X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:55:18 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.207.72] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.14) with SMTP id 3753320 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:25:16 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.142.207.72; envelope-from=airmale4@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 7096 invoked by uid 60001); 11 Jul 2009 07:24:41 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UoAmQrNUPgixvmGzQygudKFgSUGrEqxrqFcntQyAn6BEr7TS2YtGvs6wvcCdZF204rLKyomd/aLOVpHyMrB38Eceobd8MUfwu6WLcY1v08bkPliPW5VYn+hKLr4JXMMparuTU444fi9m0xgJ6I5R7aw1qk61MX645tk6NWT+hg4=; X-Original-Message-ID: <534330.1071.qm@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: Il8O4E4VM1kDbaWYHGh9Seu2yOBMsLxTsp3Lef5ygdIxHm_YMMpCyVEO008UnE_MCx0kg6zy3EXT6hXOFTduD8z9yQYT1v93QBGuIk24KG33pmYBKyj4_PPB6GURU9ctifEasRW_MuU3xMWRBjNxPbB409UHLAf7bKKq_zvHsGvEHULaUvgatsiP2G5jZONuKgVTYMK7yvaoAIl_TOYG.ZrIQG.VtCe_90TF5NMtNYT96yENX79Jj59sZvPrwkfZ4W_JkuZsYtdd4yzwcPfAj.nNlyTVpPnfBYiZZOYp8Lej.Ml9.BxECrF92fDXL4VXjXajHrk0B8Z8Og-- Received: from [67.140.222.85] by web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:24:41 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1358.22 YahooMailWebService/0.7.338.1 References: X-Original-Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:24:41 -0700 (PDT) From: J H Webb Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Belly Landing 360 Video X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1656688302-1247297081=:1071" --0-1656688302-1247297081=:1071 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Rob, In 1995 my left main would not go down, the problem was the hydraulic actuator had a bent shaft and would not allow full extension. I had lots of fuel and spent about 2.2 hours trying to get it down not knowing that the strut was bent, finally I landed on the right main and nose-wheel with flaps not fully extended. This allow minimal damage to the flaps and then they did not drag on the asphalt. The total repairs including paying for a mechanic to repair the aircraft was under S1300. Compare this to landing gear up and having prop damage and engine teardown. The military did several studies of landings with reduced number of wheels extended and determined that it is cost efficient to land on how ever many wheels that extend. My costs would have been much lower if the left wing tip had not hit a 4" metal post at the side of the runway. I had planned for the left turning tendency of the airplane with the left wingtip dragging by landing angled off to the right side of the runway but the tendency to turn left was greater than I expected and it finally went off the runway to the left, damaging the left wing tip and a scrap along the outboard trailing edge of the left flap (about 1/4 inch). With planning and care I feel that you can save money and reduce damage to the airframe by using whatever wheels that you have available. Jack Webb L360, LIV BSAE ________________________________ From: "rwolf99@aol.com" To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 4:08:51 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Belly Landing 360 Video I saw a 360 which had done a gear up landing on asphalt or concrete while I was at Aircrafters in Watsonville. They were about to start repairing it. This would have been in 2001. I was pleasantly surprised at how little airframe damage there was. The belly pan was ground down somewhat, but the wing spars are about an inch above the belly pan so they were untouched. Of course the lower cowling needed some local work but the cowling was largely intact. Of course, the major expense is the engine teardown and the prop (isn't that what insurance is for?) but as far as airframe damage and occupant safety, well, I wouldn't have a major concern about landing gear up in a 360. That doesn't mean I want to do it. It just means that I'll be pretty calm about my personal safety it I ever have to do it. Much less dangerous than landing with one gear retracted. - Rob Wolf ________________________________ Finding the best videos just got easier. Try the NEW Truveo.com. --0-1656688302-1247297081=:1071 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Rob,
    In 1995 my left main would not go down, the problem was the hydraulic actuator had a bent shaft and would not allow full extension. I had lots of fuel and spent about 2.2 hours trying to get it down not knowing that the strut was bent, finally I landed on the right main and nose-wheel with flaps not fully extended.  This allow minimal damage to the flaps and then they did not drag on the asphalt. The total repairs including paying for a mechanic to repair the aircraft was under S1300. Compare this to landing gear up and having prop damage and engine teardown.  The military did several studies of landings with reduced number of wheels extended and determined that it is cost efficient to land on how ever many wheels that extend. My costs would have been much lower if the left wing tip had not hit a 4" metal post at the side of the runway.
    I had planned for the left turning tendency of the airplane with the left wingtip dragging by landing angled off to the right side of the runway but the tendency to turn left was greater than I expected and it finally went off the runway to the left, damaging the left wing tip and a scrap along the outboard trailing edge of the left flap (about 1/4 inch).
    With planning and care I feel that you can save money and reduce damage to the airframe by using whatever wheels that you have available.

Jack Webb
L360, LIV
BSAE

From: "rwolf99@aol.com" <rwolf99@aol.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 4:08:51 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Belly Landing 360 Video

I saw a 360 which had done a gear up landing on asphalt or concrete while I was at Aircrafters in Watsonville.  They were about to start repairing it.  This would have been in 2001.  I was pleasantly surprised at how little airframe damage there was.  The belly pan was ground down somewhat, but the wing spars are about an inch above the belly pan so they were untouched.  Of course the lower cowling needed some local work but the cowling was largely intact.

Of course, the major expense is the engine teardown and the prop (isn't that what insurance is for?) but as far as airframe damage and occupant safety, well, I wouldn't have a major concern about landing gear up in a 360.

That doesn't mean I want to do it.  It just means that I'll be pretty calm about my personal safety it I ever have to do it.  Much less dangerous than landing with one gear retracted.

- Rob Wolf
--0-1656688302-1247297081=:1071--