haha, not only are you a valiant defender of our bill of rights, you're also a rocket scientist. You're a true renaissance man. And you've got the nerve to call someone else (whose clear sarcasm soared over your head) conceited. Ok, just wanted to pop in and point out that you're a completely ridiculous person, and your false modesty ("I'm just the bus driver") isn't winning you any points because every other post indicates that you *know* that you're the smartest person alive.
110SU how bad?
- Thread starter Gonzo
- Start date
haha, not only are you a valiant defender of our bill of rights, you're also a rocket scientist. You're a true renaissance man. And you've got the nerve to call someone else (whose clear sarcasm soared over your head) conceited. Ok, just wanted to pop in and point out that you're a completely ridiculous person, and your false modesty ("I'm just the bus driver") isn't winning you any points because every other post indicates that you *know* that you're the smartest person alive.
MFT1Air
Mfalme Soleimani
Actually Woog, he reminds me greatly of those "naysayers" during the Challenger incident. Now, they weren't these valiant, staunch defenders of a no-go status; they cowered to the pressures and initimidation of those officials who paid their checks. None . . .repeat, none of them stood up to fall on their swords to say no. See the correlation those naysayers and FF have in common? Lot of talk AFTER the fact. He was probably timid and whiny during his tenure as well as a fear of upsetting and being intimidated by staff, but after it's over, he's no longer concerned with the possibility of a head to head confrontation, so he can spout whatever rhetoric he desires. Kinda like those contractors. Challenger? It's official there was no evidence of the status of O-rings at varying temperatures different from flight flown previously, and because of that lack of data, no one wished to stand up and say no way we should fly. It wasn't a definite no go situation, yet because of that gray zone, no one had a strong backbone to speak up. . . until afterwards.
Sounds like someone we know?
In general, businesses do their best to keep their heads above water financially. 110SU has been flying for a long time. I kinda wonder how many people have flown this airplane knowing the history of the landing gear? You think they balked about flying the airplane? You think they even asked about the history of the airplane? Rather than fly simply to build hours and gain certificates/ratings, you think pilots checked out the history of the airplanes they fly? Go figure the odds of their performing their due diligence to determine the safeness or airworthiness of the airplane. What is the history of those airplanes being flown on a regular basis? Does the mx staff cut corners in order to keep airplanes flying? If there's all these complaints and comments about scheduling and maintenance issues, one could easily conclude there's just as much pressure on the mx staff to keep them flying. Is the mx staff the golden children or are they disgruntled as well? My belief? I think pilots complained about it, but flew it anyway for fear of angering staff.
I think they simply said, "heck, I'm only here for a short while. Let someone else worry about it."Yes, I'm curious when 110SU is going up and who's going to fly it AFTER mx signs it off as airworthy.
Florida_Flyer
Well-Known Member
I agree with what you say in the second paragraph. It does make a lot of sense. Yes most guys just hope it won't happen to them.
As for being a coward and not sticking my neck out. Remember this. I was at the school whilst I was posting for a long time. Mike Cohen was so angry he put out a $5000 reward on anyone who could rat me out to him. People knew but there were no takers. I carried on posting and putting my neck on the line. If I'd have posted under my own name or made open criticism in the school he would have thrown me out for sure. You've go to pick your battles and the ones you pick, fight to win. If that means guerilla tactics, fine. NickH had a head to head confrontation with management, as did Gonzo. Let's just say it was not a battle they could ever win and they didn't. Yes, I am still intimidated. If Cohen knew who it was posting he would set his lawyer on me, like he did with that guy a short while back.
As for you MFT1Air, I've said this before but I don't figure your agenda and motivations. You've been posting on the Aviator forum for more than two years. From your posts you sound like an expert on the school, a past student or instructor? You ask regular questions, often the same ones about timebuilding. You reguarly defend the school against criticism. However, the reality seems to be that you are not school alumni and after two years probably never will be. You've never even visited the place but you are willing to get involved in the politics as if you are alumni. Why? I honestly don't understand why? Me? I had a rough ride at the place and even now that I have a great job, I want to make sure that others go in with their eyes open. That's my agenda.
Are you honestly considering training at the Aviator and what ratings do you hold? Do you want to be a professional pilot? If not, why are you on the forum of a flight school? If you are interested, why tell me I know nothing about aviation? After all, I'm a pro pilot myself, which is one up on you.
As for being a coward and not sticking my neck out. Remember this. I was at the school whilst I was posting for a long time. Mike Cohen was so angry he put out a $5000 reward on anyone who could rat me out to him. People knew but there were no takers. I carried on posting and putting my neck on the line. If I'd have posted under my own name or made open criticism in the school he would have thrown me out for sure. You've go to pick your battles and the ones you pick, fight to win. If that means guerilla tactics, fine. NickH had a head to head confrontation with management, as did Gonzo. Let's just say it was not a battle they could ever win and they didn't. Yes, I am still intimidated. If Cohen knew who it was posting he would set his lawyer on me, like he did with that guy a short while back.
As for you MFT1Air, I've said this before but I don't figure your agenda and motivations. You've been posting on the Aviator forum for more than two years. From your posts you sound like an expert on the school, a past student or instructor? You ask regular questions, often the same ones about timebuilding. You reguarly defend the school against criticism. However, the reality seems to be that you are not school alumni and after two years probably never will be. You've never even visited the place but you are willing to get involved in the politics as if you are alumni. Why? I honestly don't understand why? Me? I had a rough ride at the place and even now that I have a great job, I want to make sure that others go in with their eyes open. That's my agenda.
Are you honestly considering training at the Aviator and what ratings do you hold? Do you want to be a professional pilot? If not, why are you on the forum of a flight school? If you are interested, why tell me I know nothing about aviation? After all, I'm a pro pilot myself, which is one up on you.
MFT1Air
Mfalme Soleimani
Never called you a coward, nor will I ever do so unless I've expressed that perspective to you in a face to face conversation. You might be a different person on a bar stool or a table, so I'll defer any definitive character analysis until that happens.
Guess that means we need to attend a Jetcareers "Meet and Greet" soon!
I'm not speaking pro-Ari-Ben nor con-Ari-Ben. I ask questions (detailed) to get definitive facts. I challenge subjective opinions/observations to gather validity or worthwhile perspectives on what people express as either negative or positive, then I evaluate those opinions as they relate to me or anyone close to me interested in pursing a career in aviation. I, too, spend a lot of time mentoring kids interested in aviation/aeronautics and space exploration with aviation being a small aspect of careers in which to explore. Given individual's desires to attend either small FBOs or academies, I can't express a perspective unless the information is substantive in nature. My opinion is many of your posts do not provide much concrete facts but rhetoric and fluff. I'll challenge that. . .either directly or sarcastically, but I will challenge it. If I agree or disagree with any post online, I'm usually not inclined to say much, but if I don't understand it, oh yes. . .you'll get a barrage of posts asking for clarification and justification of one's position. Call it age; call it maturity, call it simply a desire to gain information - useful information.
Now, to address your questions which truly are none of your business, but I'll provide you a perspective for the sake of argument. I am an aviation enthusiast. I've always wanted to fly, but my path took me in a different direction. I am retired military having spent 25 years experiencing the pros and cons of a pretty successful career. I have always enjoyed flying and been involved in flying. Do I wish to become a professional pilot? Define what professional pilot means vice becoming a commercial pilot, for your question is vague. My aviation mentors/counselors have been Air Force One CPTs, both 747 and UH-60; shuttle commanders who are also CFIs/CFIIs and MEIs whom I fly with regularly here in Houston; Southwest Airlines' CPTs past and present in addition to a few seasoned people on this forum who recommended this site to me. If I were to ask them what a professional pilot is, I'm believing their definition would conflict with yours. What do you think?
Silly but again perhaps another perspective of your lack of insight is your quote:
How can you be "one up" anyone much less me? My own personal opinion is that if you truly knew my background, you would aspire to have the experiences I've had, but you'll never come close with the short-sighted perspectives you've provided on this forum. Additionally, at your age, I'm fairly confident I was significantly further along in my career in the military than you presently are as a "pro pilot." They called me a professional soldier. I'm proud of that. Now, I simply kick back, relax and train astronauts for NASA. . .something I know for a fact I do better with more respect/admiration/appreciation than you receive as a FO.
. . .and if you like, I can prove that as well.
TripleSticks
Well-Known Member
Hey guys,
I just saw that there has been a lot of nose gear talk with the Duchess. I remember when I was there we used to always look at a certain part of the nose gear that seemed to cause problems and sometimes cause nose gear collapses. I thought I had a picture of the part but I don't so I'll try to describe it.
Up in the nose gear linkages there is a d-shaped pin that is pressed in to a housing. The pin is about 5/8 inches in diameter and about an inch long from what I remember. The flat on this pin lines up with another linkage. I can't remember exactly how the assembly looks but pin is the key component. It's pressed in to a housing and supposedly it has a tendency to come loose and turn. If the flat part does not line up with the other linkage then there is a chance that the nose gear will not lock, causing a collapse.
Talk to the maint guys there. They can show you exactly what part to look at. I would check it during preflight all the time. From what I understand it's not out of the ordinary for the Duchess to have nose gear problems.
There might be a picture somewhere on this web site.
http://www.aviatorlibrary.info/Library_Information.htm
j
I just saw that there has been a lot of nose gear talk with the Duchess. I remember when I was there we used to always look at a certain part of the nose gear that seemed to cause problems and sometimes cause nose gear collapses. I thought I had a picture of the part but I don't so I'll try to describe it.
Up in the nose gear linkages there is a d-shaped pin that is pressed in to a housing. The pin is about 5/8 inches in diameter and about an inch long from what I remember. The flat on this pin lines up with another linkage. I can't remember exactly how the assembly looks but pin is the key component. It's pressed in to a housing and supposedly it has a tendency to come loose and turn. If the flat part does not line up with the other linkage then there is a chance that the nose gear will not lock, causing a collapse.
Talk to the maint guys there. They can show you exactly what part to look at. I would check it during preflight all the time. From what I understand it's not out of the ordinary for the Duchess to have nose gear problems.
There might be a picture somewhere on this web site.
http://www.aviatorlibrary.info/Library_Information.htm
j
Florida_Flyer
Well-Known Member
That's good advice John. Did the gear collapse though, or would it not extend? My instructor told me that 278D had a similar problem a while back, gear stuck up and geared up. Did the student get billed for the flight or did the fact it ended up with an incident on his record, get the charge waived.
TripleSticks
Well-Known Member
There was never a gear collapse while I was at the school, that I can remember. Actually... there might have been. I remember there was something with one of the planes landing down in West Palm (or somewhere like that) with a couple time builders in it. I don't know what it was though. I can't remember. I just heard that the Duchess had that problem with the pin.
We checked that d-shaped pin all the time though. I seem to remember that if that pin turned and the flat did not match up with the mating part you would have a situation where the gear would not lock. Causing the possibility of a collapse after the gear was extended. It's been quite a while since I have been in a Duchess though. So I could be wrong.
We checked that d-shaped pin all the time though. I seem to remember that if that pin turned and the flat did not match up with the mating part you would have a situation where the gear would not lock. Causing the possibility of a collapse after the gear was extended. It's been quite a while since I have been in a Duchess though. So I could be wrong.
MFT1Air
Mfalme Soleimani
That's good information. . .which begs that question regarding if it's addressed during the preflight checks.
Gonzo
Well-Known Member
There are a lot of assumptions being made by some people without knowing any details.
We don't know whether there was an instructor and student in the plane, two pro students time building, or two hundred hour time builders.
Keep in mind the duchess is pretty idiot proof when it comes to the gear system. I'm willing to bet in most gear up situations the pilot is 99.99% at fault. I'm also willing to bet most of the gear incidences involving aviator planes involved two time builders. Most pro students at one time in their training will have a pack failure (I had two). It's not really a big deal.
When I was down there 110SU was my favorite plane. It had the best electronics, was the easiest to trim out, and was the fastest.
P.S. - the people giving NASA a hard time are crazy. When you think about the complexities of having to use a reusable orbiter. Not to mention unlike the Chinese and Russian organizations which can make a profit from the money launching satellites in the space NASA refuses to carry any commercial payload.
We don't know whether there was an instructor and student in the plane, two pro students time building, or two hundred hour time builders.
Keep in mind the duchess is pretty idiot proof when it comes to the gear system. I'm willing to bet in most gear up situations the pilot is 99.99% at fault. I'm also willing to bet most of the gear incidences involving aviator planes involved two time builders. Most pro students at one time in their training will have a pack failure (I had two). It's not really a big deal.
When I was down there 110SU was my favorite plane. It had the best electronics, was the easiest to trim out, and was the fastest.
P.S. - the people giving NASA a hard time are crazy. When you think about the complexities of having to use a reusable orbiter. Not to mention unlike the Chinese and Russian organizations which can make a profit from the money launching satellites in the space NASA refuses to carry any commercial payload.
MFT1Air
Mfalme Soleimani
Now those are excellent questions to ask as well. I would be hard pressed to remain calm if I got billed for the flight with an incident on my record. Then too, if I don't have an incident on my record and I'm uninjured, I did the time, logged the hours in my logbook. . .hey, I'm good. . .until the next flight.
This wasn't pilot error. They even bounced the plane off the runway 5 or 6 times trying to knock the nose gear out before finally landing it
Gonzo
Well-Known Member
Hopefully when it's all said and done and the investigation is completed it will be shown the pilots could not have done anything to prevent it from happening.
Hopefully some of the people who used to give me crap because I was very detailed during my preflight will realize why I took the extra time.
MFT1Air
Mfalme Soleimani
You won't ever receive a negative comment from me when one performs a detailed preflight. I usually pay detailed attention to what I perceive are critical things that might kill me. . .landing gear being one of those things.
yeah you take your time with everything don't you? have those instructor ratings yet?
Beechlover
Well-Known Member
Johnt,
I just want to extend my sincere thanks for your post. I have printed your description up on said component and will research this further. Please know that "helpful" information such as this is always appreciated. Again thankyou
TripleSticks
Well-Known Member
No problem. Have a good thanksgiving.
Florida_Flyer
Well-Known Member
Let's warp back to 2004; I wasn't around then but I checked out the 278D incident to find out what happened. Sounds similar. Here's what the FAA database reports:-
NARRATIVE
(-23) ON 10/18/04, AT 0236Z, BEECHCRAFT AIRPLANE REGISTRATION #N278D AND SERIAL #ME-23, THE PILOT CALLED PBI ATCT AND TOLD THEM THAT HIS AIRPLANE HAD AN UNSAFE NOSE GEAR INDICATION. WEST PALM BEACH POLICE HELICOPTER OFFERED TO SCAN N278D WITH NIGHT VISION EQUIPMENT. POLICE HELICOPTER (EAGLE ONE) REPORTED THAT THE NOSE GEAR WAS VISIBLE, BUT NOT FULLY EXTENDED, MULTIPLE TOUCH AND GOES TO ATTEMPT TO DISENGAGE STUCK NOSE GEAR. THE AIRPLANE CIRCLED TO LOSE FUEL. AT 0533Z PBI ATCT, UPGRADED ALERT STATUS TO AN ALERT II. AT 0601Z, N728D MADE AN EMERGENCY LANDING THAT RESULTED IN MINOR DAMAGE TO THE NOSE CONE OF THE AIRPLANE, THE NOSE LANDING GEAR DOOR AND WITH NO INJURIES TO THE CREW. INSPECTOR ^PRIVACY DATA^ FROM FSDO-17 AUTHORIZED THE AIRPLANE TO BE MOVED FROM THE RUNWAY. THE AIRCRAFT WAS TAKEN TO GALAXY AVIATION FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
So, to be fair to the Aviator, I've never heard of that plane having another gear related problem. Also the feds have released the final report on the European girl that had the fatal accident a few years back. The findings were that there WAS a failure of the flaps and she was not able to handle the situation. Here's the links.
Factual
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=MIA06FA007&rpt=fa
Cause
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=MIA06FA007&rpt=fi
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
I flew Duchess N110SU from Fort Pierce, FL (FPR) to Stinson Municipal field (SFF) in San Antonio, Texas in August 2006.
Did it solo, too. Wasn't worried she'd do anything I couldn't deal with alone. I knew she wouldn't bite me.
I then loaded her within 100 pounds of max gross and flew back.
I did this round trip over four days. Limiting factor? Weather.
She flew like a champ. Minus an incident where I had to land to reclose a door after a turbulence encounter so bad I almost wet myself, I had no problems.
It's a light twin being beaten to death as a trainer.
Ever wonder how many cycles the gear were designed for?
Before you impugn the design (which smacks of ulterior motives, in your case...) I suggest you consider the exact nature of your 'statistics'.
Did it solo, too. Wasn't worried she'd do anything I couldn't deal with alone. I knew she wouldn't bite me.
I then loaded her within 100 pounds of max gross and flew back.
I did this round trip over four days. Limiting factor? Weather.
She flew like a champ. Minus an incident where I had to land to reclose a door after a turbulence encounter so bad I almost wet myself, I had no problems.
It's a light twin being beaten to death as a trainer.
Ever wonder how many cycles the gear were designed for?
Before you impugn the design (which smacks of ulterior motives, in your case...) I suggest you consider the exact nature of your 'statistics'.
NickH
Uber Driver
5090M is back up. I stopped by FPR today and saw it being dragged out of maintenance. No idea how long it's been up again as this could have been a routine thing.
6630K was being stripped for parts, and there was another engineless duchess on the ramp. Are they ordering brand new ones as fast as the old ones expire?
6630K was being stripped for parts, and there was another engineless duchess on the ramp. Are they ordering brand new ones as fast as the old ones expire?
Mark815
Well-Known Member
So i was just lurking around and stumbled upon this thread. Funny to find people talking about the incident on here, I was the student who was in 110SU for this incident.
It was a dual flight, we were suppose to be working on single engine patterns. On the initial climb out my instructor "failed" one of my engines, once i recovered and got the engine back, I noticed that the red "in transit" light remained on, after the gear had retracted. We decided to recycle the gear, after selecting the down position we got 2 green mains, but no nose, and confirmed it by using the little mirror on the cowl of 110SU. Transit light stayed on the entire time, the instructor told me to recycle the gear one more time, at that point the mains didn't even retract and we noticed the Gear Motor Breaker popped (with the red light still on). We tried the emergency dump but that failed to work. After letting the tower know we departed the area to trouble shoot. We decided that my instructor would obviously be responsible for flying the aircraft, and i would take care of the rest, all radio communication, writing down procedures etc etc. So we tried a few maneuvers, positive G pulls, steep turns, yawing left and right with no luck. We talked with Aviator maintenance guys on the ground over the radio to see if there was anything we might not be seeing or doing, but we had already done everything they suggested. We had full tanks so we circled for about 3 1/2 hours. Like someone else stated we also did a few bounce and goes on the mains to see if that would shake the nose loose but it didnt, so at the end we had no choice but land it the way it was. After writing down a procedure and going over it a few times in the air we decided to execute it, i was in charge of shutting down and feathering the engines once the runway was made, once we were on final and the runway was made i shutdown and feathered the left engine and secured it, and once we touched down i shutdown and feathered the right engine and secured that, popped the door, shut down the rest of the electrical\master switch and got out. In a nutshell thats what happened, but it turns out it looks like a hydraulic line blew, there was hydraulic fluid all over the belly. No injuries, nothing on my record since i wasn't PIC.
It was a dual flight, we were suppose to be working on single engine patterns. On the initial climb out my instructor "failed" one of my engines, once i recovered and got the engine back, I noticed that the red "in transit" light remained on, after the gear had retracted. We decided to recycle the gear, after selecting the down position we got 2 green mains, but no nose, and confirmed it by using the little mirror on the cowl of 110SU. Transit light stayed on the entire time, the instructor told me to recycle the gear one more time, at that point the mains didn't even retract and we noticed the Gear Motor Breaker popped (with the red light still on). We tried the emergency dump but that failed to work. After letting the tower know we departed the area to trouble shoot. We decided that my instructor would obviously be responsible for flying the aircraft, and i would take care of the rest, all radio communication, writing down procedures etc etc. So we tried a few maneuvers, positive G pulls, steep turns, yawing left and right with no luck. We talked with Aviator maintenance guys on the ground over the radio to see if there was anything we might not be seeing or doing, but we had already done everything they suggested. We had full tanks so we circled for about 3 1/2 hours. Like someone else stated we also did a few bounce and goes on the mains to see if that would shake the nose loose but it didnt, so at the end we had no choice but land it the way it was. After writing down a procedure and going over it a few times in the air we decided to execute it, i was in charge of shutting down and feathering the engines once the runway was made, once we were on final and the runway was made i shutdown and feathered the left engine and secured it, and once we touched down i shutdown and feathered the right engine and secured that, popped the door, shut down the rest of the electrical\master switch and got out. In a nutshell thats what happened, but it turns out it looks like a hydraulic line blew, there was hydraulic fluid all over the belly. No injuries, nothing on my record since i wasn't PIC.