This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.
We left for ZZZ to do takeoff and landings. On takeoff, we were on the left tank, and left the left fuel gauge changed to empty.
I pointed this out to the owner of the Mooney M-20 M Bravo, he tapped on the gauge and it showed almost full.
We entered the pattern and got no gear down in the annunciator panel. I pointed this out to the owner and he said the gear is down and didn’t seem surprised. We verified this with a small window on the floor between the front seats.
We did several takeoffs and landings and never got an annunciator panel gear down indication.
The last landing was to be a short field landing. I reminded him not to get below 75 knots until in a low flare and ready to land. Previously his airspeed varied a lot on final. On a half mile final he was exactly at 75 knots. He seemed to be working hard on maintaining 75 knots. I was really focusing on his airspeed to be sure he didn’t get below 75.
Just seconds before touchdown we heard a “go-around” on the radio we didn’t know who it was for, why, or where it was coming from. No mention of plane type or reason.
A few seconds before touchdown we both scanned the runway to be sure there was nothing on the runway. No gear down indication on the annunciator had been routine each time.
I was guilty of confirmation bias that the gear was down. Fixating on the airspeed contributed to the incident. At no time during the landing did we get a gear warning or stall warning.
In the future if the annunciator light becomes inoperative, I will use the small window on the floor each time in place of the annunciator light.
Primary Problem: Human Factors
ACN: 1839641
Like Judge Judy classic: Stupid is forever.
Hmmm—not so sure the ASRS report would let either of these folks off the hook. Seems to me that the airplane was unairworthy as soon as they discovered that an important annunciation light wasn’t working—and in a retract, the light showing that the gear is down and locked is pretty important! So intentionally flying an unairworthy aircraft which subsequently is involved in an accident is the express exception to the normal “get out of jail free” provisions of the ASRS system, i.e., intentional violation of the FARs.
But in any event, it wasn’t very smart, nor was it “confirmation bias”. It was complacency.
This isn’t confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is where you seek out information that supports your preexisting hypothesis or convictions. After accepting that the gear annunciator didn’t work, they relied upon the window to confirm the gear was down. The CFI and owner became complacent, assuming the gear was down, but didn’t seek to confirm that hypothesis by looking at the small window to confirm their conviction the gear was down. Complacency is not the same thing as confirmation bias.
How many ways is this just wrong?
Totally right You’re, Mr. Jim Macklin
In the future if the gear down annunciator becomes inoperative, land, and spend some money to pay a mechanic to get it fixed!
From the write-up it appears that the author was providing guidance to an owner/pilot of his or her own aircraft. There was no real mention of roles played by each person, but if the author holds a valid CFI ticket, he or she should have to answer for why they allowed the flight to continue. The annunciator lamp may not be on the MEL for that aircraft, so it may not have been an illegal operation, but was it unwise and did it promote a lack of respect for safe operation, absolutely.
I guess we are suppose to assume that they landed gear up? The write up certainly does not say so. That’s a big element in the story that was left out.
Actually the ASRS “Synopsis” infers(?) that it was a gear-up landing. It also refers to a “M-20 M Bravo instructor pilot”; sounds more like a CFI riding along in a plane he/she had no business ‘instructing’ in.
But GA News got the headline right: This person is “Guilty” as charged. Glad we’re reading about it in an ASRS report instead of a NTSB summary.
I had a similar yet not as drastic experience. It was a cold morning a dead battery required an external power jump start and the idle was set too low so the engine died and needed a restart. We taxied out and when we did the run up the gear position unsafe indicator light came on. since we were still on the ground I was sure the gear was down however I didn’t want to take a chance when we were landing so I taxied back and had a mechanic check it out; there was a problem. The lesson is don’t ignore those indicators and don’t let your desire to take up explain away the problem.
I read lots of excuses, but no acceptance of responsibility. You were guilty of flying an aircraft with known deficiencies that rendered it unairworthy. Gear down indicator should have been checked as part of the preflight. Not working = no fly.
This report describes an unairworthy airplane.
The flight should legally be terminate after first landing.