These guys were certainly on their A game. Marvellous recovery and flying…
BeechBaby wrote:
These guys were certainly on their A game. Marvellous recovery and flying…
Why didn’t they extend landing gear on final?
Airborne_Again wrote:
Why didn’t they extend landing gear on final?
I can think of several reasons:
Probably wanted to minimize drag for a less than good powered approach, maybe did not have time – the DC-3 gear extension is a little complex, not just one operation, and, it’s better to land gear up, than gear in transit. the decision to land came without a lot of warning.
The pilots did an awesome job in difficult circumstances!
Airborne_Again wrote:
Why didn’t they extend landing gear on final?
This variant of the DC3 is heavily modified, with several complexities in the mix. If you look closely at the video you will see that they are heavily into the dead engine with a prop that won’t feather, and having to turn into that dead engine to make the runway and not into the middle of downtown Anchorage.
They did not require further drag and had they lowered the gear they would not have made it..Just super work IMO.
Looked like a Hollywood movie, and bear in mind this was the GA field, not the field they departed from.
BeechBaby wrote:
This variant of the DC3 is heavily modified, with several complexities in the mix. If you look closely at the video you will see that they are heavily into the dead engine with a prop that won’t feather,
How does the non-feather relate to the complexities? I assume that the aircraft isn’t modified so that the props can’t feather.
The prop may have mechanically failed to feather or remain feathered. In a rush at low altitude, diagnosing that may become secondary if there’s a runway to land on ahead. That revision of the DC-3 has landing gear doors, which complicate an already complex landing gear system. Several actions are required in order to retract or extend the gear, and it is not a quick cycle time.
I have not flown a piston DC-3, but I will presume it has an autofeather system, which perhaps did not function as intended. I do know that the regular DC-3 as a turbine powered is power limited because of Vmca handling, so in seeing that video, if the plane was heavy and slow already, and lost an engine, I can imaging having to reduce power on the remaining engine to maintain straight flight. In that configuration, extending the gear, which includes opening draggy gear doors, may have risked more drag than the pilot was willing to accept. DC-3’s are designed so that wheels up landings are minimally damaging to the airframe. I think that the pilot used that fact to save the situation.
The plan A was a return to ANC. The ADSB shows left turn from ANC, 97 kts, 900 feet. Engine issues, RHS. Quits. They obviously within seconds jumped to Plan B.They were losing speed and altitude. Down to 500 feet and 80kts. They then completed a smooth and gentle right turn, into the dead engine co-ordinating ATC with ANC and Merrill. They just made it to Merrill. Crossed the parked Super Cub by about 10 feet. Merrill has a 4k foot runway. Any gear or flap they would not have made it. Question will be how heavy were they?
