Sad day for a mooney at LZU

Somedudeintn

Somedudeintn

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
1,271
Location
Knoxville, Tn
Display Name
Display name:
somedudeintn
The story I heard is that the owner of the plane was with a CFI and they had an issue where the nose gear was stuck up. I went and took a closer look and it appears there was quite a bit of damage with the prop still spinning. Random question, in this case would you try to stop the engine at altitude and glide to a landing to save the engine and prop, or just land with the engine spinning as it's the safer option?
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 216
Depends, if I felt comfy with the landing area and had the altitude to play, sure.
 
It depends on if it is my plane and whether or not the insurance is paid up. Risk vs. reward.
 
that's not the rental from Advanced aviation (i think its advanced) is it? I was hoping to fly that sometime this year.
 
I suspect I'd leave the engine on in case I have to do a go around. Odds are you couldn't get the prop to stop where you wanted it to and once I committed to a gear up landing, I am essentially assigning the plane to the insurance company anyway.
 
They had 6000 foot of runway. They could of tried to get lucky and stop the prop in a position that would save it (and the engine), but at that point the insurance company is going to take care of it anyway.
 
I might have shut down the engine if I thought I had the energy to make a safe landing. The safety of the passengers and pilot are always my top concern, but I might try and make things a bit better for the aircraft. That is, unless my engine were run out...
 
What was the story with the failed to extend nose gear, and the pilot orders the passengers to dive to the aft after the mains touched down? All he succeeded in doing was grinding down the tail tiedown. Yeah, that. Thats what I would do.:goofy::rofl:
 
ChemGuy said:
that's not the rental from Advanced aviation (i think its advanced) is it? I was hoping to fly that sometime this year.
Click to expand...

Nope, but advanced got rid of their money a few weeks ago :( supposedly the mx was getting too expensive. I was hoping to get some time in the mooney at advanced too:(
 
Last edited:
JOhnH said:
once I committed to a gear up landing, I am essentially assigning the plane to the insurance company anyway.
Click to expand...

Correct answer, at that point the insurance co owns the airplane.

Skin, tin, ticket.
 
The best comment I heard on this was: why would you add an emergency (engine out) on top of the existing emergency (nose gear stuck)?
 
Sam D said:
The best comment I heard on this was: why would you add an emergency (engine out) on top of the existing emergency (nose gear stuck)?
Click to expand...

Shutting down the engine abeam the numbers should not be an emergency. If you feel it is, it might the time to get a CFI and try some power-off landings.
 
Subsea said:
What was the story with the failed to extend nose gear, and the pilot orders the passengers to dive to the aft after the mains touched down? All he succeeded in doing was grinding down the tail tiedown. Yeah, that. Thats what I would do.:goofy::rofl:
Click to expand...

Just what one needs..... Unrestrained pax...:yikes::eek::hairraise:
 
;)
Somedudeintn said:
Nope, but advanced got rid of their money a few weeks ago :( supposedly the mx was getting too expensive. I was hoping to get some time in the mooney at advanced too:(
Click to expand...

Mooney an expensive to mx complex trainer?!? Burn the witch! Don't tell that to the mooniacs around here. They'll tar and feather ya :D

signed,

lowly slow-rrow owner.
 
hindsight2020 said:
;)

Mooney an expensive to mx complex trainer?!? Burn the witch! Don't tell that to the mooniacs around here. They'll tar and feather ya :D

signed,

lowly slow-rrow owner.
Click to expand...

It's all hearsay but my understanding is that they were having electrical issues with the plane. I've still got a mooney at the top of my list when it comes time to purchase despite what I've heard regarding that particular plane.
 
I'm surprised at the answers presented here. The only time that you would have a "reasonable" chance of stopping the prop so that it's horizontal is when you are over the numbers and slow, and then by hitting the key until it stops at the index that you need. Until that time it will most probably be windmilling. AOPA had a write-up a couple of years ago on how a pilot may attempt this and judging by what the author wrote at the time, it was not easy even under controlled conditions, let alone with the anxiety of dealing with a no gear landing.
 
Do you still need an engine teardown if the engine is shut down and the prop is windmilling when it strikes the pavement?
 
dmspilot said:
Do you still need an engine teardown if the engine is shut down and the prop is windmilling when it strikes the pavement?
Click to expand...

From what I remember from the article, the answer is that no teardown is required. If there is was no evidence of a prop strike then you can clean up the belly and fly off.
 
It was not a nose gear failure. It was a gear collapse on the runway during the rollout.

Also, never complicate the current emergency more than absolutely necessary. I would not shut it down.
 
the400kid said:
From what I remember from the article, the answer is that no teardown is required. If there is was no evidence of a prop strike then you can clean up the belly and fly off.
Click to expand...
But if the prop is windmilling you are going to have a prop strike...
 
I don't think this is Advanced's Mooney. It's not been flying recently (lots of MX on that one). I think this is the one owned by another student at AA that his wife was flying with a CFI while he was in the pattern in a 172. Scary day! That's why half the planes from KLZU were diverted to KWDR last Sunday. I even ran over there to pick up one of AA's 172s to fly it home. If it's that one, Ted is correct. The nose gear collapsed during rollout. Probably a total writeoff, sadly. :(

Edit: But at least everyone is fine, no injuries from what I've heard.
 
This is how you save your engine and propeller, sorry for the crappy commentary on the video but it is a very impressive landing done by a true professional. Watch him when he shuts down the engines:yes:


http://youtu.be/dH_AzTvnN_Q
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
It was not a nose gear failure. It was a gear collapse on the runway during the rollout.

Also, never complicate the current emergency more than absolutely necessary. I would not shut it down.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense as I heard the plane was on 25 prior to Delta and I would thought it would have been further down making a landing. Thanks for clarifying the details!
 
No way I'm shutting down a perfect running engine on an airplane that belongs to the insurance company anyway. If I had the misfortune to need to gear up an airplane, that would be the day I need to go around.
 
Somedudeintn said:
That makes more sense as I heard the plane was on 25 prior to Delta and I would thought it would have been further down making a landing. Thanks for clarifying the details!
Click to expand...

The CFI in this plane is my current CFI for something im working on. I can vouch for his competency and ability.

I wasnt real impressed with the way the feds handled it.
 
Acrodustertoo said:
This is how you save your engine and propeller, sorry for the crappy commentary on the video but it is a very impressive landing done by a true professional. Watch him when he shuts down the engines:yes:


http://youtu.be/dH_AzTvnN_Q
Click to expand...

And he still hits both the props on the runway.

Even though they weren't spinning, that can bend the cranks, and it's definitely not good for the props.
 
Having a lot of time in a mooney, they are pretty docile and will float forever in ground effect, with 6000 feet of runway and the if gear malfunctioned while in the air, I would shut it down . No big deal. Should have landed with minimum damage to the under, not hard to repair, if the pic was familiar with it, no big deal.
 
Would it depend on if you had 100 hrs on your engine, or 2100 hrs? How about turn fuel off, master off, in case the landing is rough, probably doesn't matter, or how about landing it in the grass?
 
Last edited:
I had the same situation as the 310 in a BE-60. Kept the right pitot tube as a souvenir.
ad88b3a827852609d2e8762fe676376f.jpg




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
well shoot. Now I have to find a mooney to try and fly. I wanted to get a couple hours in one. Oh well.

glad no one was hurt. Now they can shop for a new mooney.


Ted, what did our 'friends' at the FSDO/FAA do? if it was a gear collapse with 3 green prior to landing....what would be the problem?
 
MAKG1 said:
And he still hits both the props on the runway.

Even though they weren't spinning, that can bend the cranks, and it's definitely not good for the props.
Click to expand...

So what exactly should he have done then?:dunno: He took measure to minimize the damage and the possibility of further damage to an already dismal situation.
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
It was not a nose gear failure. It was a gear collapse on the runway during the rollout.

Also, never complicate the current emergency more than absolutely necessary. I would not shut it down.
Click to expand...

Note Ted's correction above
 
Somedudeintn said:
The story I heard is that the owner of the plane was with a CFI and they had an issue where the nose gear was stuck up. I went and took a closer look and it appears there was quite a bit of damage with the prop still spinning. Random question, in this case would you try to stop the engine at altitude and glide to a landing to save the engine and prop, or just land with the engine spinning as it's the safer option?
Click to expand...

No, the only time someone gets hurt/killed in a gear up situation is when someone owes something stupid to try to save machinery. It's not a good idea at all. When I first hit the prop tips of the 310 hit the runway I reached for the throttles to get out of there and stopped, "Nope, that's how people get killed." And I just let her settle in nice and slick. Both the FAA and NTSB guys agreed with that thinking.

There is almost no risk to life and limb from sliding in. Shut it down early now you are adding risk to life. Skin before tin, always sacrifice the metal to secure the man.
 
steingar said:
Shutting down the engine abeam the numbers should not be an emergency. If you feel it is, it might the time to get a CFI and try some power-off landings.
Click to expand...

But I'd consider it an emergency and ask for emergency handling when the gear won't come down. Stopping the engine alone, no (unless it won't restart and I can't clear the runway). Gear up, yes.

Let the insurance company deal with it.
 
teejayevans said:
Would it depend on if you had 100 hrs on your engine, or 2100 hrs? How about turn fuel off, master off, in case the landing is rough, probably doesn't matter, or how about landing it in the grass?
Click to expand...

No, this is all stupidity. Once things go wrong, metal doesn't matter.
 
JOhnH said:
Odds are you couldn't get the prop to stop where you wanted it to
Click to expand...


You have altitude. You have time. Once you commit to a particular runway (especially if you have one 6000' long) you plan your touchdown a third of the way down the runway. As for windmilling prop, if you get anywhere NEAR landing speed the prop will stop on its own if the engine is shut down (once it stops you will have to get to damn near Vne before it will start turning again). Then you nudge the prop into position with the starter one small burp at a time with the mixture idle cutoff.

At least that's what I was taught and how I did it at Hanna, WY on my way home from Oshkosh one year when a jug came apart.

Jim
 
ChemGuy said:
Ted, what did our 'friends' at the FSDO/FAA do? if it was a gear collapse with 3 green prior to landing....what would be the problem?
Click to expand...

It's all second hand information from my buddy who was present, so take it with a grain of salt, but they tried every angle they could to try and stick a violation on him for landing gear up, even with three witnesses confirming the gear was down.

I could ask him personally, but why bring it up?
 
Acrodustertoo said:
So what exactly should he have done then?:dunno: He took measure to minimize the damage and the possibility of further damage to an already dismal situation.
Click to expand...

He should have left them running in case he had to add power to make the runway, or go around, if he had to. He saved NOTHING while adding risk, that is a poor command decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top