"Gear up" - "Positive rate"

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Message
Author
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7415
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#26 Post by Rockie » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:39 pm

I've never flown an aircraft that couldn't get the gear up before an overspeed even if you waited and that includes a CF-18. It's called "pitch", and you increase it to control your airspeed until you're ready to accelerate. In large aircraft standard procedure is to maintain V2 to V2 + 20 until at least 1000 feet AGL by which time the gear is safely in the wells after waiting for two positive indications of a climb before selecting it up. Couldn't be that hard to do in smaller aircraft either.
---------- ADS -----------

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4264
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#27 Post by trey kule » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:54 pm

Being 3 kts above the retraction speed for the last 2 seconds of the retraction isn't going to break anything.
I see others already picked up on this...glad I will never have to fly a plane this pilot has flown in before me.

Do you think it is also ok to lower the flaps a few seconds before you slow down to max deployment speed? Introduce fuel a couple seconds before turbine speed is at minimums?
The limitations are there for a reason. And as a few of the posters here who have common sense, mentioned, you can control speed with power and attitude.....something I believed every private pilot was taught.

I never cease to be amazed by the rationalizations pilots use.
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by trey kule on Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 601
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#28 Post by confusedalot » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:10 pm

Retracting the landing gear at the appropriate time sounds like a specialized skill? What have I not understood and appreciated after almost 4 decades? Must be lucky I guess, since I got it right 100% of the time, maybe I should go out and buy a lottery ticket.
---------- ADS -----------
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

Illya Kuryakin
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:14 pm
Location: The Gulag Archipelago

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#29 Post by Illya Kuryakin » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:54 pm

Good to see goingnowherefast’s remarks biting him in the butt. Perhaps now he’ll stop dishing it out. Spends much of his posts dumping on Cat Driver, who BTW would treat an aircraft’s limitations with respect. To admit ones disregard for aircraft limitatioms says it all. Perhaps it’s time to learn something from those older and, while not always wiser, with the experience to back it up.
Illya
---------- ADS -----------
Wish I didn't know now, what I didn't know then.

User avatar
complexintentions
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1795
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#30 Post by complexintentions » Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:19 pm

Illya Kuryakin wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:42 pm

I find the radalt can be a bit misleading at times and, I’ll admit to sometimes even looking outside to confirm the cars and trucks are getting smaller befor I call pos rate.
Illya
Just a small note - my reference to the radalt was on a LVO approach specifically, where there's no way to see cars and trucks, and the potential for extremely low-level go-around. But it does fit with your comment as if applies to using all available references to ensure that you are indeed, climbing away from the cold hard ground.
---------- ADS -----------
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.

goingnowherefast
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 861
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#31 Post by goingnowherefast » Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:47 pm

I don't work there anymore, didn't stay there long. I was the FO. I can't control what the captain does with pitch. All I can (and did) do was quit. In my current job, I follow limitations, don't worry.

This was also back before jobs were easy to find, so quitting wasn't an easy move to make.

How about everybody get off their thrones and realize not everybody is as "blessed" as they were and inadverantly work for scummy operators. Realize once they're scum, you quit.

Captain does the w&b, you hop in and go flying. Later he says the plane is x lbs overweight. You're already flying, what do you do? Forgot your golden parachute at home, sorry. Too bad the boss condones that behavior, so can't talk to them. The airplane will fly 9% over gross, they do it every day in Alaska...legally.

Maybe this explains why I am so fond of SOPs, I want to follow the rules. In an SOP compliant culture, that's what happens.

Well I'm glad everybody was so happy to jump all over me for one story while not knowing the whole situation.
---------- ADS -----------

AuxBatOn
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2823
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#32 Post by AuxBatOn » Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:31 pm

You did say this:
Being 3 kts above the retraction speed for the last 2 seconds of the retraction isn't going to break anything.
Which is absolutely unacceptable.
---------- ADS -----------
Going for the deck at corner

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4264
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#33 Post by trey kule » Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:18 am

Your “Captain” did not post this...you did..

Being 3 kts above the retraction speed for the last 2 seconds of the retraction isn't going to break anything.

Oops, Auxbat beat me to it
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
Panama Jack
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3175
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:10 am
Location: The Sandbox

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#34 Post by Panama Jack » Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:33 am

Here is a recent example where a simple recital of "positive rate- gear up" did not reflect the reality of the situation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_Flight_521
---------- ADS -----------
“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-President Ronald Reagan

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7415
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#35 Post by Rockie » Sat Dec 09, 2017 5:42 am

complexintentions wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:19 pm
[quote="Illya Kuryakin" post_id=<a href="tel:1021416">1021416</a> time=<a href="tel:1512690158">1512690158</a> user_id=43858]

I find the radalt can be a bit misleading at times and, I’ll admit to sometimes even looking outside to confirm the cars and trucks are getting smaller befor I call pos rate.
Illya
Just a small note - my reference to the radalt was on a LVO approach specifically, where there's no way to see cars and trucks, and the potential for extremely low-level go-around. But it does fit with your comment as if applies to using all available references to ensure that you are indeed, climbing away from the cold hard ground.
[/quote]

Whether we realize it or not, moving away from the ground in our peripheral vision is one of the clues we use besides the baro and radalt. In low viz ops we don’t have that of course so I will wait a couple more beats just to make sure along with another check of my pitch value. 15 degrees or more with 2 engines (12.5 with 1) and you will be climbing provided you aren’t also having wind shear.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 601
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#36 Post by confusedalot » Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:39 pm

Panama Jack wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:33 am
Here is a recent example where a simple recital of "positive rate- gear up" did not reflect the reality of the situation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_Flight_521
Interesting.....

I'm really really really not the smartass type. Is it possible that basic abilities and skills are the culprit? No amount of training will correct such situations. i can't figure it out anyway.
---------- ADS -----------
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4264
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#37 Post by trey kule » Sat Dec 09, 2017 10:23 pm

Indeed! For a smaller retractable on a longer runway, wouldn't you rather delay the retraction of the gear, until a land straight ahead was no longer possible? No point bellying in when you could glide back onto the wheels. This could apply to a light twin too!
This is one of those things that use peferct logic to come to the wrong conclusion.

Might be ok for a single engine.

But on some twins you want that gear up so you can keep it in the air if an engine decides to take a break.
The idea that you will be able to keep the plane over the runway in the event of a catastophic failure is not based in reality on small twins. That immediate asymetic thrust will have you off the runway in a heartbeat.

Dont believe me? Have someone do an engine failure in a real sim ( not a desktop) unannounced, and not anticipated. See how the pilot manages to get the plane back on the runway, while dealing with the dead engine.

You get a positive rate...gear up. yes, there are probably exceptions.
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by trey kule on Sun Dec 10, 2017 6:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Panama Jack
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3175
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:10 am
Location: The Sandbox

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#38 Post by Panama Jack » Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:33 am

confusedalot wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:39 pm
Panama Jack wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:33 am
Here is a recent example where a simple recital of "positive rate- gear up" did not reflect the reality of the situation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_Flight_521
Interesting.....

I'm really really really not the smartass type. Is it possible that basic abilities and skills are the culprit? No amount of training will correct such situations. i can't figure it out anyway.
Whole basic abilities/skills may be a culprit, these were two trained, qualified and current crew members with a fair amount of experience. Whether they were "below average" remains subjective, and as it is most pilots rate themselves as "above average" in their skills. Let that one sink in for a moment. I have observed a lot of crewmembers calling "positive climb" (SOP on my fleet type and company) with the same thoughtfulness as wedding vows. At least that is what I am perceiving, when I immediately hear "positive rate" and have not yet had a chance to take in whether thrust being produced, rate of climb and airspeed trends are actually a sustainable trend.
---------- ADS -----------
“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-President Ronald Reagan

User avatar
complexintentions
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1795
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#39 Post by complexintentions » Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:47 am

The problem in the Emirates accident wasn't that they called positive rate when they didn't have it - they did. Their VSI/altimeter and radalt would all have indicated a positive climb.

The problem was that the initial "positive rate" was due to a bounce and inertia - but they didn't have go-around thrust set. If they hadn't hurried the "positive rate" call, and verified that go-around thrust was set instead of rushing to get the gear up, they would have identified they had insufficient thrust and had no problem.

It's not the same thing as the main thread topic where people aren't checking to verify they have positive rate before raising the gear. In the Emirates case, they did have it. Unfortunately what they didn't have, was thrust, due to the wheels touching down which disables TOGA. Why they didn't know this, remember this, who knows. But it doesn't matter - they failed to monitor the thrust setting and it cost them. Nothing to do with skills or abilities. Systems knowledge, perhaps. Certainly, a lapse in SOP that normally one would get away with on a G/A where the wheels don't touch and the autothrottles operate normally. Interestingly, Boeing has modified their FCTM to emphasize the lack of TOGA once you have WoW. Previously there was little/no mention of it. Kinda important, hmmm? Still, it doesn't remove the final responsibility of the pilot to make sure the aircraft is doing what you want it to.

But it does relate in terms of not rushing the gear retraction. I always brief on a go-around I NEVER want to hear "positive rate" before I hear "go-around thrust set" (both are SOP calls for us). We can climb away quite easily for thousands of feet if necessary with the gear down. Not so much if the thrust isn't set.
---------- ADS -----------
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.

User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18887
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: "Gear up" - "Positive rate"

#40 Post by Cat Driver » Sun Dec 10, 2017 2:16 pm

Good to see goingnowherefast’s remarks biting him in the butt. Perhaps now he’ll stop dishing it out. Spends much of his posts dumping on Cat Driver, who BTW would treat an aircraft’s limitations with respect.
Yes. he does seem to have a tendency to knee jerk jump on me to try and make me look unprofessional doesn't he. :roll:

However given time they usually post something that shows their relative lack of experience or even worse a lack of professionalism and respect for the airplane limitations.

It is entertaining to read his response where he blames everyone else for his own lack of understanding though. :mrgreen:
---------- ADS -----------
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”