Skydive King Air lands gear up

[Doc]

How many light twin piston engine airplane AFM's tell you to use full fine on the approach with the engines at maximum RPM?

From what I have immediate access to, the C404 and the BN2B both specify propellers full forward as part of the before landing checks.

Sure they do. BUT Do you put them up 1/2 mile final.or after your final power reduction in the flare? Both are "pre landing". One I do. The other is totally unnecessary. Inset common sense here. Herein lies the bullshit that is blind adherence to SOP's and checklists.

[Cat Driver]

When these POH have select full fine before landing do they explain when and why?

Are the engines that different from other light twins?

There has to be a reason for a manafacturer to specify an action, if an airplane is descending you should not need a great amount of thrust to descend, if you wish to reject the approach and climb then of course one would require climb power.

The practice of selecting full fine while the engines are producing enough power to increase the RPM to maximum resulting in high noise and high RPM during the approach is the habit I am referring to.

Are there light piston engine airplanes that require climb power to be used to descend?

That is what I am driving at.

Once again, nowhere have I suggested you operate any aircraft with disregard for the POH.

[Cat Driver]

Thanks Doc, that is exactly what I was trying to say.

I remember flying with a guy in Vancouver one day, he wanted to short term lease my twin because his was unservicable. He was supposed to be one of the best teachers on the west coast. We were about half way down wind and said he was starting the before landing checks, and with that he shoved both props full forward with the obvious result of full RPM.

When I asked him why he needed full RPM down wind he said it was part of the pre landing checks.

Of course there was no sense in arguing with him so I told him I had changed my mind and I was not prepared to lease him the airplane......

.......he was not happy of course.

[Big Pistons Forever]

We seemed to have strayed pretty far from a gear up landing in a King Air. Perhaps it is time to start a separate thread......

[Castorero]

This has been a very good thread.
It will serve as a reminder that if you live long enough you will see a lot of stupid stuff happen to other people.

If you think some of this stuff will Never happen to you, then you are either retired for good or already dead.

If you are old And retired, you have earned the right to pontificate.

It is true that some people should never be allowed near an airplane, or an operating room or a board room.
We all know some of those people, and it is easy to understand when the expected does happen...

It is when the unexpected happens to good people that should give us pause for thought... "there but for the Grace of God..." comes to mind.

Arrogance and infallibility have no place in any professional setting, IMHO..

There, I am pontificating again...

Flyinthebug... you are a good man and I wish you good things going forward.

Castorero.

[Jack Klumpus]

PS I don't have the pedigree of the folks here,
but I don't do circuits in retractable gear aircraft,
like the C421 or L39. It's not a natural thing to
do, in that kind of aircraft.

Again, I'm not as smart as everyone else here,
but that's what I like to see in the 421 for basic
VFR maneuvering, which ain't a circuit. If I taught
on King Airs - which I am monstrously uninterested
in doing - I would probably do the same thing.

We do VFR circuits + touch n goes on the 320, 777, 330, etc. they all ave retractable landing gears.

[pelmet]

Very true, done touch and goes in several jet and large turboprop types. Three circuits each as required by the regs.

As for props fine on final, I have always done it at low power setting to prevent excess noise. I say "Gear down, Props fine" several times on final. Why leave them coarse? I assume they go to fine in order to be able to get max power for overshoot. Maybe different for some certain specific aircraft I suppose but if you don't go fine and then overshoot, are you getting full power? There is a reason for full fine for takeoff, is it not the same for an overshoot? Never heard of someone in a light twin staying in coarse props on final before. Manuals call for fine so this is very strange.

These were just my assumptions. Can anyone confirm.

[Colonel Sanders]

if you don't go fine and then overshoot

as I have said before, in the unlikely event of an
overshoot, it's mixtures / props / throttles forward.

Personally I do not consider that an onerous
sequence of events.

I suppose in preparation for the remote possibility of
any overshoot, on short final you could also select
full power and gear up - you know, to have the aircraft
"pre-configured" for the overshoot. I do not do that,
however.

Especially in the 421, I do NOT want the props driving
the engines. The gearbox will not tolerate it. And
the way that I accomplish that is by selecting approach
power - 21 inches and 1800 rpm - and leaving it there
for the entire approach. If I fly it right, I do not need
to touch the throttles until the flare.

Shoving the props all the way forward is all about
producing drag, over-revving the engines, and making
all sorts of unnecessary noise to piss off the neighbors
and pax. You can do that if you want to. I've been
flying constant-speed props on piston aircraft for 40
years now, and I'm going to keep on doing it my way,
which is props and mixture set for low cruise.

The four-bars crowd here probably also likes shoving
the mixture all the way in during descent, too, which
cracks the cylinder heads and is NOT what the
engine manufacturers recommend.

When I fly aircraft, the engines and props last a very
long time. When four-bars fly them, they destroy
them in short order. I suppose if you're not paying
for the engines and props it really doesn't matter if
you wreck them or not.

PS I know of at least one fatal accident - and there
are likely others - that was attributed to shoving the
props forward during approach. It was a piston twin,
with one engine feathered. Apparently on approach
the pilot instinctively shoved both mixtures and props
forward, which caused the feathered prop to unfeather,
create drag, and he ran out of airspeed and died on final.
Frankly I am a bit dubious of that explanation, but there
you are.

[Colonel Sanders]

We do VFR circuits + touch n goes on the 320, 777, 330, etc

Your definition of a "VFR circuit" is probably different from mine.

In a little airplane, I like to fly downwind at 500 AGL, laterally
1000 feet from the runway. I don't do that in a jet. What
you do, I would probably log x/c on, and need binoculars to
see the runway turning base

[Doc]

I'm sure most of you older types have noticed. Nobody's brought it up though. More and more POH's and checklists are being written by the aircraft manufacture's legal departments. As a very simple example, if anybody has done a Caravan FSI course lately, the check list provided by Cessna was NOT written by anyone who has EVER actually flown the airplane! If you follow it "to the letter" it will take close to TWENTY MINUTES to get the bloody thing started!

[Doc]

We do VFR circuits + touch n goes on the 320, 777, 330, etc

Your definition of a "VFR circuit" is probably different from mine.

In a little airplane, I like to fly downwind at 500 AGL, laterally
1000 feet from the runway. I don't do that in a jet. What
you do, I would probably log x/c on, and need binoculars to
see the runway turning base

Got to do a few circuits with a buddy of mine in a DHL DC8. You'd be amazed at how tight these thing can fly around the patch!

[pelmet]

Especially in the 421, I do NOT want the props driving
the engines. The gearbox will not tolerate it. And
the way that I accomplish that is by selecting approach
power - 21 inches and 1800 rpm - and leaving it there
for the entire approach. If I fly it right, I do not need
to touch the throttles until the flare.

Shoving the props all the way forward is all about
producing drag, over-revving the engines, and making
all sorts of unnecessary noise to piss off the neighbors
and pax. You can do that if you want to. I've been
flying constant-speed props on piston aircraft for 40
years now, and I'm going to keep on doing it my way,
which is props and mixture set for low cruise.

A check of some POH's on constant speed aircraft I have flown show in the manufacturer checklist to put props to fine for landing. A quick check on another site for a Cessna 421 shows the same but it doesn't say when.

http://www.redskyventures.org/doc/cessn ... H-AFM_.pdf

That being said, no shoving is required. I just wait until the power is low(which will usually be after the landing checklist is complete) and slowly move them forward with little to no rpm increase at all. I guess they are on the fine pitch stop by then.

Anyways, I am just following the POH.

[7thirtyseven]

This has been a very good thread.
It will serve as a reminder that if you live long enough you will see a lot of stupid stuff happen to other people.

If you think some of this stuff will Never happen to you, then you are either retired for good or already dead.

If you are old And retired, you have earned the right to pontificate.

It is true that some people should never be allowed near an airplane, or an operating room or a board room.
We all know some of those people, and it is easy to understand when the expected does happen...

It is when the unexpected happens to good people that should give us pause for thought... "there but for the Grace of God..." comes to mind.

Arrogance and infallibility have no place in any professional setting, IMHO..

There, I am pontificating again...

Flyinthebug... you are a good man and I wish you good things going forward.

Castorero.

Wise man

[trey kule]

If you follow it "to the letter" it will take close to TWENTY MINUTES to get the bloody thing started!

Doc. If I have told you once, I have told you at least three thousand times.....don't exaggerate
Takes no more than 17 mins to start using the checklist!!! In fact, the POH has an abbreviated pre start checklist that is only 11 pages long. It is why we need SOPs to ensure the crew stays awake.....
And these checklists have less than 1/4 the items TC has on their king air pr
e start lists. And we all know how well TCs gear up landing record is...blind leading the blind.

The problem is the industry is trying to avoid common sense and experience by substituting checklists with novels, and SOPs for simple aircraft. Read some of the previous posts. Instructors that feel they need to handle the cowl and wing flaps for a transitioning twin pilot because to expect the student to actually do it would overwhelm them. No need to supervise. Do it for them. GUMP checks done a hundred miles back before descent with items like "undercarriage....to come". What the hell kind of checklist item is that? And as Cat mentioned....props to "scream" in the downwind.as near as I can tell most FTUs dont have an internal operational audit system or quality control on their instructors, so it is the wild west when it comes to instructor technique, and to the evolution of check lists...152 checklist...lets add everything into it for every plane a pilot might ever fly.
And allowing smart ass comments like...gear down and welded...real professional!

Proper training and common sense would go a long way towards minimizing the number of these types of accidents....TC actually needs to do operational audits on FTUs that go beyond the paper, and CFIs have to start doing their job ensuring quality control.

My rant for the day....

[pelmet]

Instructors that feel they need to handle the cowl and wing flaps for a transitioning twin pilot because to expect the student to actually do it would overwhelm them. No need to supervise. Do it for them.

Sorry if my method for preventing accidental gear retraction strictly on the ground during a touch and go doesn't meet your expectations for training. And by the way, it was done for high time pilots getting checked out. And I strongly recommend that any instructor or check out pilot does this.

After all...it is only common sense. To those that have it of course.

[trey kule]

Common sense....hmmmmm.

Seems to me that if the ground work is done properly, and the student goes out and sits in the cockpit either by themselves or with an instructor, they should pretty much have all the procedures down pat before they ever start an engine. Course, that is not common sense talking, as the instructor cannot log that oh so valuable PIC time and the student will actually save some money.

Once that is all done well, any instructor with even a modicum of skill should be able to watch and prevent the student from accidental gear retraction on the ground instead of playing co-pilot.

But you are right. It does not meet my expectations. I have to deal with the products of this type of training, and we, as a company, spend a great deal of time, effort, and money retraining pilots to actually be able to do the job properly. Seldom, if ever, do I ever hear one of them tell me that they sat in the cockpit of a twin and went through all the procedures and drills. It was just hop in and fly...

Common sense dictates to me that the transition to a light twin is not a big deal, particularly if the pilot is high time as you mentioned. But sometimes it is a big deal to an inexperienced instructor, or at least they think it is. Common sense tells me you can watch the students hands, and if they go anywhere near the gear lever at an an inappropriate time, intervene. You dont teach someone to fly by doing the flying for them, and again, as you mentioned they were already experienced pilots this seems ludicrous.

Anyway, to each there own...your method will definitely get you more logged PIC twin time.

[7thirtyseven]

Trey trey trey.

[Doc]

Instructors that feel they need to handle the cowl and wing flaps for a transitioning twin pilot because to expect the student to actually do it would overwhelm them. No need to supervise. Do it for them.

Sorry if my method for preventing accidental gear retraction strictly on the ground during a touch and go doesn't meet your expectations for training. And by the way, it was done for high time pilots getting checked out. And I strongly recommend that any instructor or check out pilot does this.

After all...it is only common sense. To those that have it of course.

Every year, our lads get together and do night circuits. Just another example of some TC moron justifying their jobs/pension plan. I have more than enough hours of night time and need circuits like I need a second head (head can be nice). But we "must" to them....SO, we do retract the flaps for each other. NOT to "prevent" inadvertent gear retractions though.....BUT so the guy driving/wasting fuel etc., can keep both eyes "on the road" to prevent "inadvertent" contact with wild life. You know.....DEER.....that can cause about 400K worth of damage, if not KILL us!
If you are actually worried about your "high time pilots" retracting the gear instead of the flaps, something is really wrong, and McDonalds is always hiring folks to flip burgers!

[pelmet]

.

[pelmet]

If you are actually worried about your "high time pilots" retracting the gear instead of the flaps, something is really wrong, and McDonalds is always hiring folks to flip burgers!

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I know Doc thinks that a high-time guy will never accidentally retract the gear by accident on a touch and go and that is fine. But I'm not taking any chances, especially when the cowl flaps were right beside the landing gear. Call me paranoid if you like but a slight paranoia is in my opinion, a good thing to have as a pilot whether for gear operation or fuel etc.

Previous links by me and others on this thread have shown how a 747, C-5 Galaxy, DC-9 and C-17 have landed gear up. Students on board? I think not. A B-1 did it in Diego Garcia a couple of years back. Proof positive that experienced, professional pilots do it on occasion and it can happen to anyone....even the self-described superheroes that I come across in all segments of aviation. Perhaps the guys on those flights are flipping burgers, I don't know.

I find it interesting that someone would feel that myself doing a couple of operational actions during a training manouver that has absolutely no application in line flying is somehow reducing the quality of a checkout. Mr. Boeing had these things done for me by the PNF when I did my Touch and goes in a couple of his jet designs and so did some turboprop manufacturers(I know...they were multi crew aircraft).

I know, I know, some will say...the student, which in my cases have all been pilots with fairly significant experience, should be properly ground trained prior to the flight, and that I should be ready to intervene to a potentially quick reach for the wrong lever. But there is one problem with this nice theory. It is called the real world. Smart pilots do stupid things or shall we say erroneous, inexplicable things on occasion. Guys I am checking out(don't really do it anymore as the machine was sold a couple of years back) can get their experience operating flaps, gear and ancillary controls on an overshoot, a real world scenario that has application.

I guess the risk of this, at least for an earlier poster is that because of this one procedure that I perform, on an activity that has no application except training, is that said poster will have to "spend a great deal of time, effort, and money retraining pilots to actually be able to do the job properly". After all, being able to properly operate the flaps, and cowl flaps during a touch and go at his company is no doubt one of the areas most concentrated on.

When you think about it logically, which of course I always do, so many people harp about not touching any controls until clear of the runway after landing until the aircraft is stopped, not even taxiing at a slow speed(and no doubt venom would be spewed by some on this board if someone reached for the wrong lever and retracted the gear prior to stopping). So why does it all of a sudden become bad practice with comments about flipping burgers and massive retraining required when we apply the same practice when operating at high speed on the ground such as during a touch and go?

But anyways as Trey Kule states, I can continue to log my extra PIC command time in a light twin. WEEEEEEEE.


Suggestion to instructors.....when doing touch and goes in a retractable.....you operate the flaps, and cowl flaps and whatever else needs operating as briefed by you during the ground portion.

[Cat Driver]

Suggestion to instructors.....when doing touch and goes in a retractable.....you operate the flaps, and cowl flaps and whatever else needs operating as briefed by you during the ground portion.

In otherwords teach the student how to operate the airplane for a two crew operation even if they will never fly two crew?

[Big Pistons Forever]

The Touch and Go manoever is only used during training and has no utility in normal operations. That is one of the reasons why I chose not to use it during training.

IMO there is more training value to do a full stop landing with a taxi back. This allows practice of what is everyday normal operations, a SOP after landing and then pretakeoff checks and takeoff brief. Personally I think touch and go landings are negative training particularly during single pilot operations.

My company is rethinking touch and go's when training on our large T-Prop aircraft even though company SOP is that they can only be done with a third pilot in the centre seat who does all the aircraft reconfiguration with the Capt and FO solely devoted to minding the aircraft and doing their PF/PNF duties.

[Doc]

I'm not a big fan of T&Gs myself. We use them when we're getting the "government required" 5 take offs and landings in, to save time, but for "training" purposes, I'll agree with BPF. Gives somebody learning the airplane more time to gather his/her thoughts between circuits. But it's NOT because I fear an inadvertent gear retraction. Reset trims, promote a smoother power application (prevent an over boost or over torque), retract flaps etc.

[pelmet]

Suggestion to instructors.....when doing touch and goes in a retractable.....you operate the flaps, and cowl flaps and whatever else needs operating as briefed by you during the ground portion.

In otherwords teach the student how to operate the airplane for a two crew operation even if they will never fly two crew?

I suppose for the touch and go portion of training, that would be correct. Seeing as it won't be used on the line anyways....I suspect there will be no detrimental effect.

[bodyflyer]

FWIW, the King Air wasn't just doing circuits as reported in the CADORS, but had dropped jumpers on that flight. This is what I've been told by skydivers who were there.

As far as I could see from (private) photos of the aircraft skidded off into the farm field next to the runway, the damage to the aircraft would have been the usual props / belly skins / flaps / etc. Whether there is damage beyond that, I have no idea.

The damage to one engine in the fall of 2012 happened with another pilot, when a dark coloured engine intake cover, apparently without a big red Remove Before Flight flag on it, was left in for 2 skydive flights. On the 2nd flight the engine smoked and was shut down, with a landing at Kingston airport with jumpers aboard. What the exact nature of the damage was, again I don't know. Again this was with a new pilot, and not the regular guy who had been flying for the dropzone successfully for a few years, whose contract was up and moved up to another flying job.