23 comments

[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 45.1 ms ] thread
>> The pilot then maintains control of the vehicle

This seems to have been a training flight. Im sure the black box (if there was one) heard an excited "i have control" from the senior pilot once the grinding noise started.

Is this the same one that was randomly in the middle east for an extended duration with no explanation?
What a bummer. We helped map the Kerrville floods for support of the state. Same day we mapped it, so did this WB-57 - only 35K feet above us. Such a historic and unique aircraft - I feel bad for the pilots onboard knowing it will likely total that aircraft even if it was a mechanical failure.
What will happen to the vehicle after such crash landing?

Is it possible (reasonably) to repair it? or it will never fly?

It's a mid-50s bomber. The skin will be easy to replace. Drill out the rivets, rivet on new sheet metal. I don't think it even dragged the wingtips.

Might be some complications with the nose gear and the payload bay (the main gear is on the wings, and untouched) but nothing terribly complicated. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was designed with some assumption of belly landings; it's a warplane after all.

Repairs surely isn't automatic, and who knows how tight that's program's budget is, but planes are repaired from such landings all the time, and if they attach any value to the vehicle it can be repaired, and not at great cost.

That's not a crash, that's a controlled landing
"high friction landing" :)
Beautifully controlled landing, well done to the pilot.

This is certainly a dumb question, but could a plane like this land on a softer material to try to save the airframe? Like a dry lake bed, marsh, or golf course?

Not softer, because that'll make it lawn dart, but dry lake beds yes.

Edward's AFB is located at the edge of a dry lake bed exactly because it acts as a huge extended runway in case an aircraft under testing has problems landing and coming to a stop.

Why is such an ancient plane still being used? Lack of funding to use something newer? Or it has some capability that can't be replicated?

I would imagine it's incredibly expensive to maintain. Are they machining their own engine parts?

We should build a drone system that attaches to the underbelly of planes and physically pulls the gear down
1) Build a mobile platform with wheels that starts at the beginning of the runway

2) matches speed with the plane as it enters runway.

3) Plane will “touchdown” on the mobile base gently since speeds are matched.

4) Lock the plane to base and decelerate the base in a controlled manner.

If you can gently lock the base and plane you can even save the plane

Implementing a mobile landing platform for commercial or high-speed aircraft is a theoretically sound concept for emergency recovery or weight reduction but faces massive technical hurdles in precision, synchronization, and infrastructure.

Just make a huge baseball glove to catch the plane as it's approaching.

Ok so the plane is pretty much toast, though perhaps only the bottom of the fuselage as not sure if the wingtips touched the ground.

I'm wondering about the runway at this point, does that damage the runway significantly? It seems that a runway out of order would be a massive problem..

I see comments about the saving the airframe on here. I bet it is salvageable considering the era it came from. It is like the difference between cars pre crumple zones and post. The 'cornfield bomber' story is an example of this [1]. Is it worth restoring vs is it salvageable are two different questions though.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornfield_Bomber

The aircraft was doing touch and go's, it was planning to land and immediately take off again, something you typically do to practise procedures.

Speculation is that the pilot forgot to lower the landing gear, but I suspect the NTSB will likely determine the specific circumstances.

The radio traffic is here on the VASAviation YouTube channel:

https://youtu.be/zCTicb6of2w

My uncle did a gear-up landing that way a number of years ago. He was fine, but the plane was a total loss from a financial perspective. It was a Moonie, and the prop hit the ground, which forced an engine rebuild as I understand it.

Scary, but as they say any landing you walk away from...

The article says it was a mechanical issue that forced the gear up landing?
Doubtful, if so they would have warned ATC.
Definitely not a Ryanair trained pilot with that smooth touchdown.
Article makes no mention of “crash”. Please don’t make sensationalized edits of the title.