Hold That Gear! Right?
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 01. 2024
- Hold That Gear! Right? When is the best place to raise the gear? Is there value in holding gear retraction until there is no more runway below you?
FlyWire Store:
flywire-store.creator-spring.com
Patreon FlyWire:
/ flywire
FlyWire is about exploring flight and the freedom this incredible experience brings us on a personal level. Flying has always captured the imagination and excitement of living life to its fullest. Hi, I'm Scott Perdue. In a former life I flew the F-4 and F-15E, more recently I retired from a major airline. I've written for several aviation magazines over the years, was a consultant for RAND, the USAF, Navy, NASA as well as few others, wrote a military thriller- 'Pale Moon Rising' (still on Kindle). But mostly I like flying, or teaching flying. Some of the most fun I had was with Tom Gresham on a TV show called 'Wings to Adventure". We flew lots of different airplanes all over the country. Now with FlyWire I want to showcase the fun in flying, share the joy and freedom of flight and explore the world with you. Make sure you subscribe if you want to go along for the ride!
#Pilot #Fly #Flying #Fly yourself #aviation #FlyingTraining #LearntoFly #adventure #military aviation #aviationhistory
Website: www.flywire.online
Merch Links: flywire-store.creator-spring.com
My Book: Pale Moon Rising tinyurl.com/5abmxxkh
Twitter: @FlyWireO / flywire.online
Facebook: / flywireonline
"I was told there would be no math..."
Thanks Gunny, I always wondered about the theory of "no more useable runway" in retract acft.
This has been beat into me as soon as I started flying retracts."Don't retract until you have no usable runway." And i never bought it. For all the reasons you just stated, Scott. Thank you!
6 cilynder or 4 you are taking about? How many times in last year did you practice "50' engine fails" After you retracted the gear?? BE HONEST. Because many pilots lie about this..
“….watch the next cat video.”
Ha! That’s funny.
One of my favorite esoteric topics. I fly a Mooney and retract the gear at positive rate to get to DMMS ASAP. If I have an engine failure, 99% of the time I'm landing gear up - on or off pavement and I'm landing straight ahead unless I'm at ~ 1000 AGL. Lots of things to do before the forced landing, (pitch to DMMS, shut off the fuel & master, get the door cracked open to make sure I can get out, etc.) - the gear is the least of my worries. Scott's right, a typical gear up on pavement doesn't do much damage.
Thanks for taking the time to chart this out. As a (28v) A36 owner, clarity in the 30-35kts delta to stall is the primary concern when startled with an engine failure. One simply needs the best possible margin with minimal impact on normal ops performance, and an outcome that offers the most time to deal with the startle factor. Positive rate, gear-up and climb at Vy seems to be the best answer.
I prefer Vcc and your A36 engine would agree. Cooling is a big issue.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Understand, especially since it’s a TC and I live in PHX.
Positive rate, gear up; thats worked well for me for 13,000 hours in many different airplanes
For a long time I didn't retract my hydraulic landing gear at "positive climb" because when I did the left main often failed to lock. As it turns out the main wheels were spinning so much just after liftoff that they had a gyroscope effect that worked against retraction. Now I just apply brakes after liftoff, then retract the gear.
I don’t think Gyro would slow lateral movement.
I learned retracts in the Army: Positive rate; gear up. Fast forward 18 years. I buy a Piper Arrow and I'm getting checked out in it. I call positive rate gear up and my instructor corrects me to wait until "no useable runway available" before retraction. We're on a 5,000 foot runway. By the time I rotate and see positive rate there is no useable runway. I didn't like it but he demanded it. This video confirms my Army training and what I intrinsically thought was right. Great video, Scott. No one is talking about accelerate stop distances either which I think is important to this discussion as well.
Thanks! I've done videos on Aceel-Stop in singles. I think it is an issue.
This maxim may have started back in the day when planes took a bit more time to 'get going'. I flew a Beech 18 cargo plane for a while and when we were heavy, we'd get it off the runway then relax back pressure for a couple of seconds to let it built up airspeed while still low over the runway, then start the climb and raise the gear. If an engine had let go when we were still low over the runway it would've been easy to set it down again. I wasn't aware of any company policy on this, but that's how we flew them. When the plane was light, of course, we just went up and, after a tapping the brakes to stop the wheel rotation, so did the gear.
Given that altitude and speed are your friends, raise the gear on positive rate of climb.
If the worst happens, just do a gear up landing.
Your videos are always good. Even though I can no longer pass a medical, flying is in my blood.
Thanks Mike, I feel your pain!
8,000 hrs in a C-182 RG, always waited until I knew I couldn’t get back on to the runway. Just made me more comfortable, no other reason. With 140 kt. gear speed no worries about overspeed.
The engine failure issue trumps the runway issue, in my opinion!
I guess one can apply what most Twin Pilots do, positive rate, gear up.
Loose an engine on take off one wants less drag.
Stall & Spin while gear down or belly land off runway is my preference if given the option.
My 1947 35 v tail has gear and flap speeds at just 100 MPH🥴. On take off, I really have to pitch up. On approach, I really have to work hard to slow to 100 MPH, gear down first, then flaps.
@tFor the ignorant of 50-100' feet engine fails. And most small twins cant climb well on one engine even with gear up unless perfect technique, low weight and low dens altitude and bad engine feathered. DUHH. Dont bullshit me.
Let me see your video landing it well after engine out at 50 feet with gear coming up with 3 on board and 50 pnds luggage. Lets see it..
@@outwiththem
Not really sure what your question is?
Most pilots flying twins choose to keep flaps up on takeoff & it's gear up & yaw damper on before 500ft mainly for drag purposes & 2 less things needed to do if engine failed on one engine etc.
I guess if it were me if I'm in a single engine or light twin & a engine had failed at 50-100ft altitude, even with gear up if be looking to place it down straight ahead belly landings with zero turning back to runway. That's just me.
Again, most light twins can & will climb slowly at 100-250ft a minute. If you have zero obstacles like on an open great plains as long as your flying at or over blue line plane should indeed climb.
That's assuming that both gear & flaps are up. That's assuming pilot was quickly able to perform "The Drill" steps to feather correct engine. Agreed, with a unfeathered engine it most likely will not climb. In that case it's as stated before, aim to glide it down straight ahead or 5 degrees left or right.
Airspeed = Life
In a twin you let airspeed get under blue line close to vmca it's game over.
Not that I fly a retractable gear plane, but I have always wondered what that trade off was - don't retract just in case but pay the drag penalty as the runway disappears, or retract asap and gain as much energy as quick as possible. I never really believed that leaving the gear down was the way to go..
2nd time watching Scott. Even better the second time!😀. Thanks for doing this work. Gear up for me after PRClimb ❤️🇺🇸🙏🏻😀👍
My flight instructor used to say “positive rate of climb, but in the Air Force, some guys would flip it up, and rely on the squat switch, and as soon as it was off the ground, the gear would retract. Looked mighty cool!”
I asked why he didn’t do that while in the AF… “if you hit an unexpected bump, you’re explaining things to the Old Man.”
Exactly right!
My thought was "how do they know to avoid incidental bumps on the runway?"
There was a legend during the late 1960s in Western Australia about an unlicenced pilot and the efforts of the then Australian aviation authority to catch him entering the aircraft on the ground or exiting after a landing to prove an offence for prosecution. He apparently was quite competent but could not pass a medical due to medically manageable diabetes.
The pilot became known as "the phantom pilot". In one event, he was under surveillance but during a distraction he entered his aircraft and took off. The observers heard the take-off, climbed into their Aero Commander and followed in hot pursuit.
Apparently in the eagerness of the chase, their pilot retracted the gear during the take-off roll. The locks apparently should have taken care of it except that the runway at Wittenoom had a hump which lofted the Commander long enough for the retract cycle to commence and it settled on its belly.
In the course of another pursuit, he led them to a mustering strip on the station and landed. He waited for them to run off the end of the runway, then took off again leaving them stranded until they could clear enough scrub to safely take off again.
I vaguely recall he came undone when during taking a person for a joylight. He went a little too low buzzing a Valiant ute on the highway and hooked the nosewheel of his Cessna in the rear window of the ute's cab.
Another legend had it that eventually he was granted a restricted licence, with the logic being applied that he might be motivated to fall into line by having something to lose.
All of these stories came to me secondhand.
I visited the station he managed in 1972 primed by all of the yarns I had heard. I was an idiot kid eager in those days and except for age, nothing much may have changed. During my visit, knowing of the phantom pilot's adventures and mishaps, I contrived to tease out some of the legends from the man himself by asking him about the many different aircraft he had owned. He was quite obliging in telling me about them. In describing one aircraft, he said "I crashed that." On asking what had happened his reply was "It stopped".
I applied for a student pilot's licence and began taking lessons at a flight school. I scraped though a pilot's medical with restrictions which would have limited me to flying myself around VFR only with no one else aboard. I discontinued as the hourly costs went up. It was eat/pay for roof over head or fly but not both. I had also moved to another remote town with a three hour commute each way over unsealed rough roads to the nearest flight school. Then my life insurance provider found out and was not too keen about it.
I was born about 50 years too soon. In Australia we now have Recreational Aviation Australia, formerly the Australian Ultralight Federation which was delegated to administrate and licence aircraft and pilots in a separate tier of aviation to GA. Now I am 75 and incrementing, of lesser physical condition and now needing to watch the coin of the realm as it dwindles in value. So thus I was and remain a groundfowl. My aviation curiosity is being sated by presently helping in small ways to build a Bowers Fly Baby.
@@DARANGULAFILM Oh, there are thousands of diabetics and heart patients flying in USA. Buy an electric motorcycle or Bike and have fun. They dont break the bank like airplanes do.
Sitting on the ramp engine running passenger and baggage loaded. “Oh I forgot to drain the sumps. Ah, it will be alright.” Right after rotation at about 10 feet the engine quit cold. I was taught to delay gear retraction until “out of usable runway” so I set the Mooney M20C down and coasted to the next taxiway exit. It took me 30 minutes to drain the water out. A downpour thunderstorm the night before had put water through what turns out to be leaky O-rings in each fuel cap. Needless to say I was lucky and stupid but became a fuel drain fanatic. And I still delay gear retraction.
Whatever works for you. There’s always an exception.
This is a fine argument for delaying retraction, but if you had the failure 10 seconds later the extra speed and altitude would’ve been in your favor. Since you can’t control the failure I say put yourself in the best spot to survive a failure before putting yourself in a position to roll it back on. Glad it worked out for you that time!
I fly a V35B (12v) and the landing gear is an anchor. I pull it up as quickly as I can. My goal is preserving life, not vehicles. I want altitude and speed as quickly as possible, and leaving the gear down dramatically reduces rate of climb and speed.
I Agree. And to add to that many runways you would fly to in general aviation are short enough (in europe anyways but i presume outside the big hubs that is similar in the us) that by the point you would put the gear up the usable runway (meaning you are able to stop on the tarmac) is almost gone anyway. Depending on the time of year and condition of fields etc. it would actually be preferable to do a gear up landing to prevent rollover(especially on taildraggers)
@@ZeeroGamingTV ...agreed.
@@ZeeroGamingTV in what universe is it preferable to land with your gear up instead of down? your landing gear is not an optional extra to be used only when conditions permit
@@andyrose5441 unsure how you came to think he's talking about landing in any of this
@@rbryanhull you saw i was responding to zeerogaming right?
he said and i quote "it would actually be preferable to do a gear up landing"
I've never been instructed to retract the gear at anytime other than positive rate.
The co-Captain and I flying the KingAir 200 concluded our takeoff would be (non standard).
During the takeoff the PF sets the torque and maintains control of the torque levers except the PNF will tweak the torque and monitor the engine parameters during the takeoff sequence.
After liftoff the PF decides when he can no longer ABORT and remain on the remaining runway.
Once the pilot goes for the gear, it's a GO, not at positive rate, and transitions back to the torque levers.
Do I remember correctly from ABS flight clinics that drag increases during gear retraction before it falls away when the rollers are stowed? If so, in a 12v system (as I had) and in a hot, high, short evolution it might be wise not to touch anything until you know - absolutely - you can clear those rocks and trees at the end of the runway. That said, better not to find yourself in a hot, high, short situation where details like gear drag are make or break. I know my own process was to raise the gear when I had clear positive ROC no matter how much runway was still ahead.
Positive rate.... there are some instances where holding the gerar is not a bad idea. Fly intentionally!
Common sense backed by experience and data. Thanks for the take-away: “Do it your way, but do it intentionally …”
Great series, Scott. I switched to cruise climb immediately on takeoff after your previous video results. More speed, more energy, more options! But I’ve been messing about with gear retract as well, trying to decide by general observation what works better… and it has seemed to me that immediate gear up with positive rate of climb is better. Now your data confirms this, so thanks. Oh, I fly a Mooney 231, not a Bonanza.
James, I figured it would apply to a Mooney as well, it's great to hear from you!
One important addition to your video is to consider the Cessna 337 model with the "clam door" covers on the back side of the fuselage, for when opened attempting to retract or extend the gear, especially with an engine problem, will create a 250 foot per minute decent rate during the time the doors are cycling. Essentially, with an engine failure, Cessna suggests not to retract the gear until well away from the ground or better yet, to just keep the gear extended if you were returning to land at the airport you departed. Treat the emergency as if you were flying the non-retractable Cessna 336 under these circumstances. 100 degree summertime afternoon temperatures at gross weight taking off southbound at Meacham Field, will put you flying around the Fort Worth skyscrapers even if you do things just right. Bottom line is that those clam shell doors will cause you to descend if you raise or lower the gear too close to the ground.
That’s why I didn’t say every GA airplane. Gotta have some judgment as PIC.
I'm not a pilot, Scott. However, being a fan of experience, I'm all ears to what you have to say.
HE AND JUAN B. ARE MUST SEES FOR ME.
when you are done using it, put it away. Added drag just reduces airspeed, climb rate and engine cooling.
Depends also on aircraft type, I have a glider with retractable gear. We leave gear down until well beyond a safe altitude above the airport. But in our case a rope break is a lot more common than an engine failure and we need one hand on the spoiler one one on the stick and a third to operate the manual gear lever. We also will do a 180 degree turn at 200' agl off the end of the runway and land down wind. One wheel and doors is not a lot of drag at 65 kts so it is a lot less to deal with if you leave it out until you are sure you won't be in a hurry during the landing. I also had an engine fail on a Cherokee 140 at 30 feet after takeoff and landed on the runway, so you might wait just a few seconds. When I was flying the Jet at the airline it was pos rate gear up. If I was flying a SEL with retracts I most likely would pull them up at pos rate if the runway wasn't 10000 or more.
Back when I was a charter pilot operating under Part 135. I had to have a 6 month check ride from the FAA. Because many of the airports in West Virginia were on the tops, or near the tops, of mountains, the FAA didn’t want us to try to stop on case of an engine failure; they didn’t want us to run off of the end of the runway and over a cliff. On the check ride, the FAA examiner would shut down an engine right after lift off and expect us to “go” on one engine. We were using an Aztec for these check rides. It was sort of a game for us to play to see which one of us could make the FAA examiner not shut down an engine on takeoff by retracting the landing gear just as soon as the Aztec was out of ground effect. I’ve seen that hand reach for the mixture just to see it fall back into the examiners lap. Of course I had to do the takeoff again but not retract the landing gear as soon. After a year of this “cat and mouse” games the FAA gave our chief pilot authorization to do the check rides.
Did you fly for Cumberland Airlines?
Love the physics and systems point of view. We need more of this approach in GA and learning environments,
I've flown my 250 Comanche for forty years. My father (an old school pilot from WWII) insisted on gear up as soon as positive climb was established. I have always agreed with that. Comanches have no inner gear doors and probably have less drag than your A-36 as they retract. Still, getting the gear up early makes a noticeable increase in speed and climb. Thanks for this and many other great videos, Scott.
I was taught to leave the gear down on my Bonanza G36 until 400 MSL.
with my 190# and about 40 gallons of fuel.
I did experiment with retracting it at about 30’, but no matter what I tried,
I’d only be about 400 AGL by the end of the 5,500’ runway at 2,300 MSL.
IIRC, empty weight was 2720 with the Tornado Alley Turbo.
With myself and 4 adults aboard it was only about 200’ above the end of
the runway.
It was good for 185-190 KTAS at about 17,000 MSL, but I was never comfortable
with the ground-roll, so I sold it and got an RV-7.
I did LOVE the way the gear slowed the G36 when dropped at up to 144 KTS. (no
such animal on the RV7!)
Yup. I’ve been right for 35 years. “Positive rate gear up” - that’s one word. Remember, it’s the insurance company’s airplane the moment we decide to pull it outta the hangar.
Gear up ensures that's true. 😂
It may be the insurance company's plane the moment you pull it out of the hangar, but it's YOUR ass if the engine fails during takeoff!
@@jeffmorton9220 the landing gear saves the airplane, assuming you don't overrun because of the longer stopping distance. Gear up landings rarely cause injuries let alone fatalities. They rarely cause substantial airframe damage either. The largest cost is typically the engine teardown inspection, and in this scenario the engine has already failed anyway.
Gunny this is outstanding. I have always retracted my gear asap just due to habit patterns from jets (to avoid over speed) and because I think it’s cooler to do it earlier. Now I have the science to back it up too. Thanks Gunny! What an interesting topic to dig into. Cheers! JJ
Thanks JJ! How are you enjoying that V-Tail? Are you coming to Oshkosh this year?
Love my MightyV - looking forward to seeing you at OSH24 Gunny!
G'day Scott,
Good stuff !
On the one hand,
I suspect that the "convention" of flying to the end of the Runway before raising the Undercarriage began back when raising the Wheels involved flying with one hand and winding a Crank-handle 37 turns with the other, or friction-nutting the Throttle while holding the Stick with one's knees, and then flying with the Left hand - while reaching over to the Right side of the Panel to actuate the Undercarriage Up/Down Selector..
Spitfires, for example, are somewhere between being notorious, famous, and infamous ; for
Waggling their Wings as they go over the fence - as the pilot changes hands while flipping the Selector.
I think the goal was to have the Aeroplane sufficiently clear of the ground as to be able to wobble and wriggle about a bit - without risking hitting anything..., while only actually notionally "Under Control" during the co-ordinated little gymnastic performance...
On the other hand, I can well imagine some Base Commander on a WW-2 Training Aerodrome - regardless of Cockpit Ergonomics..., responding to any uptick in
Students flying Solo trying too hard to
Look Cool,
By selecting "Gear-Up" as they
Rotate...,
Misjudging their Airspeed &
Power/Drag Curve - then
Settling back onto the ground, making very
Expensive noises as it slows down...;
By posting Standing Orders
Requiring everybody to leave their
Wheels Down until
After they're safely Airborne, and
Climbing away steadily - and the Boundary Fence is a convenient place to draw that line....(?).
In the Gripping Hand, I like the idea of holding the wheels on the Ground, accelerating to 1.5 or 2 times the Stall speed, thus ensuring that the initial Climbout won't run out of energy when I get out of Ground Effect ; then I
"Leap" off the ground a bit steeply, before lowering the nose back down to an angle at which the Engine can pull me uphill without losing too much Airspeed....
I watched a Foot-launched Powered Hang-Glider raise the
Undercarriage too early, once though,
At an Airshow...
It was an "Easy-Riser", ie an "Icarus" Tailless Swept-Wing Hang Glider, using a tiny weeny little bit of Weight-shift for Pitch control, and big Drag-Rudders out at the Wingtips for Coupled Yaw/Roll inputs - mated with a 10-Hp McCulloch Chainsaw motor, turning at 10,000 RPM on the upper Centre-Section Trailing Edge, pushing via a tiny little direct-drive Razor-sharp Fibreglass propeller...
He more or less wore it, Elbows hooked over the inner Ribs of the bottom Wings, sitting in a fabric Sling, a Rudder-Stick in each Hand...,
And a "Clothespeg" Throttle in his mouth...
(Bite hard for Full Throttle..., Open wide for Flight-Idle...,
Spit it out, so that when it hangs inverted on it's Cable - then the interior
Mercury Switch will effect an
Emergency Ingition Cutoff...!)
So we, the assembled multitude at the last Schoefields Airshow in 1981, watched..., as the
Screaming Take-off Shuffle became almost a
Run..., then the Run became
Moonwalking, like the
Pussy Cat with 7-league Boots, his
Steps becoming ever longer, with his whole body dangling down, making copious amounts of Drag.
When the Steps were maybe 20 or 30 ft apart, he
Retracted his Undercarriage...
Pulling up both Legs, resting his Heels atop the
Lower Centre-Section Leading-Edge...; which was indeed the recommended
"Cruising Posture" for the things,
With only his
Buttocks & upper Thighs
Dangling down in the
Airflow,
Smoothly curved and
Streamlined though...
And clearly he expected to climb out and away..., but either his Clothespeg wasn't quite
Bitten sufficiently tight,
Or his Chainsaw had been fed a dose of bad Fuel, or the
Density-Altitude was beyond the thing...(?).
But he sat there, sceaming away at full throttle and maybe 15 mph as he slowly mushed back down, and literally flew his
Bum straight
Onto the Runway...
And then the whole thing nosed over and disappeared, behind the Dustcloud which it raised in the impact.
Maybe if he'd stayed on the ground for a bit longer, and run a bit harder, and got moving a bit faster..., before trying to jump up into the Sky ; then perhaps he wouldn't have literally fallen down onto his Arse, in front of a crowd of thousands... (!) ?
The only Machines I've flown which had retractable Undercarriages were
Sailplanes, being Aerotowed ; and when so engaged the
"Drill" is to leave the Wheel down until after releasing the Tow (!) ; because when being towed in "High Tow" one potential danger is posed if the Glider pitches down, overspeeds, and the Towrope goes
Slack..., and then JERKS Tight, and breaks at the Weak-Links...
So the Wheel stays down,
Specifically to generate a bit of extra Drag, to better assist in keeping the
Tension stable in the
Towrope...
"Horses for Courses..." apparently !
Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth of pontification...
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
The main reason to keep gear down longer is to have gear down if engine quits. Extreme example is takeoff from 11,000 feet runway - gear up right away, engine quits, and there is 10,000 feet to land on but gear is up and there is no time to get it down.
In my A36, I keep gear down while I still see runway end through the windshield (with the usual about 10 degree up on takeoff). I did a few tests on long runways in the past and this is about how much runway I would need to land if engine quits shortly after takeoff.
I have an F35 Bonanza, 12 volt system. I normally raise the gear on positive rate. If I am in a tight field with obstacles I raise it once I know I am going to clear the obstacle.
When I land my Bonanza the gear coming down is like a wall and pointing the nose down doesn’t speed up at all That tells me I want it gone as soon as the wheels are off the ground. As soon as I’m positive and I can safely snap the button up it happens.
I enjoyed your comment about the guy with the slide rule. Which is how/when many currently operated GA planes were designed. I was a kid when the first TI calculators began to appear. My dad insisted I had to know the slide rule first. He nearly always had one in his shirt pocket.
Texas Instruments. I had them in Venezuela in the 1970 +/- .
Love your stuff. Long time watcher. Career ARFF guy and active pilot. Nowhere near the experience you have. However , I have personally witnessed a 14 volt bonanza lift off approx 1200’ feet down an 8000’ strip. Sucked the gear immediately. Engine faltered and he was back in the deck , on his belly and partially deployed now mangled gear with about 3000’ of runway remaining ahead of him. Safe. However his beautiful Bonanza was totaled by insurance company. Just my opinion , but I felt that bird was wasted totally unnecessarily. Had the gear been down this would have been a non-event. With all due respect , your numbers are talking about saving literally seconds and altitude measured in hundreds of feet. For my money , on a flight of any length , I can make it break that advantage by coughing while I don’t have the autopilot on. Now I might be misunderstanding and if I am I apologize, but I see no benefit in bringing the gear up (while it’s still possible to utilize the runway ahead of you) Yes , for sure … if there’s no truly useable runway left?…. Then go for it. But the term I’ve always been taught it “no USEABLE” runway remaining and I believe if you’re in the habit of “wheels up” the second you have a positive climb, like the guy I saw was , you may just be throwing away some good options should the unthinkable happen. Soeaking with him , he was kicking himself.
Interesting. In an Arrow it takes about 7 seconds for gear transit. On my commercial check, the DPE actually pulled the engine after liftoff (~50 feet?). Fortunately I had not yet raised the gear. I pitched down, and sent to flaps 3 in one motion and greased it. I shutter to think what would have resulted if the gear were in transit. Likely the DPE would not have pulled the throttle. Actually I don't think they are allowed to do that anymore. In any case, think there may be more give and take here. I don't raise the gear at positive rate unless there is no more room to land which well before the end of the runway. All depends on the aircraft. In that little space, a couple of percent difference in climb, and fuel is not a big deal to me so my positive decision is to delay if runway permits. I do appreciate the time you put into the data collection and analysis. Always a pleasure to see how fun the process is.
Thanks GreenGuy, I don't think I said there is only one way to do it in the video. There are always exceptions. I'm pretty sure I said choose the technique you use intentionally rather than on hearsay. And the point of the video actually is about that 15-7%. An engine failure over the runway and put it down gear up or down is NOT the issue. The engine failure after the takeoff IS was more risky and kills more people. Energy means everything and that IS THE POINT.
A gear up landing executed with skill, does minimal damage to the airplane. Boil it down and I think you missed the point of the video. But thanks for watching and commenting.
Thanks. Watched again and agree. I like the way you break it down. Made me think a lot more about what is largely taken from granted. All made me curious about positive rate and positive climb with respect just how much altitude has been gained when the VSI indicates a solid positive rate. Never really took notice. Another excuse to do a few more circuits. Never can get enough.
When I first started flying back in 1986 I began flying a 1966 Mooney M20C.
With the famous Johnson Bar gear lever!
One day I got her off the runway very quickly and made the twist & tug of the gear lever.
When the planes owner, my first instructor, pulled the throttle asking "You've just lost the engine and the gear is up, what now?"
"You're going to spread her across the runway!"
His lesson was;
In any light retractable plane, single or twin.
Rotate, wait till there is no more runway that you can touch down on should you have to then select gear up.
A long time airline pilot mate of mine had a gorgeous low time 1975 Piper Arrow II.
I went flying with him one day years ago and it was 'Positive rate, gear up' seconds after getting plane off the runway.
So I pulled his throttle!
He freaked but got it all sorted.
When he rather annoyed a few minutes later asked why I'd done that.
I told him of the lesson I'd been taught nearly 40 years ago.
In his B777 it is 'Positive rate, gear up'
But in the Arrow it shouldn't be. Just in case something goes bang shortly after rotate.
You then have the option of touching down on your wheels.
But you don't if the gear in is process of or completely retracted. It's going to be expensive!
The other thing I reminded him of was the Arrow II has a 130kt IAS gear limit so he can keep the wheels dangling in the breeze for ages
He told a while afterwards that my killing his engine right after takeoff and telling him of my early lesson changed the way he flies the Arrow.
And the way his friends fly their planes.
Opinions. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Oh, by the way if you thought I was advocating Positive Rate occurs when breaking ground… you missed the point.
You are very fortunate you didnt try that stunt with me flying-
Positive rate, gear up. No one should be climbing with the wheels dangling. Save for a few exceptions, like flying with you, or flying a clam shell door sezzna. lol. Better to have a controlled crash than an uncontrolled bouncy, gear rippin’, aluminum cartwheelin’ botched “landing” on less than runway than expected.
When do you want to fly with me?
In the Meyers 200, if I’m concerned about clearing obstacles, I’ll leave gear down until I’ve cleared the obstacle. The inner gear doors cause more drag when they’re in transit versus the gear remaining down.
Interesting presentation. For current and competent pilots familiar with their airplanes, I can see the point. For S/E complex airplanes and Part 23 twins, however, I instructed my students to wait till the remaining runway was unusable. The marginal change in performance makes little difference in normal operations, and the issue becomes response when an engine quits. For new pilots, the shock factor and decision-making time is extended compared to experienced aviators, and having an affirmative plan memorized reduces the workload and time lost. Also, while flying jets in the airline, we retracted the gear at positive rate, but we had done a runway analysis calculation that assured the ability to climb from the airport. For loaded Part 23 twins, the working engine is guaranteed only to relocate the crash site when the other engine packs it in, making usable runway ahead helpful. IMO an inexperienced or low time pilot accepting a gear up landing when it could have been made wheels down doesn't make sense.
Well, for Bonazas. Pull up the gear on a C337 or 210, all those doors opening & the gear twisting at a glacial speed are dangerous, if low& slow.
I too favor airspeed over altitude when low where airspeed is life. I can confirm, in many engine failures while low, that airspeed provided the energy necessary to maneuver to very near landing zones.
I know how to do turnback maneuvers very well. Had to do 2 from 700 agl. No damages. Cherokees. But if i decide to never do another again and with good places to land in front, i will use cruise climb, not Vy- and crash in front next time. Most airplanes, if you use cruise climb speeds YOU CANNOT TURNBACK DUE TOO FLAT A CLIMB ANGLE.
Awesome video and breakdown. I have a lot of times in 210s so the drag is not significant, however I would always pull the gear up positive rate. I just watched a video where the pilot flying a multi engine airplane used the “out of usable, runway gear up“. Great detail and topic sir
Left vertical scale was VS, would suggest putting a vertical scale on right side with the pitch angle scale....
That's a next level Excel skill.
Most engine fails on gear up altitude are the partial power kind, and 6 cylinder engines like yours is about a cylinder lost. Most are fuel injected engines so not much ice probems there. In that case, due you will still be able to climb well on 5 cylinders, you will be able turnaround the airport. No turnback needed with 5, they climb well anyway. So it is ok to raise the gear as soon as climbing well and get ready for the most common kind of engine failure on 6 cylinder engines you have.
4 cylinder engines, You will have only 3 cylinders left, you will not climb at all on 3 cylinders unless low weight and low density alt. If partial power when gear up altitude, then better land in front if runway left. And for that, better with gear down (for me). But it takes practice to do that. So do on sim first. Practice 50 feet partial power fails.
I used to teach “50 feet engine fails” on singles when CFI in 1990’s. 4,700 long runway. All times stopped at end.. oops.. But never hit the fence or scrapped the tires.
I moved away to fly jets and retired in 2016. But as far as i know, 3 of my 20 so students i taught 50 feet EFATO savedthem selves from accidents by doing that 50 feet engine fail maneuver by pushing nose down and land in front on runway. 1- C172 took off and oil door opened all way up, He lowered nose and landed as taught. 2- Piper Arrow. Hit a goose with wing at about 40 feet on take off. As taught, lowered nose and landed in front too. Wing was damaged and replaced. And more.
That was my CFI. Hit the bullshiters well. So many in net lately. Talking about maneuvers they don't know well. Show them your 1995 "50 feet engine fails" 2 videos you have.
@@CFITOMAHAWK2 He doesnt want to. Those guys BS will start crying.. Buah Buah, that is dangerous practice.. Buahh, Buahh, .. LOL.. They cant do that..
I'm sold - great video
Thank you for explaining this so clearly. Very useful information and a great learning opportunity.
Out of runway, Gear up, was what I was always taught. Until you are out of runway, you are a fixed gear aircraft. I trained in an Arrow and owned a c35 bonanza. If you are on a 6,00 foot runway and have an engine stutter after positive rate gear up, you are going to belly land the aircraft. It would have happened to me in the Bonanza had I done Gear Up Positive rate. I do out of runway gear up, so when the engine had a problem I just pulled power and landed on my gear on remaining runway. The drag change is negligible during the that few seconds between positive rate or end of runway. Holding is safer.
On a 6,000' runway, I'll buy that, I even said that was an option in the video. Now make it 2500, or even 4,000'.
Thanks for this, confirms what I have logically deduced just from flying the dang thing. By 50 AGL, I am already reaching for my gear lever. One thing though, my F-33A is a 14Volt and when I timed it, was at 8-9 seconds of travel, so not sure where you got your figure of 14 seconds for a 14Volt system.
A Mooney M20-C with a manual "Johnson Bar" can raise and lower the gear in less than 2 seconds. I say, get the gear up when there is a positive rate.
Excellent video Scott. Any chance you can do a video in reverse about when to lower the gear assuming a failure? Energy management?
Actually I have done that, back with my A36. Essentially, if you are landing off a prepared surface a gear up landing is, in my opinion, the best choice. I practice engine out forced landings as the gear is going to stay up, even if the prepared surface is what I'm aiming for. If I can make my prepared surface and putting the gear down won't inhibit that, and there is time to get it full down/locked, then I'll put it down.
I used to hear about the fly-boys that on roll out, stick forward, gear lever up. It was quick eh? I think carrier based is close to that yet today.
You got me at geeky.
In other words, decide to retract gear like your CFI said... when it no longer would be possible to help you safely land if the engine failed. Runway length would dictate, don't you think?
If its a long runway, maybe that would be an argument to hold the retraction. Otherwise I say it's better to prepare for the engine failure by gaining as much speed as possible. A forced landing under control has a much better chance of working out than one out of control.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Dont Bonanzas try to raise the nose after gear is up? That will make it more difficult to lower nose as needed if engine fails. Dont? Most do that.
@@outwiththem I've done thousands of takeoffs in Bonanzas and never noticed that. Putting the gear down does have a tendency to raise the nose momentarily.
Never in my decades of Air Force and airline history did normal procedures say to delay gear retraction. An abnormal situation, such as a hot brake indication on the Airbus, did we leave the gear down for cooling.
You have 2 engines duhh!
Great video. Thank you 🙏
I'm stuck having my gear out all the time...
awesome. That's exactly how it feels too.
😂😂😂cat vid! Better get a hanger cat. Ours is named Huey! Great vid.
Great observations and explanations, as always! I fly a 225hp powered bonanza and a “legacy” 225hp mentor. In other words, not much power headroom… and engine cooling is a big issue. What does your engine monitor show that the CHTs are doing (either average across all 6, or just the hottest) in each test profile? I imagine higher airspeed = better airflow = better cooling. What are your observations?
In the cool wx for this test they ranged from 310-350. In the summer the hottest might get up to 370. My baffles are good!
Scott, thanks for the flight test. I retract at positive rate and accelerate in ground effect (level with the wind sock gives 5% induced drag reduction for the A36 a 20'/33' ratio of height to span-and has good ground separation on gusty days) until I have just overrun left then climb at cruise, speed is life- I operate out of a mountain strip- if you could do that test and add it to this suite, I'd really appreciate it. I'd like to have a test pilot validate my approach- This youtube channel rocks!
Sounds like a good idea, thanks!
@@FlyWirescottperdue Hi Scott, the other variable- take-off flaps. I retract flaps after retracting the gear stil in ground effect. I'm usually around 80 KIAS. There is probably an optimum speed for retraction. Slower speeds present some settling but acceleration is rapid even with corrective pitch input. Thanks again for what you are doing- linking flight test theory and practical Bo flying.
@@21mentor Thanks for watching and commenting. If I use flaps for takeoff, I delay them for quite a long time after the gear. First because lift is more than drag for a long time and second because I don't want to sag, with flap retraction and possibly touch the runway again. In a Go-Around I hold flaps until 100 kts, same thing for a takeoff profile.
Great info!
Attention all 9th graders wondering why understanding algebra can be applied in real life; watch this video.
When you reference a spring in the aircraft's performance as the retract cycle concludes, would the propellor governor responding to a change in the engine's loaded state contribute to it?
Possibly, interesting thought. I'm not sure how to measure it. But the spring is not immediate and that would match your idea. Very interesting.
Scott, interesting comparison. For the reasons you state I'm a positive rate guy. Do have a question. I hear many folks talk about pumping the brakes before retraction. It doesn't have to do with this discussion but interested in your opinion. I'm thinking hitting the brakes is another distraction given the low risk of a tire coming apart in the wheel well. Your thoughts please. I know commercial airliners introduce brake pressure(through the retract sequence) at retraction to slow the wheels down, but they are at a lot higher speed then me.
I think you pretty much have it. Some airplanes call for a tap of the brakes in the Normal Procedure. The T-6 is one.
If you have a Johnson bar mooney its as fast as you can swing it.
There was a mention about Cessna wheels being "flat to the wind" during retraction, implying that the drag is higher than either up or down. I ran several tests with my C177RG with the gear in various stages of retraction. There was no measurable difference with partial retraction. Any phase of retraction resulted in essentially the same drage as gear down. Bottom line? Same as Scott said, retract at positive rate. I've read some comments about the gear being further down at partial retraction. The Cessna gear drops about 1.5 feet during retraction, not enough to even think about unless you are a pro aerobatic pilot.
My bush pilot CFI says yes there is a 4 knot reduction when those rear tires are turned perpendicular to the wind. Some don't notice details.
@@CFITOMAHAWK2 Same thing on the Cessna Skymaster i flew. You raise the gear and suddenly you lose about 4 knots when you expect it to increase insteade..
Oh gosh...I thought this WAS a cat video.
I'm left thinking: as soon as you see increasing airspeed, on the ASI after takeoff, retract landing gear. Clean up asap?
🌏🇦🇺
Not the airspeed, so much as the vertical speed... you want to have a solid climb rate with no chance of skipping off the runway again.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Altimeter 🕛
😎
I don't find the POH "Retract when positive rate of climb is established" to be particularly useful. Unless the runway is downhill, you technically have a positive climb the instant you leave the ground. I'd be happier with something less open to interpretation and more objectively measurable.
It’s a PIC thing. In other words a judgement call as to when you have a solid positive rate established and not likely to touch down/skip the wheels again. Most of flying includes a judgement call. I’m pretty sure that’s what I’m speaking to. If you have a number or procedure from someone else. Fly intentionally not by rote. Thanks for watching!
@@FlyWirescottperdue Yeah I figured it means a sustainable climb i.e. not just trading airspeed for altitude and going to drop back down again. Thanks for the reply!
Which cat video (I think I may have seen them all)?
LIB, got another song on this one for once.
No, I don't think so. Got those at the beginning and the bumper for free, so I don't change them. I'm not about music.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Wow, voice to text failure, I meant to say got another notice on this one for once.
Pizza chip screw tube. Happy landings.🛩️
Haha! That and spell check, bane of texting.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Tru that... 😏
"Right?"?
Sorry; but I disagree. Vx climb and hold the gear until no runway/ landing area remaining. Gets you to the highest altitude in the shortest distance. Higher parasitic drag but lower Vimd than a clean aircraft.
Altitude is far more useful to you than speed in a light GA aircraft. Not so with a military jet but definitely the case with a prop single.
You need to watch the other videos in this series. What is paramount is flying a takeoff profile that biases survival in the event of an engine failure. Vx is for climbing over an obstacle and you should minimize your time there. The odds of stalling with an engine failure at Vx is almost guaranteed. Plus, Kinetic energy goes as the square of velocity while Potential energy goes linear with height. You got this one wrong.
Positive rate, gear up.
Cat video?
Mean!
Yeah, for a long stretch YT put cat videos in my feed. I don't like cats.....
Well, I guess you're still kinda ok.
Thanks, Scott. Seriously, you're The Best. All of the work you put in...You're appreciated.
I bet if you had a cute, cuddly kitten, you'd succumb...
Cheers, old boy.
Haha, thanks. My neighbor in Goldsboro, NC had an orange cat called Bo Kitty who made it her life’s mission to convert me. Just that one cat, I’ll admit.
Any thoughts on the B-17 v. Kingcobra mess, a while back?
@@mutthaam2396 Oh my gosh, yes! It's best if I hold my tongue... saying this in public won't change the world.
Great subject, but when you show graphs without the axes labeled and then talk continuously over them without explaining what we’re looking at then it’s difficult to follow. When your audience has to use their brains to figure out what they’re looking at, they can’t use their brains to consider what you’re saying. Also, it would be good to state whether these tests were all done right after one another, and whether the results are averages of multiple tests or the results of a single test for each condition (in which case we have to assume that you are a perfect pilot and the test conditions were identical in each case). Intuitively your argument makes sense to me, but when it’s a matter of a few seconds either way, you’d have a stronger case for the skeptics with consistent repeated results. Cheers
The graph has an axis. The lines are labeled. The test runs were done back to back. If you are skeptical try the tests out yourself. And you can pause the video.
@@FlyWirescottperdue I’m not trying to be rude or question the findings, I’m trying to offer you some constructive feedback as both a pilot and as someone who used to present and interpret graphs for a living. Presumably you’re presenting the data to communicate something to your audience, right? If you doubt that the graphs are difficult to interpret, print one out without making any changes and hand it to a random pilot and ask him what it means. If it takes him more than ten seconds to give you the right answer, maybe consider that it could be improved. A graph without a clear title and the x and y axes labeled (fpm, seconds, degrees) is very difficult to interpret if you don’t already know what you’re looking at. I would have failed the assignment if I handed in graphs like these as an undergraduate - again, I don’t say that to be offensive - it’s simply a fact. As a presenter, it’s very difficult to avoid the curse of knowledge, but I’m telling you, if someone like me has to pause the video for thirty seconds to figure out what the heck I’m looking at, your goal of clearly communicating data is not being met.
@@DIYPackraft Thanks for your input.
I flew a 36 Bonanza for several years, and the gear had such high drag (as noted when extended on approach), that after takeoff I wanted it up as soon as safely possible.