If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Nose gear failure
Technical question regarding gear extension mechanisms:
Our flight school's Seneca had a nosewheel collapse today during rollout after a landing. The instructor, pilot, and witnesses agree that all of the airplanes 5 landings were good; none hard and certainly no nosewheel landings. The lights were all green. Examination shows that the rod end on the gear extension mechanism was severely bent and sheared. No other structural damage was visible inside the gear well. The FAA inspector's first reaction was a rigging problem, but the Chief Mechanic of the flight school convinced him that a hard landing had done the damage. There was no indication when the hard landing might have occurred….could easily have been long before the one where it collapsed, so no one is blaming the instructor. The instructor, who is a big iron A&P, doesn't believe that a hard landing could do the damage indicated. He thinks that the rod end is a flimsy piece of metal because it doesn't really bear any load; its job is just to press against the over-center link to make sure it stays over center. The load of a hard landing would be borne by other structures in the assembly and would likely show damage. He suspects a rigging problem as well. However, since the mechanics making the inspection are the ones who performed the rigging, they have little motivation to mention it. Anyone have any knowledge of these mechanisms that might lend support to one of these competing theories? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Greg Esres wrote:
: Technical question regarding gear extension mechanisms: : Our flight school's Seneca had a nosewheel collapse today during : rollout after a landing. The instructor, pilot, and witnesses agree : that all of the airplanes 5 landings were good; none hard and : certainly no nosewheel landings. The lights were all green. If you look at the UK's AAIB (Air Accident Investigation Branch) they have innumerable reports on nose-gear collapse on Seneca airplanes. The general conclusion is just as you postulate later: the overcenter link didn't. It seems this is a weak point of the Seneca landing gears. The usual reason the AAIB comes up with for the gear collapse is "mis-rigged". You might want to peruse some of their accident reports, they're all on the web, though I can't recall the address. -- Aaron Coolidge (N9376J) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Greg Esres wrote: The instructor, who is a big iron A&P, doesn't believe that a hard landing could do the damage indicated. He thinks that the rod end is a flimsy piece of metal because it doesn't really bear any load; its job is just to press against the over-center link to make sure it stays over center. The load of a hard landing would be borne by other structures in the assembly and would likely show damage. The whole point of the 'over center' part is that briefly the gear is actually extended slighty farther than the locked position. Maybe it was misrigged so that (on that particular landing) the rod only pushed it to the maximum extension point (which would give you your green light) then on landing the pushrod would have to bear the whole force as the gear tried to collapse. It would probably be hard to see it on jacks. There's no force pushing against the gear to prevent it from extending (in fact gravity is probably helping when the plane is on jacks). -- Ben Jackson http://www.ben.com/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
You might want to peruse some of their accident reports
GREAT suggestion! The UK does a far more thorough investigation than the FAA does. One accident they examine in great detail is almost identical to the one that occurred today. I'm going to pass on the report to our Chief Flight Instructor, just in case he has any reservations about the instructor involved. Nowhere in the report does it suggest that a hard landing could be a factor. Thanks! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I can't answer your specific question, but I can chime in to say that when I
was training in a Seneca, I had a terrible time avoiding slamming the nose wheel down on virtually every landing. I've never flown an airplane that was so hard on the nose gear. Unless you carried a great deal of extra speed into the landing, and immediately lowered the nose after touchdown, it would slam down VERY hard during the rollout as you tried to hold it off. Given the kind of abuse the nose gear likely takes, I would strongly suspect long-term wear/tear and fatigue, rather than mis-rigging. But I have no specific knowledge of how the Seneca nose gear works. - Mark |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
then on landing the pushrod would have to bear the whole force as
the gear tried to collapse. That's one possibility the British report suggested, lower downlock too short. Looking at the schematics, seems like a hard landing would move the link to more over-center, putting tension, not compression, on the rod. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I had a terrible time avoiding slamming the nose
wheel down on virtually every landing. Yes, the Seneca is challenging in this respect, which is why this explanation is likely to find receptive listeners. However, it appears that a vertical hard landing would likely put tension on the downlink rod end, rather than compression. And the rod failed under compression. Our other Seneca was damaged similarly a few years ago, when an instructor allowed a student to come in hot, and the airplane porpoised. However, the gear structure showed a lot of other damage besides this rod end. The best technique in the Seneca is to trim very nose up on final, and use forward pressure to maintain airspeed. With the trim helping you as the airspeed bleeds off, you can land the Seneca in a full stall and gently lower the nose. Most don't do that, though. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
....or you can use the electric trim during the flair and keep it coming back
until the nose comes down. That makes for much nicer landings in an Archer. It also makes touch and goes much easier because the aircraft is trimmed for T.O. instead of a flaps down landing. -- Regards, Mike http://mywebpage.netscape.com/amountainaero/fspic1.html "Greg Esres" wrote in message ... I had a terrible time avoiding slamming the nose wheel down on virtually every landing. Yes, the Seneca is challenging in this respect, which is why this explanation is likely to find receptive listeners. However, it appears that a vertical hard landing would likely put tension on the downlink rod end, rather than compression. And the rod failed under compression. Our other Seneca was damaged similarly a few years ago, when an instructor allowed a student to come in hot, and the airplane porpoised. However, the gear structure showed a lot of other damage besides this rod end. The best technique in the Seneca is to trim very nose up on final, and use forward pressure to maintain airspeed. With the trim helping you as the airspeed bleeds off, you can land the Seneca in a full stall and gently lower the nose. Most don't do that, though. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
...or you can use the electric trim during the flair and keep it
coming back until the nose comes down. Except ours doesn't work. :-) I really don't like using trim for this purpose, but it's just necessary to be able to land this airplane nose high. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Greg Esres wrote: I really don't like using trim for this purpose, but it's just necessary to be able to land this airplane nose high. How does that work? Is the tail like the Mooney, where the trim moves the whole horizontal stab? -- Ben Jackson http://www.ben.com/ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VW-1 C-121J landing with unlocked nose wheel | Mel Davidow LT USNR Ret | Military Aviation | 1 | January 19th 04 05:22 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 2 | November 24th 03 05:23 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 24th 03 03:52 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart D. Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 22nd 03 06:24 AM |
WTB: Nose Gear Assembly for Early Model Bonanza | Eric Ulmer | Aviation Marketplace | 4 | November 16th 03 10:50 PM |