How Not To Land An Ercoupe

Goodness..could have held just a hair more back pressure :cool:
 
Imagine what's going through the pilot's mind in that situation. That's the kind of stuff nightmares are made of.


I've had dreams of having a 'fender-bender' with a parked aircraft, getting out after starting the engine and the airplane rolling off from me (I don't know why I would ever do this in reality), and also tearing something up on landing, and then experiencing the shame/fear of having to walk inside the FBO and explain what happened, only to wake up relieved realizing it was a dream.
 
Wait, what? That was a terrible landing, but it didn't seem hard enough to rip off the nose wheel...but it clearly did. I swear I had worse landings when learning to fly to no effect. I was in 172, but still.
 
It appears to me that the nose just dropped at about 4 feet high. It also appears that the wind was a little gusty. A couple of things come to mind, he was just too slow and dropped it in nose first, or he was flying a gust that just quit and he dropped it in. I obviously don't know, but it is a curious thing.
 
The pilot must be used to flying with his wife. She wasn't there to "backseat"this time and you see what happened.
 
How many times has he landed like that BEFORE it finally broke?


This space intentionally left blank for future sarcasm.
 
How many times has he landed like that BEFORE it finally broke?
That's my thought...it wasn't just this landing that did it.

At least with video there'll be no question on the accident landing...
 
If it takes full power to taxi...
 
He took his time shutting down the engine, do you think he thought he could taxi to parking?
 
He took his time shutting down the engine, do you think he thought he could taxi to parking?

Probably in a trance collecting his thoughts, or cleaning his shorts!
 
This is the perfect video clip for CFIs to show students about why they want them to hold back pressure opposed to letting off. I don't understand how he was so squirrely on the approach though.
 
The no rudder pedal Ercoupe does take some thought when landing in a cross wind (keep wing level and nose into wind all the way down) but regardless of the wind put the mains down first.

Yet, that landing did not look bad enough for what happened.
 
That will buff right out.

Amazed he didn't bounce it. No idea of the internal damage in there, but it looks like the engine and prop were saved so the airplane will probably fly again.
 
Aw never mind. I watched it with the sound off. Apparently there were a lot of prop strikes. Sigh, another classic airplane is gone.
 
Yeah, if that landing breaks off nose wheels, we'd of all wrecked a plane during private training.
 
The no rudder pedal Ercoupe does take some thought when landing in a cross wind (keep wing level and nose into wind all the way down) but regardless of the wind put the mains down first.

Yet, that landing did not look bad enough for what happened.

Ah, ok, this makes more sense.
 
Two things of note:

1. Our Ercoupe's nosewheel was similar in size to our mains. This one appears to be significantly smaller.

2. No way was that landing hard enough to break the nosegear. The Ercoupe's landing gear is the stoutest I've ever seen -- it has to be, to land crabbed (no rudders). You can drop that plane in from 10', and it just chirps and rolls straight.
 
Stupid question, but how in the heck do you fight torque and maintain centerline (even landing in a crab) on the ground without a rudder?

Nose wheel steering is enough?
 
Stupid question, but how in the heck do you fight torque and maintain centerline (even landing in a crab) on the ground without a rudder?

Nose wheel steering is enough?

Actually, that's an interesting point. In an Ercoupe without pedals, would it be common practice to put the nose down early to get directional control from the wheel? That might explain the flat landing: it was intentional to help keep it on the runway.

As to whether nosewheel steering is enough, that I can answer: hell yes. Rubber on pavement is highly effective. What's more, the lack of a bounce seems to indicate that the wings were quite done flying, so there would be significant force on the wheel. Think about crab-and-kick: you're depending on the wheels to arrest the slewing aircraft. Same here, though to a lighter extent.
 
Stupid question, but how in the heck do you fight torque and maintain centerline (even landing in a crab) on the ground without a rudder?

Nose wheel steering is enough?

Yes.

The first time you land an Ercoupe in a significant crosswind, you think you are going to die. I mean, looking out the side window on short final is the most unnatural feeling in the world, to anyone who has flown an airplane with rudder control.

Then, you flare, that enormous (for the plane's size) landing gear soaks up the side stress, and you let the nose gear down. It is, quite frankly, the easiest plane in the world to land -- which is what it was designed to be.
 
From my days flying an Ercoupe I remember them having limited elevator travel. This was intended to keep the airplane from stalling. When you perform slow flight & hold the stick all the way back they just sink...no break. He may have been a bit slow & ran out of elevator & was unable to raise the nose.

I flew one in the winds of Montana. It was quite the experience in a x-wind until you got used to it. I rented it for $8.00 wet so you know that's been a while ago. Good memories though.
 
Do those things not have flaps? He seems to be coming in pretty flat(nose high) the whole way down.
 
At first I thought it looked like a stall in a nose-heavy configuration and drop of the nose, but after seeing that stall test video, and looking again, it looks more like the pilot tried to force it on, thinking he was closer than he was (flared way too high obviously). If the nose wheel stayed "together" I think it would have bounced/porpoised good.
 
Back
Top