at his funeral who will say what a great pilot
he was, even if he had just demonstrated that he lacked basic
judgment.

All the best,
Rick

Dan Truesdell wrote in message ...

I saw that in the Valley News yesterday. I hate to see a broken plane,
but was glad he walked away. A couple of thoughts crossed my mind:

1) Why didn't he go to BTV? Closer to Sugarbush, much longer runway
(with the wind blowing down it if it was from the Northeast). Military
crash units on the field (I presume).

2) Why didn't he shut down the engine prior to landing?

I'm not trying to be critical. I do recognize that I'm making these
observations from the comfort of my desk, not from a cockpit where I was
just slammed into the ground hard enough to break my landing gear.

wrote:

A Mooney pilot had to belly in his airplane Saturday at Lebanon
airport here in NH. All I know is from the newspaper's story. He had
flown up from Massachusetts and apparently was attempting to land at
Waitsfield airport, which is squeezed in between ridges in Vermont's
Green Mountains. I've flown by Waitsfield, it's a single runway
airfield where glider operations are popular during the summer months.
The two ridges form a deep valley and the airfield sits right between
them.

Saturday was an extremely windy day after the passage of a cold front
on Friday night, with winds generally from the northwest. Since the
mountainline in this area (if I'm remembering correctly) generally
runs from from southwest to northeast, this means that the winds would
be blowing over the peaks and then down the windward slope into the
valley.

The pilot reported that while he was flaring to touchdown, a gust
slammed him onto the runway damaging his landing gear. I gather that
he knew right away that the landing gear was damaged. He did not
attempt to continue the landing at Waitsfield.

He flew from Waitsfield to Lebanon and did several fly-by's while
attempting to lower the gear. Only one main lowered, which was
confirmed by the tower. Unable to lower both mains, the pilot elected
to retract the gear and land on his belly.

The landing was uneventful, although the three bladed prop was bent
back on all tips and there must have been damage to the belly.

The pilot, who was alone, was not hurt in the landing.

Corky Scott





--
Remove "2PLANES" to reply.

(Rick Durden) wrote
How many pilots have done prop stopped glides? Or have even gone
through the procedure to shut down and stop a prop on a single?

All of my students and I personally, turned my MiniMax into a "deadstick"
(no starter installed) glider on the final landing of each day. As a
result, the day that my prop decided to depart from the hub, the event
turned into a "non-event". Never did find the Prop! :-(

Bob Moore

wrote

Someone posted either here, or perhaps another group, that if the
engine is not making power when a prop strike occurs, then engine tear
down is not necessarily mandated. Don't know how you'd check the
engine to make sure though.

Corky Scott

That was talking about the large radials, with their stocky, strong con rods
and crank. Opposed engines still rate a teardown, as I recall.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.692 / Virus Database: 453 - Release Date: 5/28/2004

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:17:09 -0400, Jack wrote:



Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Dan Truesdell wrote in news:40BCCA76.8090409
@ceaPLsofAtwNarEe.cSom:



All correct. One thing you could have done was just switch off the magnetos
rather than the mixture control. This will shut down the engine faster, and

Depending on the engine that can still leave fuel going to the
cylinders.

might cause the prop to stop too when the mags are grounded. Since you won't
be restarting the engine anytime soon, there is no reason to not stop the
engine with the magnetos.

When I pull the mixture, it's like a switch. No slowing, it just
quits.

Actually that is a good time to reach down and turn off the gas.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger Halstead wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:17:09 -0400, Jack wrote:



Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Dan Truesdell wrote in news:40BCCA76.8090409
@ceaPLsofAtwNarEe.cSom:



All correct. One thing you could have done was just switch off the magnetos
rather than the mixture control. This will shut down the engine faster, and

Depending on the engine that can still leave fuel going to the
cylinders.

Right. That's why the normal shutdown procedure is to use the mixture. An
airplane engine continues to move fuel into the cylinders after it is shutdown
without starving it of gas, in no small part due to the big prop helping to spin
it around for a bit.



might cause the prop to stop too when the mags are grounded. Since you won't
be restarting the engine anytime soon, there is no reason to not stop the
engine with the magnetos.

When I pull the mixture, it's like a switch. No slowing, it just
quits.

Actually that is a good time to reach down and turn off the gas.

Agreed.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
If the engine won't stop with the mixture cut off, it won't stop with
the
mags grounded.

Not necessarily true.

What makes you say that? What motivating force are the magnetos providing
that keep the engine windmilling with just the mixture cut off, and which is
absent when you ground the mags?

No motivating force, however the mag switch in most planes works by grounding
(short circuiting) the magnetos, not opening a circuit. A grounded magneto has
a much greater load than a magneto happily humming around producing a spark.

"Jack" wrote in message
...
No motivating force, however the mag switch in most planes works by
grounding
(short circuiting) the magnetos, not opening a circuit. A grounded
magneto has
a much greater load than a magneto happily humming around producing a
spark.

Are you seriously trying to claim that the additional load will make the
difference between the windmilling engine stopping or not? (Even assuming
your claim of increased load due to grounding is valid...seems to me, the
load is caused by the generation of electricity, which happens either way,
to the same degree).

Pete