OpenAirDocs.org

20090428005349I

Incident · Minor damage
Open the Markdown

FAA incident report · Piper PA-28R-201 · Provo, UT · April 28, 2009

FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal

© OpenStreetMap
Date
April 28, 2009 · 12:45 local
Place
Provo, UT
Airport
Provo Municipal
Phase of flight
Landing
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Minor damage
Aircraft
N2495M
Reported as
Piper PA28R201
People aboard
2
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
260 total30 in this make and model30 in the last 90 days
N2495MRegistered now · Piper PA-28R-201S/N 28R-7837090 · Built 1977Airframe modelPiper PA-28R-201Engine modelLycoming I0360 seriesReciprocating

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 a practical test for a commercial pilot asel, the applicant was instructed to perform a power-off 180 degree accuracy approach and landing. The aircraft landed without the gear fully extended and not in the locked down position. When the flight school director of flight operations arrived at the aircraft he observed the gear handle was in the down position. When the aircraft was raised and the master switch placed in the on position the gear operated normally and fully extended into the down and locked position. Runway marks indicated heavy black tire marking for a considerable distance. Examination of the tires revealed considerable unusual wear and damage to the side walls. It appears someone attempted to extend the gear too late in the flair with only enough time for the main and nose gear to partially extend. A post accident inspection of the landing gear system and gear unsafe system determined there were no mechanical deficiencies or failure of any nature. The applicant and the DPE both claim that on downwind both confirmed gear was down and 3 green lights and never observed the gear in-transit/unsafe light or hearing the gear unsafe warning horn.

As the FAA filed it

(-23) DURING A PRACTICAL TEST FOR A COMMERCIAL PILOT ASEL, THE APPLICANT WAS INSTRUCTED TO PERFORM A POWER-OFF 180 DEGREE ACCURACY APPROACH AND LANDING. THE AIRCRAFT LANDED WITHOUT THE GEAR FULLY EXTENDED AND NOT IN THE LOCKED DOWN POSITION. WHEN THE FLIGHT SCHOOL DIRECTOR OF FLIGHT OPERATIONS ARRIVED AT THE AIRCRAFT HE OBSERVED THE GEAR HANDLE WAS IN THE DOWN POSITION. WHEN THE AIRCRAFT WAS RAISED AND THE MASTER SWITCH PLACED IN THE ON POSITION THE GEAR OPERATED NORMALLY AND FULLY EXTENDED INTO THE DOWN AND LOCKED POSITION. RUNWAY MARKS INDICATED HEAVY BLACK TIRE MARKING FOR A CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE. EXAMINATION OF THE TIRES REVEALED CONSIDERABLE UNUSUAL WEAR AND DAMAGE TO THE SIDE WALLS. IT APPEARS SOMEONE ATTEMPTED TO EXTEND THE GEAR TOO LATE IN THE FLAIR WITH ONLY ENOUGH TIME FOR THE MAIN AND NOSE GEAR TO PARTIALLY EXTEND. A POST ACCIDENT INSPECTION OF THE LANDING GEAR SYSTEM AND GEAR UNSAFE SYSTEM DETERMINED THERE WERE NO MECHANICAL DEFICIENCIES OR FAILURE OF ANY NATURE. THE APPLICANT AND THE DPE BOTH CLAIM THAT ON DOWNWIND BOTH CONFIRMED GEAR WAS DOWN AND 3 GREEN LIGHTS AND NEVER OBSERVED THE GEAR IN-TRANSIT/UNSAFE LIGHT OR HEARING THE GEAR UNSAFE WARNING HORN.