good save on landing

[Paul Anderson]

http://www.wimp.com/textbooklanding/

 

[Willy]

I liked the way he was bumping the starters to get the props level with the wings to reduce possible engine damage.

 

[Daveroo]

when did this happen?.....everyone should see this..

 

[PRB]

I liked the way he was bumping the starters to get the props level with the wings to reduce possible engine damage.

That was interesting. I can just hear him in the cockpit, with each push of the starter button "come on..., almost..., b****!, ok, perfect..!", as the runway got bigger and bigger... With three-bladed props he could have just concentrated on the approach, probably... I hope his effort with the props saved him some money with the engines.

 

[aeromed202]

Nice job, but why is it he can land right down the center with no nose wheel but FS AC wander all over the place? But this raises a question for me. It seems AC doing emergency landings where metal is bound to scrape, throw sparks and maybe start a fire and skid a long way will land on the runway instead of softer(?) grass/dirt. Is there a rationale behind this or is it emergency specific?

 

[Skyhawk_310R]

The outcome was as good as it could have been. But, frankly, I disagree with him killing the engines and even more with him pumping the starter to synch the props out of the way, especially the last time he did it on the left engine because he was already crossing threshold. He should have been concentrating on the landing and leaving his engines on to facilitate an emergency go-around. I know why he did what he did. He wanted to save the expense of tearing down for inspection both engines. That would have cost him about $30,000 assuming no engine damage was discovered and the parts could be put back together.

Distraction is a major cause of mishaps, especially as a single pilot in a GA aircraft. If he had a co-pilot then I could see him briefing the other pilot to chop power to both engines immediately upon main gear touchdown. But, when you have such a mishap and cannot get the gear down, then you focus on flying a normal approach and landing with a normal touchdown, and all you do different is try to hold the nose gear off the surface as long as possible so it contacts at the lowest ground speed possible.

Insurance takes care of the cost of putting the plane back into service, or at least compensating the pilot for total loss. Their is no aircraft insurance that brings back human life.

Ken

 

[Victory103]

Agree with Skyhawk on the that phase of the flight, all attention landing the plane and saving mine+everyone's butt onboard. I've done this for initial/recurrent training (unsafe nose gear) and could care less about the props at that point. Good job on the other headwork (burning fuel off).

 

[srgalahad]

Nice job, but why is it he can land right down the center with no nose wheel but FS AC wander all over the place? But this raises a question for me. It seems AC doing emergency landings where metal is bound to scrape, throw sparks and maybe start a fire and skid a long way will land on the runway instead of softer(?) grass/dirt. Is there a rationale behind this or is it emergency specific?

Sadly, most modern airports are runway-centric. The adjacent areas are often not maintained, are full of navaids, drainage ditches, cable trenches and electrical boxes, signs, ruts and animal burrows or crops that obscure the hazards. With something like a 310, dropping the nose into the "turf" and hitting a ditch would have more serious consequences.

Besides being a thing of habit to focus on the runway, it becomes a choice of a devil you know vs a devil you don't. Of course it drives airport management and ATC nuts because the runway is now closed for a few minutes to a few hours as the recovery is performed and any debris cleaned up.

In spite of his frenzied fussing with the props, there was still a prop-strike ( or both) but at least it was minimized (maybe enough)