lml@lancaironline.net Mailing List Archive

How hard was THAT landing?

It wasn’t the “hard landing” that caused the damage (the tail did not touch the runway); it was the oscillations that shook the tail that did the damage. The runway was short (about 2800’) and the airspeed was higher than normal (long touchdown). The pilot elected to continue with the landing; hard touchdown (a normal landing flare would have made an even longer landing) and immediate hard braking. The touchdown started the tail oscillations. Under heavy braking the main gear started walking; the tail oscillations intensified, exceeding the aft fuselage strength.

On Aug 18, 2009, at 1:32 PM, "farnsworth" <farnsworth@charter.net> wrote:

Here are some scary pictures of vibration / torsion destruction of a glass airplane

Here are the pictures of the Columbia 350 that broke it's tail upon hard landing and severe main gear shimmy upon heavy braking. No other damage to A/C. And, the tail never hit the ground. Purely violent shimmy did this....