Anybody see the live coverage on Hardball of the Navy C-2 emergency lndg?

[DemoTex]

Landing "gear up this" and landing "gear up that." Not one of these stupid SOBs noticed that the #2 prop was feathered (indicating an engine failure or shut-down). My guess is that the hydraulic system for the gear was run by the #2 engine, and the back-up (blow-down?) system failed. They were correct in identifying some excellent airman-ship. It was a picture perfect engine-out, gear-up landing. Talk about multiple, simultaneous failures. Talk about the value of excellent training. Talk about a great 4000 word article for DemoTex in my UK training magazine!

[TheDebbieDee]

1. I wonder if this is all part of the "Terror Drill" plan.......

Is the * admin messing with our minds again, perhaps like they did on 9/11?

[Old and In the Way]

2. That was mighty smooth.

Hats off to the pilots, they made it look easy.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. That pilot, however...

Will be enjoying the tender ministrations of a traumatic proctologist for quite a while. ;-)

[Eloriel]

4. I saw it and was VERY impressed

even tho totally ignorant of all the fine points: I still knew it was a masterful performance.

[tridim]

5. I heard them say they shut off one of the engines

to minimize the risk of hitting a prop on the landing strip. Makes sense.

[DemoTex]

9. No, no, no, no, no!

You never, ever shut down a perfectly good engine. Symmetric power is easier to control than asymmetric power (two vs. one on this aircraft). A one engine go-around is a nightmare on a twin-engine turboprop. Here is what happened, in my expert opinion (but subject to reports we will never see since it is a military aircraft): The Navy C-2A Greyhound (Grumman) lost the number two Allison T56-A-425 turboprop engine (4,600 shaft horsepower) and the hydraulic system for the landing gear was supplied power from that engine. The backup system to lower the landing gear failed (nitrogen blow-down, gravity, etc). The landing gear problem was a result of the engine failure .. not vice versa.

[tridim]

11. I'm just repeating what they said!

However, I am an RC pilot (which makes me an expert, right? :)), and I know that landing a gearless plane with a spinning prop isn't smart unless you want to replace the prop every flight. I don't have a plane with two engines so I can't comment on that, but I've seen guys land them with one engine quite often. No big deal.

[Jacobin]

6. Frined of mine did that to a Baron.....unintentionally

forked up the bottom and the engines, but he and his friend walked away.

[gizmo1979]

7. Excellent job.

A-1 kudos to the pilot and crew.

[karlrschneider]

8. I just replayed it on the TIVO, looks like he shut down the RE on purpose

then held the left wing a bit high to keep from ruining the props. I did a similar thing one time except I killed both engines on short final (gear was actually down but I had no lights so didn't know what I had)
But that was a piston driven a/c where the props will stop real fast unlike the propjet the Grumman is...

[DemoTex]

10. Feathered like a bird!

See my post #9. Great job. The loss of #2 probably gave him a shit-sammich for hydraulics. Then the back-up system failed. Tough day.

Mac