Nanchang CJ-6A gear-up landing at Oliver Airport BC [video]

[crazy_aviator]

To me it looks like another SIMPLE case of too much money and not enough professionalism ( brains? ) The classical doctor/dentist with the bonanza scenario,,,,

[J31]

I wonder why two guys are walking up to the airplane less than a minute after it comes to a rest with 20 lb fire extinguishers under their arms? Seems like they were ready for some potential fire.

[PilotDAR]

Ouch ! that is a MT composite prop

There are other brands which are painted white too, but yes, good chance it's an MT. If so, good luck! The blades being sacrificed tend to save engine internal damage. And, two, if not all of those blades can be repaired. I toured the MT factory, and saw blades worse than those being rebuilt. The higher cost in the beginning can certainly reduce repair cost later when buying an MT prop...

[AirFrame]

I talked tonight to a friend who talked to an eyewitness to this incident. The eyewitness talked to the pilot, and it was totally unplanned and a brain fart on the part of the pilot.

My observation from the video: Engine running (idling) at touchdown, but quit very quickly as the drag on the ground overcame the compression of the engine at idle. Composite prop shortened visibly on all three blades definitely suggests power during the first few inches of shortening.

Why is there no CADORS? Maybe because Oliver is uncontrolled, and nobody has reported the incident to TC yet?

[PilotDAR]

it was totally unplanned and a brain fart on the part of the pilot

Okay.... taking this as fact.... have at it Doc....

[Doc]

it was totally unplanned and a brain fart on the part of the pilot

Okay.... taking this as fact.... have at it Doc....

Think I already have.

[iflyforpie]

Ouch ! that is a MT composite prop

There are other brands which are painted white too, but yes, good chance it's an MT. If so, good luck! The blades being sacrificed tend to save engine internal damage. And, two, if not all of those blades can be repaired. I toured the MT factory, and saw blades worse than those being rebuilt. The higher cost in the beginning can certainly reduce repair cost later when buying an MT prop...

Definitely an MT. The green triangles are unmistakable.... representing the pyramid of stacked hundreds you need to buy the suckers.

Yes, they are very repairable. Unfortunately, you still need an engine teardown. In my experience, most of the extras on top of the teardown are as a result of pre-existing conditions like internal wear or corrosion, not damage from the strike.

[Doc]

I do have an idea that just might reduce the number of these things we see each year. Have the pilot PAY for the damage! Or, at very least, the deductible? I'm dead serious here. The private owners have to.....why should Joe "pro" Pilot get to just "walk away" from this? If it's a crew of two. Guess what....You get to split it! Instead of signing bonds, have the new keeners sign something stating their responsibility when they screw up! Specifically, forgetting the gear. Methinks, if YOU had to pay 30K for "forgetting" the gear, you just might remember it?

[PilotDAR]

if YOU had to pay 30K for "forgetting" the gear, you just might remember it?

Oh yeah! The super 182 (which backs up on the runway) has a $25,000 deductible. I can't afford that, so I really triple check the gear for every landing. I momentarily mused about buying an insurance policy for the deductible.

I have only damaged three planes in my career (never a gear up Doc), and I have either paid to fix it (dress and overhaul a prop, and replace a back window, or I put my labour into the repair (C150 fuselage frame). I believe that one must take personal responsibility - Insurance is for accidents, it should not be for carelessness or stupidity....

[iflyforpie]

Well, to be fair Doc, most do already.

Very few pilots keep their jobs after an incident like that, and most leave a large bond behind.

Maybe bonds are a good thing?

[Doc]

Well, to be fair Doc, most do already.

Very few pilots keep their jobs after an incident like that, and most leave a large bond behind.

Maybe bonds are a good thing?

Bonds are never a good thing.
Be interesting to know how many who do gear ups still have bonds in place? Very few, I should think. A nice law suit for the deductible would be a nice "going away gift"....lessons need to be learned here.

[trey kule]

This is an excellent idea. In fact, pilot error without extenuating circumstances should require the "pros" to pay the deductible. Might make them think before they try the shits and giggles stuff

[f1rocket]

I was there, it was real. The pilot has to pay for it. First he noticed that the gear wasn't down was when the prop stopped! Lots of lessons learned...

[CFR]

To me it looks like another SIMPLE case of too much money and not enough professionalism ( brains? ) The classical doctor/dentist with the bonanza scenario,,,,

Naa ... CJ-6A's can be had cheap - 50 to 75K.

Now THIS ... this is too much money!

http://alberta.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehicle ... Z511384271

[Lurch]

Well, to be fair Doc, most do already.

Very few pilots keep their jobs after an incident like that, and most leave a large bond behind.

Maybe bonds are a good thing?

Bonds are never a good thing.
Be interesting to know how many who do gear ups still have bonds in place? Very few, I should think. A nice law suit for the deductible would be a nice "going away gift"....lessons need to be learned here.

In no way am I defending gear ups, but won't say such for fear of Karma catching up

It is very illegal for employers to charge employees for damage caused. It is also illegal to fire said employee.

Now I'm no lawyer but I suspect if such a thing we're to occur not only would you be released from your bond due to wrongful dismissal but I would also fight for full pay up to the end of my bond, if it constitutes that you stay it also should stand they must keep you until the end. It could prove to be a big pay day.

Edited: you know it's bad when you can't spell Karma correctly

[cgartly]

I do not know the owner/pilot of the aircraft personally but I do know of him and have heard a couple of things from someone close to him.

- Yes he screwed up and forgot to put the gear down
- He doesn't have hull insurance so he will be paying to fix this himself
- The wrecker that picked the plane up did not position straps properly nor did they use wide enough straps so there is now significant recovery damage as well on the fuselage.

[single_swine_herder]

It is very illegal for employers to charge employees for damage caused. It is also illegal to fire said employee.

Now I'm no lawyer but I suspect if such a thing we're to occur not only would you be released from your bond due to wrongful dismissal but I would also fight for full pay up to the end of my bond, if it constitutes that you stay it also should stand they must keep you until the end. It could prove to be a big pay day.

:

Lurch et al:

I'm am intrigued by your assertion that employees are not culpable, nor bear any personal responsibility for damage caused while on the job.

Further, the concept that an employee cannot be dismissed for willful acts, negligence, or recklessness is an even more engaging argument.

Although you state clearly you have not been called to the Bar to practice law, the opinions you've formulated and expressed had their genesis in some statement or written material somewhere in your past.

I wonder if you could elaborate on the position you've advanced, because it would be unfortunate indeed to leave the impression with readers that they enjoy immunity from their actions in the workplace and then develop the inappropriate attitude they have a job for life regardless of conduct or proficiency at their craft.

Perhaps this thread is sufficiently complex that it should be a thread of its own.

[Doc]

It is very illegal for employers to charge employees for damage caused. It is also illegal to fire said employee.

Now I'm no lawyer but I suspect if such a thing we're to occur not only would you be released from your bond due to wrongful dismissal but I would also fight for full pay up to the end of my bond, if it constitutes that you stay it also should stand they must keep you until the end. It could prove to be a big pay day.

:

Lurch et al:

I'm am intrigued by your assertion that employees are not culpable, nor bear any personal responsibility for damage caused while on the job.

Further, the concept that an employee cannot be dismissed for willful acts, negligence, or recklessness is an even more engaging argument.

Although you state clearly you are not been called to the Bar to practice law, the opinions you've formulated and expressed had their genesis in some statement or written material somewhere in your past.

I wonder if you could elaborate on the position you've advanced, because it would be unfortunate indeed to leave the impression with readers that they enjoy immunity from their actions in the workplace and then develop the inappropriate attitude they have a job for life regardless of conduct or proficiency at their craft.

Perhaps this thread is sufficiently complex that it should be a thread of its own.

Swine.....way to eloquent! Yet again from you. You just can't be a pilot!
Lurch....you're full of poop! I mean that, only in the kindest, gentlest way. You're probably very nice. Maybe even a pet owner. BUT
Leaving the gear up is both incompetent and negligent. Both of which are offences which can result in dismissal from employment.

[flyinthebug]

In no way am I defending gear ups, but won't say such for fear of Karma catching up

It is very illegal for employers to charge employees for damage caused. It is also illegal to fire said employee.

Now I'm no lawyer but I suspect if such a thing we're to occur not only would you be released from your bond due to wrongful dismissal but I would also fight for full pay up to the end of my bond, if it constitutes that you stay it also should stand they must keep you until the end. It could prove to be a big pay day.

Edited: you know it's bad when you can't spell Karma correctly

With all due respect Lurch, you are wrong about this. Ill give an example. One day I was sitting in my office and the CP walks in. He starts shaking his head and I knew something very stupid had just occurred. He begins to inform me that our Seneca pilot had done a full static run up on gravel up north and destroyed both our brand new props (we had just installed new props that week).

I called the young man into my office with the CP and I and we enquired why he would do something we trained him not to do? He honestly had no answer. He just hung his head as I explained he just cost us 8K. We actually took extra time to show the young guys the damage gravel and water can do to props and why never to do a run up on gravel. When he couldn't offer us any valid reason for this mistake...we sent him packing.

I had every right as an employer to fire him. He ignored his training, ignored common sense, ignored a direct instruction from his CP, and destroyed 2 brand new props and cost my company well over 10K (lost revenue for a few days as we waited for new props). Are you suggesting that I didn't have a legal right to dismiss him? That I would have faced a lawsuit had he pursued an illegal termination? That is just ridiculous. When an employee makes a mistake that costs his/her company money due to incompetence, then I as the employer have every right in the world to send that pilot down the road.

Do you not recall the recent thread where a very experienced pilot forgot the gear on his King Air 100? His CP came on here and defended his pilot(s) and assured us he still had his job. Sadly, he obviously didn't check this position with the guy signing the cheques before he posted, and the pilot(s) were dismissed. That incident was a break down in CRM...and with our situation it was blatant disregard for our rules at our company.

To suggest you can break peoples equipment or screw up without any consequences... is one of the many reasons why this world is going in the direction its going. No one wants to be accountable for their actions, and most walk around with this entitled attitude.

If you break my airplane due to incompetence, you wont be working for me tomorrow. Ill roll the dice with one of your lawsuits.

Fly safe all.

[AirFrame]

- The wrecker that picked the plane up did not position straps properly nor did they use wide enough straps so there is now significant recovery damage as well on the fuselage.

Ouch. That could be a claim against the wrecker's liability insurance, perhaps?

I think I've now officially lost count of the number of times that I've heard that a largely undamaged aircraft has been significantly damaged by the recovery. I really hope that if I ever find myself in this situation, that I am present for the recovery so I can direct the wrecker and/or force an abort of the recovery if the equipment on scene isn't adequate to the task.