Job well done

[KAE]

This just happened in my neck of the woods.
Gotta give the PIC some kudos.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/15923069/detail.html

It's good to see another emergency that only resulted in some bent
aluminum.

I have never flown retractables and don't completely understand the
systems, would it be strange for two out of three wheels to not
extend. Would it be an electrical, hydraulic or mechanical failure
that would most likely create such a 2 out of 3 scenario?

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 18, 11:05*am, KAE > wrote:
> This just happened in my neck of the woods.
> Gotta give the PIC some kudos.
>
> http://www.news4jax.com/news/15923069/detail.html
>
> It's good to see another emergency that only resulted in some bent
> aluminum.
>
> I have never flown retractables and don't completely understand the
> systems, would it be strange for two out of three wheels to not
> extend. Would it be an electrical, hydraulic or mechanical failure
> that would most likely create such a 2 out of 3 scenario?

This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
not a life threatening event.

-Robert

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

Robert M. Gary wrote:

>
>This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
>not a life threatening event.
>

I agree. Though they said he had 2 out of 3 down, in the picture it only
looks like only the right main is down. I think I'd probably pull all the
gear up (if possible) in that case and land on the belly. It seems that
you'd have a higher risk of losing directional control with the gear down
asymmetrically. Straight belly landings are almost always uneventful. Since
the insurance company already owns the airplane by that time, why take the
chance?

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200804/1

[tom418]

I agree.I had a partial gear up (RMG got stuck) in my Seneca back in 1990.
That was before youtube. It was a non-event (aside from the repair bill
) )
"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 11:05 am, KAE > wrote:
> This just happened in my neck of the woods.
> Gotta give the PIC some kudos.
>
> http://www.news4jax.com/news/15923069/detail.html
>
> It's good to see another emergency that only resulted in some bent
> aluminum.
>
> I have never flown retractables and don't completely understand the
> systems, would it be strange for two out of three wheels to not
> extend. Would it be an electrical, hydraulic or mechanical failure
> that would most likely create such a 2 out of 3 scenario?

This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
not a life threatening event.

-Robert

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 19, 7:37*am, "tom418" > wrote:

>
> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
> not a life threatening event.
>

It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
done a belly landing
.
Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

WingFlaps > wrote in news:ca4e24f8-ae1d-43a2-b5c9-
:

> On Apr 19, 7:37*am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
>>
>> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
>> not a life threatening event.
>>
>
> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> done a belly landing

Maybe. We're told to get as many down as we can, though.

Bertie

[clint]

Senors bellys are big enough hope no one got hurt!
WingFlaps submitted this idea :
> On Apr 19, 7:37*am, "tom418" > wrote:

>>
>> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
>> not a life threatening event.
>>

> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> done a belly landing
> .
> Cheers

[clint]

you must have a long nekk!
KAE explained :
> This just happened in my neck of the woods.
> Gotta give the PIC some kudos.

> http://www.news4jax.com/news/15923069/detail.html

> It's good to see another emergency that only resulted in some bent
> aluminum.

> I have never flown retractables and don't completely understand the
> systems, would it be strange for two out of three wheels to not
> extend. Would it be an electrical, hydraulic or mechanical failure
> that would most likely create such a 2 out of 3 scenario?

[[email protected]]

On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
> On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
> > not a life threatening event.
>
> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> done a belly landing
> .
> Cheers

Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.

Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
The insurance company can buy new props and motors. They can't buy me
a new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
emergency procedures.

Mike

[buttman]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.

There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there are
no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the regs that
say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an emergency.
Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the book says.

> They can't buy me a
> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own emergency
> procedures.

Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the FAA
going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a belly-up?

If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of any
kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I wouldn't do it
either, but since I learned to land consistently (back in my pre-private
checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> > done a belly landing
> > .
> > Cheers
>
> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>

Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying the
POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the pilot
made?

Cheers

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 20, 8:50*pm, Buttman > wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
>
>
> > Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> > manufacturer's approved procedures. *I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> > AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there are
> no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the regs that
> say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an emergency.
> Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the book says.
>
> > They can't buy me a
> > new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own emergency
> > procedures.
>
> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the FAA
> going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a belly-up?
>


In fact they've been commended for their pilotage skills. Engines off
on short final is preferred for the fire risk.

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Buttman > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>
>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> book says.
>
>> They can't buy me a
>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>> emergency procedures.
>
> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> belly-up?
>
> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
>

You are an idiot.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-9f74-
:

> On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
>> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>
>> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>
>> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up
is
>> > > not a life threatening event.
>>
>> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
damage
>> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines
and
>> > done a belly landing
>> > .
>> > Cheers
>>
>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>
> Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying the
> POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the pilot
> made?
>

Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on ( not
by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The airplane
was flying agian the next day.


Bertie

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 21, 2:07*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-9f74-
> :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up
> is
> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> damage
> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines
> and
> >> > done a belly landing
> >> > .
> >> > Cheers
>
> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying the
> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the pilot
> > made?
>
> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on ( not
> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The airplane
> was flying agian the next day.
>

S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
relativeley little damage to structure.

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
:

> On Apr 21, 2:07*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
9f74-
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
>> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>
>> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
up
>> is
>> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>
>> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
>> damage
>> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
engines
>> and
>> >> > done a belly landing
>> >> > .
>> >> > Cheers
>>
>> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
the
>> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
>> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
pilot
>> > made?
>>
>> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
not
>> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
airplane
>> was flying agian the next day.
>>
>
> S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> relativeley little damage to structure.
>

Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
been wheels up)



Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> WingFlaps > wrote in news:ca4e24f8-ae1d-43a2-b5c9-
> :
>
>> On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
>>> not a life threatening event.
>>>
>>
>> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
>> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
>> done a belly landing
>
> Maybe. We're told to get as many down as we can, though.
>
> Bertie

Yeah, you're all just a bunch of dumb asses.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> Buttman > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>
>>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
>>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>>
>> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
>> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
>> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
>> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
>> book says.
>>
>>> They can't buy me a
>>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>>> emergency procedures.
>>
>> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
>> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
>> belly-up?
>>
>> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
>> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
>> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
>> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
>> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>>
>>
>
> You are an idiot.
>
>
> Bertie

Your a dumb ass.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> :
>
>> On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> 9f74-
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>>
>>> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>>
>>> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> up
>>> is
>>> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>
>>> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
>>> damage
>>> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> engines
>>> and
>>> >> > done a belly landing
>>> >> > .
>>> >> > Cheers
>>>
>>> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>
>>> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> the
>>> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
>>> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> pilot
>>> > made?
>>>
>>> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> not
>>> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> airplane
>>> was flying agian the next day.
>>>
>>
>> S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
>> and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
>> wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
>> and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
>> relativeley little damage to structure.
>>
>
> Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> been wheels up)
>
>
>
> Bertie

Yeah, but you're just a liar.

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 21, 3:17*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 21, 2:07*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> 9f74-
> >> :
>
> >> > On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
> >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> up
> >> is
> >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> >> damage
> >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> engines
> >> and
> >> >> > done a belly landing
> >> >> > .
> >> >> > Cheers
>
> >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> the
> >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> >> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> pilot
> >> > made?
>
> >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> not
> >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> airplane
> >> was flying agian the next day.
>
> > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> > and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> > wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> > and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> > relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> been wheels up)
>

For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
locked is preferred to landing
with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
extended, it is recommended
that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
Landing with only
the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.

Do you know why it would be different for heavies?

Cheers

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 21, 1:56*pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in 6.130...
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:ca4e24f8-ae1d-43a2-b5c9-
> > :
>
> >> On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >>> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
> >>> not a life threatening event.
>
> >> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> >> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> >> done a belly landing
>
> > Maybe. We're told to get as many down as we can, though.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Yeah, you're all just a bunch of dumb asses.

Well you got that wrong. It would be a _pace_ of dumb asses. Dumbass.

Bwhahahhahhahha

Cheers

[WingFlaps]

On Apr 21, 1:58*pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in 6.130...
>
>
>
> > Buttman > wrote in
> :
>
> >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. *I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> >> book says.
>
> >>> They can't buy me a
> >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
> >>> emergency procedures.
>
> >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> >> belly-up?
>
> >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
> > You are an idiot.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Your a dumb ass.

YOUR?

Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.

Cheers

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"WingFlaps" > wrote in message
...
On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> 9f74-
> >> :
>
> >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
> >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> up
> >> is
> >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> >> damage
> >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> engines
> >> and
> >> >> > done a belly landing
> >> >> > .
> >> >> > Cheers
>
> >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> the
> >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> >> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> pilot
> >> > made?
>
> >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> not
> >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> airplane
> >> was flying agian the next day.
>
> > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> > and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> > wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> > and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> > relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> been wheels up)
>

For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
locked is preferred to landing
with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
extended, it is recommended
that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
Landing with only
the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.

Do you know why it would be different for heavies?

Cheers

No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better imagination than
MX.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"WingFlaps" > wrote in message
...
On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
> 6.130...
>
>
>
> > Buttman > wrote in
> :
>
> >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> >> book says.
>
> >>> They can't buy me a
> >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
> >>> emergency procedures.
>
> >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> >> belly-up?
>
> >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
> > You are an idiot.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Your a dumb ass.

YOUR?

Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.

Cheers

You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life trying to be
a star on it.

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 02:56, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in 6.130...
>
>
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:ca4e24f8-ae1d-43a2-b5c9-
> > :
>
> >> On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >>> This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear up is
> >>> not a life threatening event.
>
> >> It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less damage
> >> to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the engines and
> >> done a belly landing
>
> > Maybe. We're told to get as many down as we can, though.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Yeah, you're all just a bunch of dumb asses.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'll pass your wisdom on to messr's Boeing and Airbus.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 02:58, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in 6.130...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Buttman > wrote in
> :
>
> >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. *I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> >> book says.
>
> >>> They can't buy me a
> >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
> >>> emergency procedures.
>
> >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> >> belly-up?
>
> >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
> > You are an idiot.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Your a dumb ass.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm not and you know it.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
> > 6.130...
>
> > > Buttman > wrote in
> > :
>
> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> > >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> > >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> > >> book says.
>
> > >>> They can't buy me a
> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
> > >>> emergency procedures.
>
> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> > >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> > >> belly-up?
>
> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> > >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> > >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> > >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
> > > You are an idiot.
>
> > > Bertie
>
> > Your a dumb ass.
>
> YOUR?
>
> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>
> Cheers
>
> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life trying to be
> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Me, I waste nothing.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 02:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in 6.130...
>
>
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> > :
>
> >> On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >>> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> > 9f74-
> >>> :
>
> >>> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
> >>> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> >>> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> >>> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> > up
> >>> is
> >>> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> >>> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> >>> damage
> >>> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> > engines
> >>> and
> >>> >> > done a belly landing
> >>> >> > .
> >>> >> > Cheers
>
> >>> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >>> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> > the
> >>> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> >>> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> > pilot
> >>> > made?
>
> >>> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> > not
> >>> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> > airplane
> >>> was flying agian the next day.
>
> >> S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> >> and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> >> wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> >> and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> >> relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> > it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> > day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> > without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> > down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> > damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> > been wheels up)
>
> > Bertie
>
> Yeah, but you're just a liar.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh ouch, maxie's back and he's chewing big lumps out of me.

Ouch again.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 03:19, WingFlaps > wrote:
> On Apr 21, 3:17*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> > :
>
> > > On Apr 21, 2:07*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> > 9f74-
> > >> :
>
> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19*pm, wrote:
> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> > up
> > >> is
> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> > >> damage
> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> > engines
> > >> and
> > >> >> > done a belly landing
> > >> >> > .
> > >> >> > Cheers
>
> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> > the
> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> > >> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> > pilot
> > >> > made?
>
> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> > not
> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> > airplane
> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>
> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> > > and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> > > wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> > > and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> > > relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> > it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> > day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> > without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> > down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> > damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> > been wheels up)
>
> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
> locked is preferred to landing
> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
> extended, it is recommended
> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
> Landing with only
> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>
> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>
> Cheers- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Nah, and it might not be like that for all of them. They don't giove
us a lot of info about stuff like that these days. they only tell us
what they want us to know. What they do recommned is that we shut down
all engines when the airframe begins to contact the ground ( in the
757, anyway)


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> > :
>
> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> > 9f74-
> > >> :
>
> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> > up
> > >> is
> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> > >> damage
> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> > engines
> > >> and
> > >> >> > done a belly landing
> > >> >> > .
> > >> >> > Cheers
>
> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> > the
> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> > >> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> > pilot
> > >> > made?
>
> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> > not
> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> > airplane
> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>
> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> > > and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> > > wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> > > and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> > > relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> > it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> > day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> > without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> > down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> > damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> > been wheels up)
>
> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
> locked is preferred to landing
> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
> extended, it is recommended
> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
> Landing with only
> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>
> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>
> Cheers
>
> No, but I sure he will make *something up. He has a better imagination than
> MX.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.

Bertie

[AJ]

"everybody says the pilot is lucky to be alive." Well, DUH! He was
lucky to be alive when he woke up that morning.

This is manufactured news, not nearly as dramatic as the breathless
"reporter" is trying to make it.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>> > 6.130...
>>
>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>> > :
>>
>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>
>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the
>> > >>> 'ho's
>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short
>> > >>> final.
>>
>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where
>> > >> there
>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
>> > >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
>> > >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
>> > >> book says.
>>
>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>
>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
>> > >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
>> > >> belly-up?
>>
>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
>> > >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
>> > >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
>> > >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently
>> > >> (back
>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what,
>> > >> twice?
>>
>> > > You are an idiot.
>>
>> > > Bertie
>>
>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>
>> YOUR?
>>
>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life trying to
>> be
>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Me, I waste nothing.
>

I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most everything.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
On 21 Apr, 02:58, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
> 6.130...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Buttman > wrote in
> :
>
> >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>
> >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
> >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the 'ho's
> >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short final.
>
> >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where there
> >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in the
> >> regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures" in an
> >> emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following what the
> >> book says.
>
> >>> They can't buy me a
> >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
> >>> emergency procedures.
>
> >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of the
> >> FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing a
> >> belly-up?
>
> >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought it
> >> could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a turboprop of
> >> any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going around I
> >> wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land consistently (back
> >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what, twice?
>
> > You are an idiot.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Your a dumb ass.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm not and you know it.



Yeah you are, and hopeless to boot.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > WingFlaps > wrote in news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
> > :
>
> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
> > 9f74-
> > >> :
>
> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>
> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A gear
> > up
> > >> is
> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>
> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less less
> > >> damage
> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
> > engines
> > >> and
> > >> >> > done a belly landing
> > >> >> > .
> > >> >> > Cheers
>
> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>
> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you saying
> > the
> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills. Which is
> > >> > safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash landing the
> > pilot
> > >> > made?
>
> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made on (
> > not
> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
> > airplane
> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>
> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the war
> > > and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with one
> > > wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the ground
> > > and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental gear ups do
> > > relativeley little damage to structure.
>
> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop got
> > it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew the next
> > day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large aircraft, even those
> > without underslung engines, they do recommend that we take whatever is
> > down. I know a few guys who have landed completely wheels up and the
> > damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99, for instance ( lots of those have
> > been wheels up)
>
> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
> locked is preferred to landing
> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
> extended, it is recommended
> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
> Landing with only
> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>
> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>
> Cheers
>
> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better imagination than
> MX.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.

Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> news:432da373-7c14-49bd-9b34-
..
> .
>> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:67009a6b-e2a9-420b-8d64-

>>> m... On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>> > 6.130...
>>>
>>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>>> > :
>>>
>>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>
>>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>
>>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the
>>> > >>> 'ho's
>>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short
>>> > >>> final.
>>>
>>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where
>>> > >> there
>>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in
>>> > >> the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures"
>>> > >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just
>>> > >> following what the book says.
>>>
>>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>>
>>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example
>>> > >> of the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while
>>> > >> doing a belly-up?
>>>
>>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I
>>> > >> thought it could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or
>>> > >> a turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of
>>> > >> going around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to
>>> > >> land consistently (back
>>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what,
>>> > >> twice?
>>>
>>> > > You are an idiot.
>>>
>>> > > Bertie
>>>
>>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>>
>>> YOUR?
>>>
>>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life
>>> trying to be
>>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Me, I waste nothing.
>>
>
> I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most
> everything.
>
>
>

Well, your mind, but even that 'i reckon I can recycle.

Them taters ain't gonn fertilise themselves, ya know!


Bertie


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>
>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
@y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>> > :
>>
>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>> > 9f74-
>> > >> :
>>
>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A
>> > >> >> > > gear
>> > up
>> > >> is
>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>
>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less
>> > >> >> > less
>> > >> damage
>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
>> > engines
>> > >> and
>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>> > >> >> > .
>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>
>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>> > >> > saying
>> > the
>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash
>> > >> > landing the
>> > pilot
>> > >> > made?
>>
>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made
>> > >> on (
>> > not
>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
>> > airplane
>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>
>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the
>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with
>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the
>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental
>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>
>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop
>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew
>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do recommend
>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have landed
>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99,
>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>
>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
>> locked is preferred to landing
>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>> extended, it is recommended
>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
>> Landing with only
>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>
>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better imagination
>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>
> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>

Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.

Whick is it wannabe boi?


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> news:a8d4b10a-8f76-4488-b927-
..
> . On 21 Apr, 02:58, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>> 6.130...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Buttman > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>
>> >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>
>> >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>> >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the
>> >>> 'ho's AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on
>> >>> short final.
>>
>> >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where
>> >> there are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing
>> >> in the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures"
>> >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just following
>> >> what the book says.
>>
>> >>> They can't buy me a
>> >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>> >>> emergency procedures.
>>
>> >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example of
>> >> the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while doing
>> >> a belly-up?
>>
>> >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I thought
>> >> it could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or a
>> >> turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of going
>> >> around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to land
>> >> consistently (back in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to
>> >> go around, what, twice?
>>
>> > You are an idiot.
>>
>> > Bertie
>>
>> Your a dumb ass.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm not and you know it.
>
>
>
> Yeah you are, and hopeless to boot.
>
>
>

Bwawehahwha!


Yeh, obviously, fjukktard.


Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> news:432da373-7c14-49bd-9b34-
> ..
>> .
>>> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:67009a6b-e2a9-420b-8d64-
>
>>>> m... On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>>> > 6.130...
>>>>
>>>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>>>> > :
>>>>
>>>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>>
>>>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>
>>>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while following
>>>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in the
>>>> > >>> 'ho's
>>>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on short
>>>> > >>> final.
>>>>
>>>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane where
>>>> > >> there
>>>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing in
>>>> > >> the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency procedures"
>>>> > >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just
>>>> > >> following what the book says.
>>>>
>>>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>>>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my own
>>>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>>>
>>>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example
>>>> > >> of the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines while
>>>> > >> doing a belly-up?
>>>>
>>>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I
>>>> > >> thought it could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade, or
>>>> > >> a turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance of
>>>> > >> going around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to
>>>> > >> land consistently (back
>>>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around, what,
>>>> > >> twice?
>>>>
>>>> > > You are an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> > > Bertie
>>>>
>>>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>>>
>>>> YOUR?
>>>>
>>>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life
>>>> trying to be
>>>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> Me, I waste nothing.
>>>
>>
>> I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most
>> everything.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Well, your mind, but even that 'i reckon I can recycle.
>
> Them taters ain't gonn fertilise themselves, ya know!
>
>
>

Yeah, that make perfect sense.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:Md9Pj.57883$QC.48769
@newsfe20.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> news:432da373-7c14-49bd-9b34-
>> ..
>>> .
>>>> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> news:67009a6b-e2a9-420b-8d64-
>>
>>>>> m... On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>>>> > 6.130...
>>>>>
>>>>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>>>>> > :
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>>>
>>>>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while
following
>>>>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in
the
>>>>> > >>> 'ho's
>>>>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on
short
>>>>> > >>> final.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane
where
>>>>> > >> there
>>>>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing
in
>>>>> > >> the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency
procedures"
>>>>> > >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just
>>>>> > >> following what the book says.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>>>>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my
own
>>>>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example
>>>>> > >> of the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines
while
>>>>> > >> doing a belly-up?
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I
>>>>> > >> thought it could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade,
or
>>>>> > >> a turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance
of
>>>>> > >> going around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to
>>>>> > >> land consistently (back
>>>>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around,
what,
>>>>> > >> twice?
>>>>>
>>>>> > > You are an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>> > > Bertie
>>>>>
>>>>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>>>>
>>>>> YOUR?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life
>>>>> trying to be
>>>>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> Me, I waste nothing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most
>>> everything.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Well, your mind, but even that 'i reckon I can recycle.
>>
>> Them taters ain't gonn fertilise themselves, ya know!
>>
>>
>>
>
> Yeah, that make perfect sense.
>
>
>

Do it?


Good k00k!


Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>> > :
>>>
>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>> > 9f74-
>>> > >> :
>>>
>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" > wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV. A
>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>> > up
>>> > >> is
>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>
>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot less
>>> > >> >> > less
>>> > >> damage
>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
>>> > engines
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>> > >> >> > .
>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>
>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>
>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>>> > >> > saying
>>> > the
>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the crash
>>> > >> > landing the
>>> > pilot
>>> > >> > made?
>>>
>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've made
>>> > >> on (
>>> > not
>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal. The
>>> > airplane
>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>
>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the
>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble with
>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on the
>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental
>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>
>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop
>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it flew
>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do recommend
>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have landed
>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99,
>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>
>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>> extended, it is recommended
>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
>>> Landing with only
>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>
>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better imagination
>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>>
>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>
>
> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>
> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>

Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.

Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to have to
come back when you are sober.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:bl9Pj.57884$QC.14990
@newsfe20.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
>> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
>> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>>> > :
>>>>
>>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>>> > 9f74-
>>>> > >> :
>>>>
>>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" >
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV.
A
>>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>>> > up
>>>> > >> is
>>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>>
>>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot
less
>>>> > >> >> > less
>>>> > >> damage
>>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
>>>> > engines
>>>> > >> and
>>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>>> > >> >> > .
>>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>>
>>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>
>>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>>>> > >> > saying
>>>> > the
>>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the
crash
>>>> > >> > landing the
>>>> > pilot
>>>> > >> > made?
>>>>
>>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've
made
>>>> > >> on (
>>>> > not
>>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal.
The
>>>> > airplane
>>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>>
>>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the
>>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble
with
>>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on
the
>>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental
>>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>>
>>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
>>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop
>>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it
flew
>>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do
recommend
>>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have landed
>>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99,
>>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>>
>>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
>>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>>> extended, it is recommended
>>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
>>>> Landing with only
>>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>>
>>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better
imagination
>>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>>>
>>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>>
>>
>> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>>
>> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>>
>
> Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.


Yeh, very effective. Calling me a liar by lying.



>
> Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to have
to
> come back when you are sober.
>

Oh explain away fjukktard!

I'm all ears.



Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:Md9Pj.57883$QC.48769
> @newsfe20.lga:
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>>> news:432da373-7c14-49bd-9b34-
>>> ..
>>>> .
>>>>> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>> news:67009a6b-e2a9-420b-8d64-
>>>
>>>>>> m... On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>>>>> > 6.130...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>>>>>> > :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while
> following
>>>>>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in
> the
>>>>>> > >>> 'ho's
>>>>>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on
> short
>>>>>> > >>> final.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane
> where
>>>>>> > >> there
>>>>>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing
> in
>>>>>> > >> the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency
> procedures"
>>>>>> > >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just
>>>>>> > >> following what the book says.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>>>>>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my
> own
>>>>>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an example
>>>>>> > >> of the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines
> while
>>>>>> > >> doing a belly-up?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I
>>>>>> > >> thought it could be done effectively. If it's a three-blade,
> or
>>>>>> > >> a turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance
> of
>>>>>> > >> going around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned to
>>>>>> > >> land consistently (back
>>>>>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around,
> what,
>>>>>> > >> twice?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > You are an idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YOUR?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life
>>>>>> trying to be
>>>>>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>
>>>>> Me, I waste nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most
>>>> everything.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, your mind, but even that 'i reckon I can recycle.
>>>
>>> Them taters ain't gonn fertilise themselves, ya know!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, that make perfect sense.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Do it?
>
>
> Good k00k!
>
>
> Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:bl9Pj.57884$QC.14990
> @newsfe20.lga:
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
>>> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>>>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
>>> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>>>> > :
>>>>>
>>>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>>>> > 9f74-
>>>>> > >> :
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" >
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on TV.
> A
>>>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>>>> > up
>>>>> > >> is
>>>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot
> less
>>>>> > >> >> > less
>>>>> > >> damage
>>>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped the
>>>>> > engines
>>>>> > >> and
>>>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>>>> > >> >> > .
>>>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>>>>> > >> > saying
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>>>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the
> crash
>>>>> > >> > landing the
>>>>> > pilot
>>>>> > >> > made?
>>>>>
>>>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've
> made
>>>>> > >> on (
>>>>> > not
>>>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal.
> The
>>>>> > airplane
>>>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>>>
>>>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from the
>>>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble
> with
>>>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on
> the
>>>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that accidental
>>>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>>>
>>>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did eventually
>>>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left prop
>>>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it
> flew
>>>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do
> recommend
>>>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have landed
>>>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech 99,
>>>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>>>
>>>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down and
>>>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>>>> extended, it is recommended
>>>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be performed.
>>>>> Landing with only
>>>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better
> imagination
>>>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>>>>
>>>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>>>
>>> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>>>
>>
>> Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.
>
>
> Yeh, very effective. Calling me a liar by lying.
>
>
>
>>
>> Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to have
> to
>> come back when you are sober.
>>
>
> Oh explain away fjukktard!
>
> I'm all ears.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:lB9Pj.57898$QC.54033
@newsfe20.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:bl9Pj.57884$QC.14990
>> @newsfe20.lga:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
message
>>>>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
>>>> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>>>>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
>>>> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>>>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>>>>> > :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>>>>> > 9f74-
>>>>>> > >> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps >
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" >
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on
TV.
>> A
>>>>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>>>>> > up
>>>>>> > >> is
>>>>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot
>> less
>>>>>> > >> >> > less
>>>>>> > >> damage
>>>>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped
the
>>>>>> > engines
>>>>>> > >> and
>>>>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>>>>> > >> >> > .
>>>>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>>>>>> > >> > saying
>>>>>> > the
>>>>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>>>>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the
>> crash
>>>>>> > >> > landing the
>>>>>> > pilot
>>>>>> > >> > made?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've
>> made
>>>>>> > >> on (
>>>>>> > not
>>>>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal.
>> The
>>>>>> > airplane
>>>>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from
the
>>>>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble
>> with
>>>>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on
>> the
>>>>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that
accidental
>>>>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did
eventually
>>>>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left
prop
>>>>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it
>> flew
>>>>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>>>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do
>> recommend
>>>>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have
landed
>>>>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech
99,
>>>>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down
and
>>>>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>>>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>>>>> extended, it is recommended
>>>>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be
performed.
>>>>>> Landing with only
>>>>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better
>> imagination
>>>>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>
>>>>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>>>>
>>>> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.
>>
>>
>> Yeh, very effective. Calling me a liar by lying.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to
have
>> to
>>> come back when you are sober.
>>>
>>
>> Oh explain away fjukktard!
>>
>> I'm all ears.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
>
>

Ah, nothing to say..


You really don't get it do you fjukkkwit?


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:MA9Pj.57894$QC.38772
@newsfe20.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:Md9Pj.57883$QC.48769
>> @newsfe20.lga:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
message
>>>>> news:432da373-7c14-49bd-9b34-
>>>> ..
>>>>> .
>>>>>> On 21 Apr, 04:59, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> news:67009a6b-e2a9-420b-8d64-
>>>>
>>>>>>> m... On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>>>>>> > 6.130...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > > Buttman > wrote in
>>>>>>> > :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:19:37 -0700, momalley81 sayeth:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >>> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >>> Sorry, I'll minimize the damage as best I can while
>> following
>>>>>>> > >>> manufacturer's approved procedures. I'm betting nowhere in
>> the
>>>>>>> > >>> 'ho's
>>>>>>> > >>> AFM does it say to shut down and feather both engines on
>> short
>>>>>>> > >>> final.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> There are a million emergencies that can occur in a plane
>> where
>>>>>>> > >> there
>>>>>>> > >> are no procedures written about in the POH. There's nothing
>> in
>>>>>>> > >> the regs that say you have to follow all "emergency
>> procedures"
>>>>>>> > >> in an emergency. Handling an emergency isn't about just
>>>>>>> > >> following what the book says.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >>> They can't buy me a
>>>>>>> > >>> new certificate when it gets yanked because I invented my
>> own
>>>>>>> > >>> emergency procedures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> Has this even ever happened before? Has there been an
example
>>>>>>> > >> of the FAA going after someone who feathered the engines
>> while
>>>>>>> > >> doing a belly-up?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> If it was me, I'd consider feathering them, but only if I
>>>>>>> > >> thought it could be done effectively. If it's a three-
blade,
>> or
>>>>>>> > >> a turboprop of any kind, I won't do it. If there's a chance
>> of
>>>>>>> > >> going around I wouldn't do it either, but since I learned
to
>>>>>>> > >> land consistently (back
>>>>>>> > >> in my pre-private checkride days) I've had to go around,
>> what,
>>>>>>> > >> twice?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > > You are an idiot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > > Bertie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Your a dumb ass.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> YOUR?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bhahahhahahahaha. God I love usenet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You must love it. You certainly waste enough hours of your life
>>>>>>> trying to be
>>>>>>> a star on it.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me, I waste nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasn't even posting to you dip ****. Besides, you waste most
>>>>> everything.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, your mind, but even that 'i reckon I can recycle.
>>>>
>>>> Them taters ain't gonn fertilise themselves, ya know!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, that make perfect sense.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Do it?
>>
>>
>> Good k00k!
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
>

Ooow ! A clever new strategy to exploit my weakness!

Whatever shall I do?

Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:lB9Pj.57898$QC.54033
> @newsfe20.lga:
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:bl9Pj.57884$QC.14990
>>> @newsfe20.lga:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
> message
>>>>>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
>>>>> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
>>>>> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>>>>>> > :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>>>>>> > 9f74-
>>>>>>> > >> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps >
> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" >
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on
> TV.
>>> A
>>>>>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>>>>>> > up
>>>>>>> > >> is
>>>>>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot
>>> less
>>>>>>> > >> >> > less
>>>>>>> > >> damage
>>>>>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped
> the
>>>>>>> > engines
>>>>>>> > >> and
>>>>>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>>>>>> > >> >> > .
>>>>>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both engines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are you
>>>>>>> > >> > saying
>>>>>>> > the
>>>>>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC skills.
>>>>>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the
>>> crash
>>>>>>> > >> > landing the
>>>>>>> > pilot
>>>>>>> > >> > made?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've
>>> made
>>>>>>> > >> on (
>>>>>>> > not
>>>>>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was minimal.
>>> The
>>>>>>> > airplane
>>>>>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from
> the
>>>>>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The touble
>>> with
>>>>>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches on
>>> the
>>>>>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that
> accidental
>>>>>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did
> eventually
>>>>>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left
> prop
>>>>>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it
>>> flew
>>>>>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>>>>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do
>>> recommend
>>>>>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have
> landed
>>>>>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech
> 99,
>>>>>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down
> and
>>>>>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>>>>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>>>>>> extended, it is recommended
>>>>>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be
> performed.
>>>>>>> Landing with only
>>>>>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better
>>> imagination
>>>>>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for instance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeh, very effective. Calling me a liar by lying.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to
> have
>>> to
>>>> come back when you are sober.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh explain away fjukktard!
>>>
>>> I'm all ears.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Ah, nothing to say..
>
>
> You really don't get it do you fjukkkwit?
>
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:uO9Pj.57908$QC.56495
@newsfe20.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:lB9Pj.57898$QC.54033
>> @newsfe20.lga:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:bl9Pj.57884$QC.14990
>>>> @newsfe20.lga:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>> message
>>>>>>> news:089d8979-143f-4dfb-9d17-8742884653c5
>>>>>> @v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> .. On 21 Apr, 04:57, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> "WingFlaps" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> news:7f0be847-cf46-4b52-9ec7-86944afd4db5
>>>>>> @y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>> ... On Apr 21, 3:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>>>> > news:cc5e0db0-3e13-42b8-8d46-
>>>>>>>> > :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > > On Apr 21, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>> > >> WingFlaps > wrote in
>>>>>>>> > >> news:3ba51b9f-6384-43cf-
>>>>>>>> > 9f74-
>>>>>>>> > >> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> > On Apr 20, 6:19 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>>> > >> >> On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, WingFlaps >
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > On Apr 19, 7:37 am, "tom418" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > > This is only an emergency because it looks good on
>> TV.
>>>> A
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > > gear
>>>>>>>> > up
>>>>>>>> > >> is
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > > not a life threatening event.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > It would have been even less of a risk and done a lot
>>>> less
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > less
>>>>>>>> > >> damage
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > to the plane if he had retracted the gear and stopped
>> the
>>>>>>>> > engines
>>>>>>>> > >> and
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > done a belly landing
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > .
>>>>>>>> > >> >> > Cheers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> >> Unless he had to go-around after feathering both
engines.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> > Why would he want to go around after short final? Are
you
>>>>>>>> > >> > saying
>>>>>>>> > the
>>>>>>>> > >> > POH says land on on one wheel? Now apply some PIC
skills.
>>>>>>>> > >> > Which is safer, a belly landing with engines off or the
>>>> crash
>>>>>>>> > >> > landing the
>>>>>>>> > pilot
>>>>>>>> > >> > made?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >> Actually, a partial gear landing is considered safer. I've
>>>> made
>>>>>>>> > >> on (
>>>>>>>> > not
>>>>>>>> > >> by choice, one failed on touchdown) and damage was
minimal.
>>>> The
>>>>>>>> > airplane
>>>>>>>> > >> was flying agian the next day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > > S'funny you say that as I was reading some RAF stories from
>> the
>>>>>>>> > > war and it seemed like gear up was the way to go. The
touble
>>>> with
>>>>>>>> > > one wheel down is what happens to the wing wen it catches
on
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> > > ground and starts a groundloop. It seems to me that
>> accidental
>>>>>>>> > > gear ups do relativeley little damage to structure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Well, in my case it happened at high speed and we did
>> eventually
>>>>>>>> > groundloop, bt at low speed and with little damage. The left
>> prop
>>>>>>>> > got it, but the boss did a crank check and found it OK, so it
>>>> flew
>>>>>>>> > the next day. Cracked drag link was the culprit. For large
>>>>>>>> > aircraft, even those without underslung engines, they do
>>>> recommend
>>>>>>>> > that we take whatever is down. I know a few guys who have
>> landed
>>>>>>>> > completely wheels up and the damage was pretty heavy. A Beech
>> 99,
>>>>>>>> > for instance ( lots of those have been wheels up)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the Gulfstream III landing with any two (2) gear legs down
>> and
>>>>>>>> locked is preferred to landing
>>>>>>>> with only one gear down or all gear up. Should only one gear be
>>>>>>>> extended, it is recommended
>>>>>>>> that the gear be retracted and an all gear up landing be
>> performed.
>>>>>>>> Landing with only
>>>>>>>> the nose gear down and locked is specifically not recommended.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you know why it would be different for heavies?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, but I sure he will make something up. He has a better
>>>> imagination
>>>>>>>> than MX.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Aww, not really, I can't imagine you being a pilot, for
instance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Trust me, we all realize your lack of imagination.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wait a second, you just sed I had a large imagination.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whick is it wannabe boi?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read between the lines wanna be troll, I was calling you a liar.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeh, very effective. Calling me a liar by lying.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Damn, If I have to explain everything in detail, you're going to
>> have
>>>> to
>>>>> come back when you are sober.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh explain away fjukktard!
>>>>
>>>> I'm all ears.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Ah, nothing to say..
>>
>>
>> You really don't get it do you fjukkkwit?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
>

Obviously not.


Bertie