Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
The fact that runway distance did become an issue disproves the statement made by CCLol yeah I was thinking the same thing, fuselage on pavement probably helps the ground roll a tad.
The fact that runway distance did become an issue disproves the statement made by CCLol yeah I was thinking the same thing, fuselage on pavement probably helps the ground roll a tad.
I was just going to say they ended up in the grass.The fact that runway distance did become an issue disproves the statement made by CC
Just takes more power to taxi off the runwayLol yeah I was thinking the same thing, fuselage on pavement probably helps the ground roll a tad.
Just takes more power to taxi off the runway
The fact that runway distance did become an issue disproves the statement made by CC
I was just going to say they ended up in the grass.
Most reports say overrun and preliminary ADSB data shows it at the end of the runway. But not 100% sure.Did they end up off the side of the runway, or off the end?
Most reports say overrun and preliminary ADSB data shows it at the end of the runway. But not 100% sure.
Did they end up off the side of the runway, or off the end?
Lol yeah I was thinking the same thing, fuselage on pavement probably helps the ground roll a tad.
Not an exact correlation.
86-0132 slid 7500+ feet down the runway after its gear up landing.
Not an exact correlation.
86-0132 slid 7500+ feet down the runway after its gear up landing.
Nice Job by ATC there.
I always wonder about the value of a low approach with gear issues. If you have an unsafe gear indication and you do a low approach and the tower reports that they see the gear down, it doesn’t mean it’s down and locked. And it’s not going to inform or change the way you handle the subsequent approach and landing. What it does do is add a maneuver that we’re not trained or taught to do in an airliner (it’s not just a go around) and adds further opportunity for further issues. Especially if you’re root problem is a hydraulic issue.