1900 Gear Up

app flap · Post by **app flap** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:31 am

Was watching the news this mornin' - and what would you know it, first thing I see is 1900D doing the electric slide down some runway.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/sto ... d=10446360

http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx ... ame=392309

Can't find the video yet.

No more BS · Post by **No more BS** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:25 am

The 1900 is probably the best aircraft to belly-up since the wheels always poke out of the wheel wells, even when the gear is up and locked (designed that way).

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:01 am

From the report. "A witness said it landed on its belly and was immediately met by fire appliances and sprayed with foam."

WTF.....a fire appliance?

I've got lots of appliances but none of them for fires. Maybe the BBQ?

SeawingsUAE · Post by **SeawingsUAE** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:43 am

I think the DC 3, B 17, and Anson may be better, along with the YAK 52, and perhaps the IL2, as they all continue to roll when they land gear up!

C-GPFG · Post by **C-GPFG** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:23 pm

According to CTV, the 1900 is a small jet.

Makes me wonder how many other inaccuracies I've listened thinking they were fact.

86583 · Post by **86583** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:39 pm

long body MU-2....jack it up, put the gear down and fly it home...unless you got unlucky and it throws something into an engine....just ferry it home gear down....other than the turbo commander, it's the only one that doesn't get the engines and props

Navajo-dude · Post by **Navajo-dude** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:45 pm

ei ei owe wrote:From the report. "A witness said it landed on its belly and was immediately met by fire appliances and sprayed with foam."

WTF.....a fire appliance?

They called the Maytag Repairman to fix it.

.

Longtimer · Post by **Longtimer** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:49 pm

ei ei owe wrote:From the report. "A witness said it landed on its belly and was immediately met by fire appliances and sprayed with foam."

WTF.....a fire appliance?

I've got lots of appliances but none of them for fires. Maybe the BBQ?

It may be the Queens english but some versions are a little different. It is a big world out there.

The New Zealand Fire Service has:

348 fire districts (urban)
436 fire stations
800 fire appliances (approx)

[/quote]

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:16 pm

Longtimer wrote: The New Zealand Fire Service has:

348 fire districts (urban)
436 fire stations
800 fire appliances (approx)

Maybe they'd only need half of the appliances if they used real fire trucks?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:20 pm

Words mean different things in different countries, for instance if you were driving down a street in south Africa and saw a red robot ahead of you what would you do?

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:25 pm

Flip it the bird and keep moving!

V1 Rotate · Post by **V1 Rotate** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:47 pm

STOP,

I like green Robots better.

VeRmiLLioN · Post by **VeRmiLLioN** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:48 am

Here is a picture of it.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4099286a10.html

WOW

Rowdy · Post by **Rowdy** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:10 am

Crazy!!

In the pic I believe I can see the pieces of the prop coming apart!!

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:10 am

Ahhhhhh..... carbon fiber flying everywhere.

For the AMEs, how long before that plane's back up and running (assuming nothing devastating underneath)?

snag · Post by **snag** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:03 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtmZkM8r ... ed&search=

Ignore the first bit, no idea what that is

fogghorn · Post by **fogghorn** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:17 pm

Simply mahvelous dahlings.

. ._ · Post by **. ._** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 4:35 am

Man, I wish I could land a plane WITH wheels that smooth!

Nice landing!

-istp

privateer · Post by **privateer** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 3:22 pm

Good job for the pilots getting it down in one piece. now hopefully they can fix her back up again. Too bad they couldn't shut off the engines before they landed like that king air 100 landing in the states.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VVmHyJMDcus

Big Pratt · Post by **Big Pratt** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:57 pm

Too bad they couldn't shut off the engines before they landed

Had they shut down, the props would be gone to composite heaven and the Pratts would still require a teardown.
The only benefit I see to shutting down would be to lessen the chance of a blade going through the fuselage (mind you composite blades are fairly light and shatter so there's less energy than say a metal blade fracturing at the hub).

Either way the dammage would be greater than the deductible so it's a bit of a mute point.

Follow SOP's.

fogghorn · Post by **fogghorn** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 7:29 pm

Big Pratt wrote:
Too bad they couldn't shut off the engines before they landed
Had they shut down, the props would be gone to composite heaven and the Pratts would still require a teardown.
The only benefit I see to shutting down would be to lessen the chance of a blade going through the fuselage (mind you composite blades are fairly light and shatter so there's less energy than say a metal blade fracturing at the hub).

Either way the dammage would be greater than the deductible so it's a bit of a mute point.

Follow SOP's.

I am not sure where you are getting your info. The engine front section may require inspection at most, not tear down or rebuilding. The blades would be inspected and likely flying the next day. If you want to be around for that kind of explosion when blades hit the pavement under power, make it your problem. I have yet to see a company that issues an sop for a gear up landing.

linecrew · Post by **linecrew** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:51 am

Big Pratt wrote:...so it's a bit of a mute point.

So it's silent then?

I think the expression is moot.

Sorry BP...we have a co-worker that keeps saying it the same way and we always razz him about it (jokingly of course). He has a good sense fo humour and a knack for botching expressions.

Once when wrapping up a meeting he combined "we're juggling all the balls at the same time" with "the wheels are in motion" and blurted out "okay boss my balls are in motion".

Lommer · Post by **Lommer** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:53 am

Meh if your only problem is the gear and you have some fuel left, call the company on company frequency and ask them what they want you to do. If they say it's your decision then at least you've CYA.

Spinner · Post by **Spinner** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:36 am

I believe that even with the engines shut down the odds of not striking at least one blade on the runway is very slim.

It would be wonderful to be on short final with engines shut down and feathered and discover you are too fast or too slow and must overshoot. It probably makes the decision to feather your engines seem a little silly.

CloudCover · Post by **CloudCover** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:11 am

If you are short final, and SUDDENLY discover you are "too fast or too slow" I wonder what instruments you were staring at down final.... the oxygen gage?

Me think perhaps you may want to pay more attention to your airspeed indicator in a case like that. It is the one in the top left.