Belly landing RNLAF F-16AM J-640@Charleroi 8 April

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2011, 12:44
by maurits
Good afternoon,

This morning F-16AM J-640 from Volkel Wing (312sq) made a belly landing at Charleroi. It should perform a touch and go/before arrival at SABCA. This Viper is sold to FaChile and arrived here for respray/rework before it will delivered to the FaCh in September.

here a video:

http://www.rtl.be/info/votreregion/hain ... c-perturbe

Just wait and see it if will be repaired (depends of the costs).

regards,

Maurits

RE: Belly landing RNLAF F-16AM J-640@Charleroi 8 April

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2011, 10:10
by yakuza
bad deal for FACh..

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2011, 16:45
by MKopack
Is it odd that the MLG doors are open (or appear to be open), but that the gear aren't out?

It's been nearly twenty years since I've worked 16's, but if I recall correctly, the doors are mechanically attached to the MLG uplock mechanism, so that when the doors open, the gear just fall out. Am I wrong on this one?

Mike

RE: Belly landing RNLAF F-16AM J-640@Charleroi 8 April

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2011, 16:54
by jaws
Well, at least it was going to the mod/depot facility and wasn't an acceptance flight.

RE: Belly landing RNLAF F-16AM J-640@Charleroi 8 April

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2011, 17:12
by Bat
The plane was coming from Volkel for update/revision at the SABCA factory, which is less than 1 km away from Gosselies (Charleroi/Brussels South) airport. Newspapers gave two different versions of this story. According to the official version, the pilot announced landing gear problems befor landing and the gear collapsed when the plane touched down.
But some people say that the plane was doing a touch-and-go and came with too high AOA: the tail touched down and the gear collapsed at this moment.

Another fact is that belgian speaking television RTL released a photography oh the plane when landing, just befor touhdown. The pic is in low res and it's quite difficult to say if aft undercarriage is correctly down... http://www.rtl.be/rtlutils/pics/div/201 ... avion2.jpg

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2011, 10:04
by exfltsafety
... but if I recall correctly, the doors are mechanically attached to the MLG uplock mechanism, so that when the doors open, the gear just fall out. Am I wrong on this one?

Mike - You're not wrong. But, it's not necessarily odd that the main gear doors appear to be open but the gear aren't out. If the gear received a retract command and the aircraft settled onto the runway, the main gear doors would have been physically prevented from closing.

It's certainly an unfortunate occurrence; but, I'm glad to see the pilot is ok. And the investigators also have an intact jet to work with to determine what happened.

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2011, 15:06
by MKopack
exfltsafety wrote:Mike - You're not wrong. But, it's not necessarily odd that the main gear doors appear to be open but the gear aren't out. If the gear received a retract command and the aircraft settled onto the runway, the main gear doors would have been physically prevented from closing.

It's certainly an unfortunate occurrence; but, I'm glad to see the pilot is ok. And the investigators also have an intact jet to work with to determine what happened.


I'll buy that - thanks Larry! As you said, good to see that the pilot was uninjured and the bird isn't too badly beaten up. With luck she'll either be repaired or replaced with a stored aircraft relatively quickly.

Mike

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2011, 15:28
by outlaw162
I believe there were 2 incidents in the 80's during touch and goes in "B" models where the trainee in the front seat actually moved the gear handle to 'up' before pushing the throttle forward from idle.

Both aircraft ended up coming to a halt on their belly. I know for sure one was at Fort Huachuca and I think the other was at Nellis or Indian Springs. Habit patterns and I think they determined it had something to do with a false sense of acceleration on the runway and that cockpit noise level doesn't change much on T&G's anyway.

I know the IP at Fort Huachuca. Before he could blink the aircraft settled and they were along for the ride (slide). :shock:

I want to say the one at Nellis was a T-bird trainee but I'm not sure about that.

Of course this may not be the case here but they did mention T&G's and as Ex-FS says the aircraft does look like the retraction cycle could have been initiated.

OL

edit: Actually the one at Fort Huachuca had wing tanks so they didn't quite make it to the belly.

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2011, 23:54
by VarkVet
I think he had a gear problem (no pun intended) and was either assessing the situation or trying for a go around. Nevertheless, I think a gear up landing on a clean jet is the proper config if a main folded or hung? The picture shows all 3 down looking normal, but you can’t see if the toggle is locked. :2c:

Source:
http://www.checksix-forums.com/showthread.php?p=1152165

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2011, 22:32
by bonzo312sqn
MKopack wrote:
exfltsafety wrote:Mike - You're not wrong. But, it's not necessarily odd that the main gear doors appear to be open but the gear aren't out. If the gear received a retract command and the aircraft settled onto the runway, the main gear doors would have been physically prevented from closing.

It's certainly an unfortunate occurrence; but, I'm glad to see the pilot is ok. And the investigators also have an intact jet to work with to determine what happened.


I'll buy that - thanks Larry! As you said, good to see that the pilot was uninjured and the bird isn't too badly beaten up. With luck she'll either be repaired or replaced with a stored aircraft relatively quickly.

Mike


The pilot like te make a touch and go but selected to short after the touch the landing gear handle in up position.

greetz bonzo 312sqn

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2011, 00:58
by exfltsafety
The pilot like te make a touch and go but selected to short after the touch the landing gear handle in up position.

It's not the first time that has been done and I suspect it won't be the last.

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2011, 04:04
by MKopack
exfltsafety wrote:It's not the first time that has been done and I suspect it won't be the last.


You're right, and as you said before, thankfully with no injuries and hopefully minimal damage.

Mike

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2011, 19:22
by pmarth
Anyone know who the pilot was? I'm glad he's ok.

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2011, 05:30
by VarkVet
bonzo312sqn wrote:The pilot like te make a touch and go but selected to short after the touch the landing gear handle in up position.

greetz bonzo 312sqn


I Think you'r full of sh*t ... but welcome!

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2011, 21:21
by exfltsafety
I Think you'r full of sh*t ...

You shouldn't comment on things you don't understand.

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2011, 05:32
by bouliult
exfltsafety wrote:
I Think you'r full of sh*t ...

You shouldn't comment on things you don't understand.


Yeezzzz Varkvet lighten up will you!! I actually know something about the jet and suspect that it is a case of too early gear retraction. That's also why the main doors are still open: first the main gears will retract forward and the doors never got the chance to close. Also be aware that before the pilot would land with an unsafe gear it would be really weird that all three gear are unsafe.. He would also try to blow the gear down with alternate gear or by pulling G's. If he should decide to land with unsafe gear he would try to retract the gear again by resetting his alternate extension....Unless he had a B system failure... But if he had a B sys fail he would probably opted to fly back to Volkel because it is a land as soon as practicle and he would probably try to land at his homeplate unless he had not enough fuel. So although it's a pitty and relative easy to prevent, human mistakes do happen...

Even if somebody writes something stupid (which Gonzo didn't) he does not need t o be treated like that.

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2011, 06:57
by VarkVet
bouliult wrote:
exfltsafety wrote:
I Think you'r full of sh*t ...

You shouldn't comment on things you don't understand.


Yeezzzz Varkvet lighten up will you!! I actually know something about the jet and suspect that it is a case of too early gear retraction. That's also why the main doors are still open: first the main gears will retract forward and the doors never got the chance to close. Also be aware that before the pilot would land with an unsafe gear it would be really weird that all three gear are unsafe.. He would also try to blow the gear down with alternate gear or by pulling G's. If he should decide to land with unsafe gear he would try to retract the gear again by resetting his alternate extension....Unless he had a B system failure... But if he had a B sys fail he would probably opted to fly back to Volkel because it is a land as soon as practicle and he would probably try to land at his homeplate unless he had not enough fuel. So although it's a pitty and relative easy to prevent, human mistakes do happen...

Even if somebody writes something stupid (which Gonzo didn't) he does not need t o be treated like that.


My bad and I apologize … everyone has an opinion when things like this happen, because at the end of the day no one wants to see a destroyed Viper! I based my ASS-U-Me-tion on the report that the pilot had gear problems!
Sorry Gonzo :cheers:
Anyone have a link to a mishap report where a GE powered jet fell back to the ground when the gear handle was raised too soon?

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2011, 16:56
by outlaw162
The Tucson Guard Block15 “B” model that slid down the runway at Libby AAF, Fort Huachuca was of course P&W powered.

But the point is that little of that power was being used when the gear handle was placed to the up position.

Apparently due to false sensations, the student attempted to pull the aircraft into the air in IDLE and raised the gear at a point, which under usual circumstances would have been considered normal. (You can pull the gear fairly quick on a touch and go in mil.) But the same thing would have happened with General Electric power in idle.

As the thing was coming to a halt, the IP asked the student:

“Why the **** did you do that?”

The student’s appropriately humble answer was:

“I don’t know.”

No links, but I talk to the IP from time to time.

OL

(Of course this Charleroi situation may be different)

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2011, 17:36
by exfltsafety
Don't have any links to previous events; but, this is not all that uncommon. Lots of variables like temp of the day, gross weight, etc; but, even in MIL, putting the gear handle up too soon, which also causes the trailing edge flaps to retract, can cause the jet to sink back to the runway. Nozzle scrapes, centerline tank scrapes, and worse have occurred. One of the more dramatic ones was a centerline tank scrape that resulted in a fuel leak and fire. The pilot subsequently jettisoned the tank and landed ok.

Unread postPosted: 23 Jun 2011, 09:14
by rnlaf-f-16-sparky
Bonzo is right there is a bump in the runway so the plane lost it's weight on wheel and the gear retracted wile coming back on the ground behind the bump.

Unread postPosted: 23 Jun 2011, 22:58
by guardbaby
outlaw162 wrote:I believe there were 2 incidents in the 80's during touch and goes in "B" models where the trainee in the front seat actually moved the gear handle to 'up' before pushing the throttle forward from idle.

Both aircraft ended up coming to a halt on their belly. I know for sure one was at Fort Huachuca and I think the other was at Nellis or Indian Springs. Habit patterns and I think they determined it had something to do with a false sense of acceleration on the runway and that cockpit noise level doesn't change much on T&G's anyway.

I know the IP at Fort Huachuca. Before he could blink the aircraft settled and they were along for the ride (slide). :shock:

I want to say the one at Nellis was a T-bird trainee but I'm not sure about that.

Of course this may not be the case here but they did mention T&G's and as Ex-FS says the aircraft does look like the retraction cycle could have been initiated.

OL

edit: Actually the one at Fort Huachuca had wing tanks so they didn't quite make it to the belly.


If I remember correctly, didn't the IP go for cataract surgery shortly thereafter? HD was his initials...I believe those words came straight from his mouth after he retired (sitting in TAGRA). Seems that is what convinced him to get the surgery since he didn't see things clearly in the cockpit.

Unread postPosted: 24 Jun 2011, 04:04
by outlaw162
That's the guy.

He was a supremely skillful fighter pilot and instructor, but his eyes were never that great, even before any problems.

But he probably couldn't have prevented it anyway, even with a couple of 20/12 eyeballs like mine.

OL

(Students WERE the "enemy".) :D

Unread postPosted: 24 Jun 2011, 07:15
by guardbaby
For me, pilots were the enemy....*grin*. He was a top notch pilot and person though. He was one guy I had much respect for....