OpenAirDocs.org

20031222034979I

Incident · Substantial damage
Open the Markdown

FAA incident report · Cessna 177RG · Mesa, AZ · December 22, 2003

FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal

© OpenStreetMap
Date
December 22, 2003 · 12:40 local
Place
Mesa, AZ
Airport
Falcon Field Airport
Phase of flight
Level Off Touchdown
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Substantial damage
Aircraft
N1875Q
Reported as
Cessna 177RG
People aboard
2
Fatal injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
850 total90 in this make and model35 in the last 90 days

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

(-23) During an instructional flight with the owner of the incident aircraft the aircraft experienced a failure of the nose landing gear. This aircraft had just recently been repaired after a nose gear collapsed and prop strike. The mechanic who did the repairs stated that the nose gear was not damaged during the first prop strike. Witnesses after the landing stated that the landing gear was hooked over the cross bar that cycles the landing gear door lever. Inspection of the landing gear doors revealed that the turnbuckle for the doors were mounted on the forward face of the door brackets. Witness marks on the turnbuckle matched marks on the landing gear strut. When the landing gear hung on the brackets the gear would have extended partly down. This was evident in that the inside faces of the doors were damaged from contact with the runway. Because the landing gear was partially extended the scissor bolt had worn through during the landing sequence. This allowed the strut pressure to over extend the gear and put the uplock hook on the landing gear door cross bar. This was evident because witnesses stated that there was a puddle of hydraulic fluid on the ground where the aircraft stopped.

As the FAA filed it

(-23) DURING AN INSTRUCTIONAL FLIGHT WITH THE OWNER OF THE INCIDENT AIRCRAFT THE AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE OF THE NOSE LANDING GEAR. THIS AIRCRAFT HAD JUST RECENTLY BEEN REPAIRED AFTER A NOSE GEAR COLLAPSED AND PROP STRIKE. THE MECHANIC WHO DID THE REPAIRS STATED THAT THE NOSE GEAR WAS NOT DAMAGED DURING THE FIRST PROP STRIKE. WITNESSES AFTER THE LANDING STATED THAT THE LANDING GEAR WAS HOOKED OVER THE CROSS BAR THAT CYCLES THE LANDING GEAR DOOR LEVER. INSPECTION OF THE LANDING GEAR DOORS REVEALED THAT THE TURNBUCKLE FOR THE DOORS WERE MOUNTED ON THE FORWARD FACE OF THE DOOR BRACKETS. WITNESS MARKS ON THE TURNBUCKLE MATCHED MARKS ON THE LANDING GEAR STRUT. WHEN THE LANDING GEAR HUNG ON THE BRACKETS THE GEAR WOULD HAVE EXTENDED PARTLY DOWN. THIS WAS EVIDENT IN THAT THE INSIDE FACES OF THE DOORS WERE DAMAGED FROM CONTACT WITH THE RUNWAY. BECAUSE THE LANDING GEAR WAS PARTIALLY EXTENDED THE SCISSOR BOLT HAD WORN THROUGH DURING THE LANDING SEQUENCE. THIS ALLOWED THE STRUT PRESSURE TO OVER EXTEND THE GEAR AND PUT THE UPLOCK HOOK ON THE LANDING GEAR DOOR CROSS BAR. THIS WAS EVIDENT BECAUSE WITNESSES STATED THAT THERE WAS A PUDDLE OF HYDRAULIC FLUID ON THE GROUND WHERE THE AIRCRAFT STOPPED.