Skydive King Air lands gear up

[pelmet]

No touch and goes.

There is a long sad string of accidents where students retracted the landing gear instead of the flaps on a touch and go landing or even worse retracted the gear instead of the flaps while still rolling down the runway on a full stop landing.

I am hard over on this in any airplane I am in.

1) No touch and Go's

2) Nothing gets touched until the aircraft is clear of the runway.

I have checked people out in a light twin doing touch and goes. But it was briefed that they just operate the power and I operate the wing and cowl flaps from the right seat.

[trey kule]

But it was briefed that they just operate the power and I operate the wing and cowl flaps from the right seat.

Now thats a quality check out for a light twin..just have the student operate only the power....oh wait...its Ok...I missed the part where you posted it was briefed, so that means there is no need for them to manage anything other than power.

[Colonel Sanders]

If you don't put the props full forward on the approach what would you do if a meteroite slammed into the runway and left a big smoking hole?

I have always found mixture / props / throttles
a terribly intellectually challenging sequence to
remember.

There's nothing wrong with putting the props
forward on approach, as long as the RPM has
started to fall already. That means the props
are at the fine pitch stop, and nothing will change
when you advance the levers.

However that's never going to happen on the
421, for example, because you always want the
props pulling when you are airborne, because of
the gearbox design. Hence the constant 21" MP
during the approach.

[Doc]

Props forward on approach. I have never understood the reasoning behind that one. Gear down on approach, I understand. Guess we just don't agree with, what we don't understand.

[Colonel Sanders]

Zing! Zing! Zing!

With a little luck, if they're fast enough pushing the
props forward, they can momentarily get over the
RPM redline.

Gotta have fast hands in the cockpit. All the great
pilots have 'em.

[flyinthebug]

I find it strange,a guy lands gear up and everyone is on him...another takes off in a beaver and crashes because of no fuel and every one thinks he is a hero.....

For what its worth, your comment didnt go unnoticed. A hero? really? I feel like the dumbest moron that ever walked the face of the earth when I think back to that day. I assume since I started a thread and got some support from fellow board members, that my Beaver crash is the one you are referring to. Im no hero nor is anyone treating me like one. Doc is my friend in real life and for that reason alone, you`ll note he hasnt commented on my crash post...because he thinks im a MORON for running out of fuel...and he is right! No matter what the circumstances were surrounding my crash...it was MY responsibility as PIC to ensure I had enough fuel. I dropped the ball, as this pilot dropped the ball with this accident.

I used to fly with a young Captain who had great hands and feet and a strong grasp on IFR procedures etc. Back in those days, when a co-pilot wasnt available for the C414 Medevac aircraft, they would send the guys out SPIFR. Most of the Captains were young and rather inexperienced in the north. One evening they needed a medevac from Gods Lake to Thompson MB. All 3 First officers were already on missions, so the CP dispatches the aircraft SPIFR and at night. So young Captain takes off and gets into hard IMC and snowstorm heading to Gods...as he misses on his 1st approach and sets up for his 2nd, he became so overwhelmed that he forgot one very important issue...the gear. He was fired and lost his career completely. I stayed in touch with him for a couple years after the incident and tried to encourage him to keep looking and eventually someone would give him another shot. Sadly, that never happened for him...and it was a loss to aviation as he was an incredibly gifted young pilot with around 2200 TT.

So for me, ive always said it can happen to ANYONE even my friends Cat and Doc! They just dont know it could happen to them (or they know, but refuse to admit it)...Lets face it, running out of fuel and landing gear up usually equal an end to a career. In some instances the punishment far outweighs the crime. The guy who belly landed this King Air wll likely find another job down the road...and hopefully this doesnt ruin his career. I do understand both sides of this arguement as what he did and what I did would (on the surface) appear as though we couldnt keep up with our airplane...or that we have poor decision making skills.

I feel bad for this pilot and even though he was flying for free and trying to build some valuable Multi Turbine Command time, he made a huge mistake that WILL cost him for the rest of his career...if he is able to even keep flying as a career.

Now you know I dont feel like, nor am I treated like a hero. I was a fool and trusted the word of 2-AMEs and 70 yr old guages. If Doc could say what he REALLY thinks of me running out of fuel...I promise you the word hero would not be any part of the tongue lashing I would get. Its only out of respect for our friendship that has kept him from unloading on me...and that my peers havent jumped on me...and I dont believe this young man deserves to be tarred and feathered because he had a brain fart that could have turned out far worse for him. My guess is he`ll never forget the gear again thats forsure.

As someone said, at least it was a clapped out Beech 90 and the pilot is uninjured. Thats the combination we should ALL be looking for.
Fly safe all.
The Hero eerrrrr FTB I mean.

[7thirtyseven]

well writen.

[pelmet]

But it was briefed that they just operate the power and I operate the wing and cowl flaps from the right seat.

Now thats a quality check out for a light twin..just have the student operate only the power....oh wait...its Ok...I missed the part where you posted it was briefed, so that means there is no need for them to manage anything other than power.

Sorry Trey,

I wasn't clear in my post. During the checkout on the light twin, while on the ground during the touch and go portion of the flight, I operate the cowl and wing flaps while the guy getting trained does the flying...as briefed. It works well and they get a quality check out.

[spaner]

Push props could be a requirement depending on the type cat.

Dual low pitch stop factory props vs single modified with the 4 blade H's.
Regardless of the mechanical function, the master caution will annunciate to read that reverse/props are not ready. Has to do with the prevention of spool down. Not unlike to/land position.

Otherwise you get what I like to call a "reverse stall"..
The engines just bog thru beta on landing, STOL...and you're in Barny...

Course, you're probly talking piston, where I think that it's just part of a good tool bag, as apposed to an actual mechanical requirement.

[Cat Driver]

Course, you're probly talking piston, where I think that it's just part of a good tool bag, as apposed to an actual mechanical requirement.

Yes with piston engine powered airplanes I never go to full forward on the props during the approach.

I am not being sarcastic here because I honestly do not know what you mean by it's just part of a good tool bag. I clearly understand the mechanical reasons I do not go to full forward on approach, and have never understood why so many pilots do approaches with the engine RPM wound up and the props screaming away just to descend.

What exactly does that mean, I have never been exposed to the concept of a good tool bag...can you explain what you mean in ordinary English?

As to turbines I only flew the PT6's and the Garretts and saw no need to put them into full fine either during a normal approach.

[flyinthebug]

Course, you're probly talking piston, where I think that it's just part of a good tool bag, as apposed to an actual mechanical requirement.

Yes with piston engine powered airplanes I never go to full forward on the props during the approach.

I am not being sarcastic here because I honestly do not know what you mean by it's just part of a good tool bag. I clearly understand the mechanical reasons I do not go to full forward on approach, and have never understood why so many pilots do approaches with the engine RPM wound up and the props screaming away just to descend.

What exactly does that mean, I have never been exposed to the concept of a good tool bag...can you explain what you mean in ordinary English?

Cat..."A good tool bag" is likely a reference to just having good overall airmanship. He is saying that despite the mechanical reasoning for not throwing the props forward on approach, that its just part of good airmanship (by not doing so).

To answer why alot of piston-twin drivers go full fwd on pitch on approach is because it "helps slow them down" is the answer ive usually received. My reply of course is if you set up properly for the approach, you shouldnt need to over-rev the engines and props by going full fwd...to help "slow you down" or help you lose some altitude. Oddly enough, my 1st training Capt in a PA31-350 went full fwd on the props when he turned final and still at fairly high power settings. I questioned him as to why he was putting the extra stress on the aircraft?...and he replied...I was a bit high and needed to lose some altitude...and then went on to explain all the techinal details and how the Navajos have "slippery wings" etc. Somehow I just never adopted his way of thinking as I know enough about engines and props to know its never good to keep them at high RPM for an extended period of time. Why over-tax your engines, cause alot of noise for the neighbourhood, for no good reason at all? When I pulled the throttles back in the flare, thats when my props went forward. Thats just good airmanship IMHO.

Fly safe all.

[Chaxterium]

Hello,

It's been years since I've flown piston but I remember when I did it was hammered into me that props go full forward on short final. This is the first I've heard about people not doing that. Would you kindly care to elaborate on why you choose not to do so? Is it simply due to noise? Or extra wear on the engine/prop?

For clarity's sake when I would bring the props up prior to landing it was on very short final once I was convinced I was going to land and my power settings wouldn't keep the props spinning at red line. I liked doing it this way because if the props were advanced at the right time (low power setting, low airspeed) then there would be no increase in rpm and if I needed to go around at the very last minute I had one less thing to remember. I felt was good because if I had to abort the landing at such an inopportune point it would increase my chances of forgetting something. Having said that; I had it locked into my muscle memory very quickly that any large power increase started on the right with the mixtures and then the props and the finally the throttles.

Anyway, interested in your responses.

Cheers,
Chax

[spaner]

Sure, it comes from the old adage, "it's in the bag"; I got this in the bag...

Which has history, in hunting, later military...
Later picked up as adage in industry, the bag; referred to as being one for "tools"..
Which was ironic, cu'z then they had two..

The one being referred to, filled with the ability to get the job done correctly, through knowledge gain with experience.
It is also said that the oldest on the job, have the largest "tool bag (S)".

I didn't think that it was that obscure in aviation...

SnapShot-1.jpg (56.04 KiB) Viewed 2108 times

[Cat Driver]

Hello,

It's been years since I've flown piston but I remember when I did it was hammered into me that props go full forward on short final. This is the first I've heard about people not doing that. Would you kindly care to elaborate on why you choose not to do so? Is it simply due to noise? Or extra wear on the engine/prop?

There are many reasons why I do not approach with the RPM more than cruise.

First off when one is learning to operate any aircraft it is best to learn it correct from the start, there was a time when pilots advanced from light inline piston engines to big radial piston engines.

The radial engine handling manuals explain why you do not use high RPM with low power therefore if you were trained to not push the RPM up during the approach there is nothing to unlearn.

When I owned a flight school there was only one instructor who flew my twin because he operated it the way I wanted him to.

The other instructors who argued that putting the props full forward on approach ( some of them did it down wind. ) never flew the twin by their own choice.

If you wish to increase your rate of descent reduce power, lower the gear, add flap.

If you are still to high go around.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I wasn't clear in my post. During the checkout on the light twin, while on the ground during the touch and go portion of the flight, I operate the cowl and wing flaps while the guy getting trained does the flying...as briefed. It works well and they get a quality check out.

I feel that by the time you get to the stage of your flying career that you are getting checked out on a new type you should allready know how to land. All of the typical GA piston/light turbine have pretty ordinary flight characteristics so I would expect that the full stop landings that will occur as part of a properly done complete type check will be sufficient to familiarize the pilot with the aircraft.

If the pilot is having significant issues with the landing such that the instructor feels that he needs to learn how to manage the flare and touchdown (the sole purpose of the touch and go),then I would be very concerned that this is a manifestation of deeper basic flight control skill deficits.

The same applies to training for the Multi Rating. I have twice stopped training after the first flight and sent them back to singles in order to address an unacceptable lack of foundation flying skills.

Bottom line from my POV the touch and go landing does not provide enough benefit to offset the extra risks that are intrinsic to this manoever.

[Big Pistons Forever]

This thread has drifted off topic but in the spirit of providing an alternative view point re the issue of prop settings on final this is what I do.

Pretty much all of the non turbocharged Lycoming engines are approved for any power setting up to and including full throttle as long as the engine RPM is 2400 RPM or higher.

Therefore on the intial Multi rating I tell the student to go to 2400 RPM and full rich after he/she is established on final. I teach and practice go arounds with the full mixture/prop/throttle sequence followed every time. However having the props allready up will eliminate an unsafe condition if they, under pressure, revert to C 172 muscle memory and just push up the throttles. On the last flight of the Multi rating I demonstrate bring the props up on very short final at a speed where no increase in RPM will occur. I brief that this is a common commercial operation SOP

I have done 2 Multi ratings for private pilots who own there own light twins. For these pilots I recommended they continue the mixture rich/props 2400 established on final as I believe the extra safety this procedure offers outweighs the slight negatives.

[Doc]

Hello,

It's been years since I've flown piston but I remember when I did it was hammered into me that props go full forward on short final. This is the first I've heard about people not doing that. Would you kindly care to elaborate on why you choose not to do so? Is it simply due to noise? Or extra wear on the engine/prop?

For clarity's sake when I would bring the props up prior to landing it was on very short final once I was convinced I was going to land and my power settings wouldn't keep the props spinning at red line. I liked doing it this way because if the props were advanced at the right time (low power setting, low airspeed) then there would be no increase in rpm and if I needed to go around at the very last minute I had one less thing to remember. I felt was good because if I had to abort the landing at such an inopportune point it would increase my chances of forgetting something. Having said that; I had it locked into my muscle memory very quickly that any large power increase started on the right with the mixtures and then the props and the finally the throttles.

Anyway, interested in your responses.

Cheers,
Chax

Actually a good question. I know FTU's always pound into students to put the props full fine on final. Their reasoning is, the power is "there" if you need to go around. Not that it takes more than a "nano second" to increase the RPM if you really needed to. Same goes for placing fuel levers in "high idle", another exercise in futility.
Later, (away from the FTU environment) pilots begin to realize there is NO advantage to either (and high idle can make mince meat out of props on gravel) and that it ads greatly to the sound level in the passenger cabin.
Bottom line.I've never seen a reason TO increase RPM on final. It gives no benefit to me as a pilot, the passengers become edgy and and it's just so LOUD!
I've had passengers comment on the fact "we didn't know we were landing...(till you dropped it in like a piano!)...it was SO quiet all the way in, compared to "Brand X"......"
Try it. You'll like it.

[Cat Driver]

Many passengers are very afraid of flying to start with, if you are descending to land they think great this is about over...then the pilot puts the props in full RPM and the passenger says oh my God what happened?

[Beefitarian]

First off when one is learning to operate any aircraft it is best to learn it correct from the start, there was a time when pilots advanced from light inline piston engines to big radial piston engines.

Well unfortunately that just will never happen.

You ask 20 pilots the most simplistic question about flying and you will get five or more, often opposing answers. most of the pilots will be ready to defend their answer as correct with pistols at noon.

It's almost worse if you have mechanical knowledge and try to explain or debate why something makes sense.

Weird things take grasp in this industry. Any conflicting, please advise!

[Doc]

FTB, I was just happy you survived. That, and what happened to you was a "team" effort. Leaving the gear in the wells? Well, that's an individual sport.
I did a one eighty shortly after takeoff, after being told by the CP that the airplane was ready to "rock N roll"....it wasn't.
I don't think this single incident will put too much of a negative spin on this young man's future. I can name more than two Transport Canada Inspectors who have landed gear up/run out of gas/hit trees/feathered the wrong engine (some while they worked for TC, and some before being hired by TC!) I know at least TWO captains with airlines(I'm talking "real" airlines here, all the guys at The Bear CAN fly) in this country, that really don't fly very well......no worries. May not be really "bright" but it's usually forgotten, over time.

[KK7]

Regardless of personal opinion, isn't it best to operate the aircraft according to its AFM?

[Cat Driver]

Regardless of personal opinion, isn't it best to operate the aircraft according to its AFM?

Of course you should operate an airplane according to its AFM.

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

[Doc]

Regardless of personal opinion, isn't it best to operate the aircraft according to its AFM?

Most of the time......But anytime you're blindly following somebody else's idea of how something/anything "should" be done, do so wih your eyes wide open.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Regardless of personal opinion, isn't it best to operate the aircraft according to its AFM?

Of course you should operate an airplane according to its AFM.

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

The Seminole and Duchess both specify full fine on their POH landing checklist. The Seneca 1 specifies 2500 RPM.

I would suggest this why many FTU's are teaching the use of full fine on final. However as Doc pointed out it is important to understand why a procedure is in the POH and not just mindlessly follow it.

IMO bringing up the props on very short final when the airspeed has reduced enough so that no increase in RPM occurs is the "best" way to operate a piston aircraft, however going to full increase on final is a POH approved procedure so I find it difficult to ridicule anyone who has chosen to follow the POH.

[KK7]

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.