The pilot reported that during a post-maintenance check flight, when he went to retract the Cessna 182’s landing gear after takeoff, he noticed that the amber light that indicated the gear was fully retracted did not illuminate.
The pilot verified the main landing gear indicator lights functioned and decided to validate in flight that the landing gear would extend. When he extended the landing gear, the green light that indicated the landing gear was down and locked did not illuminate, and the pilot was not able to visually confirm the extension of the main landing gear.
After troubleshooting the system and several unsuccessful attempts to extend the main landing gear, the pilot performed a gear-up landing to the dry asphalt runway at the airport in Tulsa, Oklahoma, with only the nosewheel extended.
The airplane slid 500 feet before coming to a stop.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right horizontal stabilizer and elevator.
A post-accident examination of the airplane revealed that a b-nut on the main landing gear actuator gear down hydraulic line was only hand tightened, with visible stripped thread present.
The mechanic who performed the annual inspection on the airplane, which included work on the main landing gear system, reported that he forgot to fully tighten the b-nut during the recent maintenance work, which resulted in a loss of main landing gear system hydraulic pressure in flight, and the pilot’s inability to fully extend the main landing gear.
A successful main landing gear swing was performed during the maintenance work, but it was not performed after all the maintenance work was completed. Had the main landing gear swing been conducted after the maintenance work was completed, it is likely the loss of the main landing gear system hydraulic pressure would have been identified before the flight.
Probable Cause: The pilot’s inability to extend the main landing gear due to incomplete maintenance, which resulted in a partial wheels-up landing and the mechanic’s failure to follow proper maintenance procedures that led to the loss of main landing gear system hydraulic pressure and the subsequent failure of the main landing gear to fully extend.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This May 2021 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
Of course no one excludes the human factor, but as for the serviceability of the airplane is a big responsibility and any mistake can lead to trouble. I am very fond of airplanes and my dream is to buy an airplane. Exactly the same as I found on small airplane images, these pictures are impressive. I hope my dream will come true soon.
Anybody can make a mistake, I just hope that this mechanic had insurance that covers the situation like this. Not only that I hope the insurance company doesn’t try to weasel out of paying. I wouldn’t but too much blame on the mechanic. We are all human.
Old pilot here from way back in the day, and there was a time when “wrench monkeys” walked on water, they were paid well and respected. Whatever has changed through the years needs some attention… good maintenance personnel are like gold, and the stakes on the table are huge for pilots.
One should keep in mind experienced experts skill manpower comes with price,but many owners & maintenance firms wants to compromise by entrusting the task to inexperienced staff without proper training and also skip the maintenance job scope, it seems the work was not cross checked by any Engineer,there are certain task which needs double checks alongwith with operational checks,by skipping some task,due to time factor or reasons better known to them,it should be strictly informed to carry out proper task with responsibility and no compromise on post installation checks even if it takes time, a better QA with experienced background, better maintainance planning should be incorporated to minimize such incidents, cursory work is of no avail, Technician should be taught work is workship, their carelessness will cause unrepairable damage, base Engineer should play an important role without any distraction to thoroughly check the work carried out under him/her without any compromise,also people should understand good reliable maintenance comes with time and money, often they want to expedite the work!
The 2 largest contributing factors to be addressed are: A. Workload and mandatory rest for mechanics. While the FAA monitors this closely for Pilots, Mechanics are worked like slaves with no rules in place to protect them.
B. Experienced Mechanics available to work and the retention of its current employees. If you throw out peanuts, guess what, you attract Monkees. Pay a fair and livable wage and employees won’t leave. If you have to pass these cost increases to the customer so be it, if they can’t afford the Maintenance they can’t afford the airplane to begin with.
With 37 years of experience as a licensed A&P mechanic I would consider myself more than qualified to make these comments and observations.
The Cessna 182 has fixed landing gear! There is no gear light! The gear does not retract!!!
Could be a 182RG, they do have retractable gears.
Not all people have the mechanical aptitude needed to accomplish work on any aircraft. In my early years we were told, “you are responsible for the Pilots Life anytime you complete work on any Aircraft!! Attention to detail in anything you do to the aircraft. Proper documentation before you clear the aircraft for flight!! I’ve never signed off any aircraft that I didn’t check all the things required for flight. Just my two cents after over 50 years of aircraft maintenance.
I believe that too many interruptions in the shop are a major concern. Cell phones, airplane owners, parts availability is another issue. The mechanic will be working on several planes in a given time period. Waiting for a part, stuff that plane somewhere and work on this one, waiting on a part and stuff that one somewhere. Oh, that part came in six weeks later, ware was I on that one.
Where is Joe, the mechanic? he quit, this is Sam, he will be working on your plane now.
The headaches of shop ownership is overwhelming and risky. The small and reasonably priced shop will go away, the same as the small auto shop has. You will then be hostage of the $200.00 an hour big shops.
The annual inspection should be a bi-annual or based on hours.
Todays work environment is a mess compared to days past.
So what sanctions and/or disciplinary action(s) will be / should be taken against that mechanic and shop? I’d like to see this reporting service do follow-up reporting on the after-incident affects on the perpetrators of maintenance malfeasance.
Since anyone is subject to making an error the resolve would be more dedicated oversite and continuous inspections, With that would be the added cost and competent personal to accommodate that. Added cost is one thing, the personnel is a whole different issue.
To date these matters are pretty much left to insurance settlements. I dealt with a shop years ago that had three post maintenance nose gear up landings…a C210, C310, B55. within a two month period.
The shop’s insurance should pay for all repair cost and rental of a replacement plane. But was it is reputable shop or a guy with a bargain price and no AI.
I like to read them and learn something