5 Huge Problems With A Retractable Gear Airplane

[@mojogrip]

Apparently airplane insurance is not legally required in the US as stated in the video. But if you are financing your purchase, most lenders will require some type of insurance.

[@Lancair320]

Yes, and no. The FAA doesn't require insurance to fly. BUT, depending on where you have your hangar the City might require insurance to keep a plane in the hangar. My previous city did not, my current city does.

[@davem5333]

Insurance may be optional depending on where you are. Most airport operators won't have any part of you without liability insurance. Don't care about hull insurance.

[@Lancair320]

That's still a bit misleading. No AIP funded airport can prevent you from using the airport if you don't have any insurance. You can fly all over the US, land at every public airport, tie down and do what you want. In fact, it's not in their rights to make you prove that you have insurance as a transient pilot. Most will not rent you hangar space (i.e. signed lease) without liability insurance.

[@bluehornet6752]

The insurance company doesn't give diddly-squat about your cost in terms of maintaining your retractable landing gear. They only care about their exposure when you leave the gear up on landing...or when one of the gear leg collapses and the prop hits the pavement, causing the need for an engine tear down and a propeller repair.

[@gringoloco8576]

@@Lancair320 that's just so the city or hangar can't be sued for the value of the plane if the hangar catches fire and they are deemed responsible for it.

[@104thDIVTimberwolf]

I'm not sure which was more impressive, that Seneca pilot's gear-up landing, or the Aerostar managing to get back into the air after scraping its belly.

[@juanbaitx8740]

1- cost. 2- maintenance. 3- insurance. 4- complex. 5- failures. 6- weight. Thanks Mike! Greetings from Argentina.

[@ssranon]

If i ever have the chance to buy a kit plane that has retracts, I will make sure it's fitted with one of the "forgot retracts" alarm systems. It sounds a warning alarm if your retracts are still up and your airspeed goes below a set level. Thanks for the vid!

[@747-pilot]

One more important consideration: Typically, retractable landing gear systems are not as ROBUST as a fixed gear system. So if your flying involves some "grass strip" or "unpaved" type landing, then a retractable gear will not be suitable for that type of flying. Fixed gear systems can take significantly more "abuse"! That said, I do think a retractable system is not only great to look at, but provides some tangible benefits like speed, efficiency, a clean profile and the ability to make a safer water landing (if one becomes necessary). However, as the video correctly indicates, COST is definitely a HUGE issue. If I were *TRULY* wealthy, and money was TRULY no object, then "retractable" would be the only way to go for me!! (that newest Mooney Acclaim looks so beautiful!!) ....But for most of us mere mortals, who are passionate about aviation cost *is* a fairly big factor!

[@ryann6919]

That gear-less landing was beautiful.

[@yacahumax1431]

i love airplanes and i always wish I can talk to someone about it. I feel like I am when listening to your channel. thank you

[@abhishekdev258]

That dude just walked out of a crash landed plane as if it is an everyday thing..😂

[@patrickroher4760]

He looked at the plane as if to say "well it looks better lower"

[@44SirLoopalot]

holy cow that belly landing was a beauty, completely safe AND saved both engines

[@davidburton4582]

He is a great pilot.

[@benjaminclark9594]

I was thinking the same thing. Looked like he/she saved the props too

[@alexasta85]

Last gear up landing just amazing. Very good job.

[@gringoloco8576]

He even shut the engines odd before it touched down. I don't think the props even touched the ground! Probably saved both those engines. Was that blind luck? IE for the props to essentially stop horizontally?

[@LanielPhoto]

Just wondering why the airport didn't lay down foam or tell the pilot to use that beautiful soft grass strip on the side. But you are right - beautiful controlled landing.

[@GeneralSirDouglasMcA]

“Three greens” should be a commonly used phrase in your landing checklist.

[@crpth1]

GeneralSirDouglasMcA - Finally some basic common sense! :-)

[@767kevin]

Newer planes should have tech to automatically drop the gear & increase the power to compensate for drag if < below a certain altitude threshold or if terrain coming up & pilot hasnt extended it.

[@78heloman]

Great video, great perspective too. I fly the exception to the rule, a manual gear mooney. Cheap to fly, cheap to insure, cheap to maintain, barely more complex then a 172, but 40-50% more speed. Great job keep it up!

[@Lancair320]

My plane is another exception to the rule. Lancair 320. Didn't cost any more than my 172, twice as fast on same fuel burn. Insurance is only a few hundred more than what it cost me for the 172 as well. There really are no hard and fast rules when it comes to planes.

[@dirtcurt1]

Bonanza is cheap too. Beech gear are really simple with solid rods and electric motor. Once the maintenance is performed to factory recommended level they become cheap. Cessna fixed gear has so much more labor on the rest of the airframe that offsets the fixed gear. Now a 210 or 310 have huge amounts of gear work for and annual if done correctly. The other thing to look out for is IF the proper maintenance is done. I just saw a Bonanza STOL setup get messed up because a simple lube job on a position indicator rod was possibly never done. The flaps stayed down and pilot and friends "helped" them back up. BEND the rod went and some skin on the plane too.

[@78heloman]

Bonanza and cheap are two words that don’t go to together, nice airplanes though!

[@gringoloco8576]

How are your costs on the Mooney? I'm looking at buying one but the retract maintenance cost versus fixed gear is my biggest concern with buying the manual gear Mooney. What's your average annual cost for maintenance?

[@gringoloco8576]

@@78heloman how pricey is your Mooney to maintain? I'm debating fixed or retractablebjt cost worries me.

[@johnhudson8197]

During my Army flight career, I was qualified in 13 different models of helicopters, including guns. I've personally owned a Piper PA-24 Comanche 250 and a Cessna 320B twin (two 270hp turbo-charged engines) - both high-performance retractable aircraft. I've never flown a 'fixed-gear' airplane. I've never experienced a retractable gear failure or had any difficulty with such systems in either airplane. If one is interested in moving into the 'high performance' aircraft category...then the retractable systems come with the airplane and are not considered as an "option" or singled out for cost reasons. I am a fully qualified reciprocating engine mechanic, and regularly check maintenance of all my airplane's systems; putting the Twin on jack stands and manually cycling the landing gear several times. Not because I HAVE to, but because I WANT to know everything I can about that system. I was taught by "old timers" who knew what the hell they were doing and passed on knowledge to ensure I could do well. GUMP was burned into my brain from the beginning of my aviation journey (gas/undercarriage/manifold/prop) regardless of what I was flying. I've witnessed one pilot who purchased his first retractable (having flown fixed-gear all his life) doing solo flight patterns at our local airport. On his second landing, he failed to lower the gear resulting in a belly landing while shredding the props. My experience has taught me there are no HUGE problems with a retractable gear system and any problems one may encounter are more likely to be MENTAL and not MECHANICAL. My 2¢ John

[@BigDickMark]

Wall of text

[@billinga]

Mike, I enjoyed the video. The 5 huge problems are not necessarily problems, depending on mission and aircraft platform. Retractables generally provide higher performance and capability for similar size NACA wings and loadings. In particular, multi engine aircraft are retractable because "drag" would reduce effectiveness of the aircraft design. The design would then need higher capacity engines which means increased fuel use, vibration, higher weights all to offset drag. In the GA world, twins were designed because requirements for lifting larger cabins (fuselage) needed 400-600HP powerplants. These high power engines were expensive and impractical due to size, weight and design. However, using 2 200-300HP commonly available engines gave GA manufacturers an avenue to produce affordable and simpler aircraft. At any rate, the point is that retracts are/were needed to provide higher carrying passenger capacity in GA aircraft. Today those powerplants limits of the past are not so restricting with turbine choices for single engine (i.e. Cessna Caravan and Kodiak). Rant over, thank again for the video and the perspective. Cheers!!

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

5 "Huge" Problems: Cost.

[@DrMD-1]

Ja sam Aviation in a nutshell

[@joshschwartz5663]

Another great video! Agree totally, if you can swing it-go for it... If you have a fixed gear, you’re still flying...!!!!

[@rodneyskennedy3163]

Got a pioneer 300 with retractable undercarriage and does give 25 knots extra speed over a similar size lsa Plus much better fuel economy.

[@jameswikstrom4174]

Mike, as you stated so well in your video, there is always a trade off on any product you by in the world. You can order a basic model car or one that has all the bells and whistles! In the end, it all revolves around your preferences and finances! Like the way your videos are done and the educational content that all pilots need to be aware of when purchasing an airplane!

[@sankara6823]

Nice video! Do one on which engine is better, single or double engines on a plane.

[@tombloom99]

That's why it's called a 'fixed gear', because its already fixed, not much maintenance required. Also, on your check list you can say 'gear-down and welded'!

[@hempelcx]

What if it's a composite structure airframe? Better hope it isn't welded.

[@DarrylZubot]

In Canada a lot of aircraft owners do their own maintenance which would make ownership of fixed and retractable very similar, just takes more of your personal time to maintain the retracts.

[@gringoloco8576]

They can legally do that? In US unless you built it, you have to get most work signed off by an A&P.

[@DarrylZubot]

Gringo Loco yup if an aircraft is under owner maintenance you can legally do anything to the aircraft, engine etc. Without any a&p sign off.

[@gringoloco8576]

@@DarrylZubot what the criteria for it to under owner maintenance

[@Desertduleler_88]

There are more positives for retractable landing gear with regard to speed and fuel efficiency.

[@gwfowler]

How about buying an efficient fixed gear, Cirrus SR20 or SR22 on the high side, or Diamond DA40 or Grumman Tiger on the lower side? These aircraft are about as fast as equivalent retracts, without the down side.

[@avoidingtrees6692]

Enjoyed this vid, mainly because you incorporated plenty of video footages.cheers from france👍

[@JudasTamad]

Sir Mike what camera do you use for vlogging?

[@tylergearhart1909]

Complex aircraft are considered only if the have the following three: Retractable gear, retractable flaps, constant speed prop. If one of the three are not present then it is not considered a complex aircraft.

[@WVeagle77]

I have 40 years experience, and as an instructor have flown many types of airplanes with people from nearly all economic levels. Generally speaking, if you want to assure that you won't fly very much, get a retractable. The additional cost, maintenance time, etc, will just keep you on the ground more. Of course it won't cost you much if you don't fly much, but your cost per hour will be astronomical. If you love to fly, keep it simple and move up slowly if you need to. Don't price yourself out of the air.

[@Lancair320]

Why do you say this? My retract wasn't any more than a 172 and maintenance isn't an issue if you are willing and capable of doing the work yourself. And it's much more efficient when flying. The fuel savings more than covers any increased costs. It all depends on what you fly. I can make the same argument about cost of flying if I'm comparing a Cessna 206 vs a 172. Retractable is another part of the equation, but it doesn't automatically mean more money.

[@WVeagle77]

Well, I can't argue with your experience, but it sure differs from what lots of owner and AP claim. I have never owned a retract, but have had friends that had them, and I flew them. Many people's flight budget will not permit them to fly enough hours to offset the cost of added maintenance, insurance, etc. As I said, I can't argue with your experience.

[@hempelcx]

It all depends. If you're committed to keeping it flying then retracts are a maintenance nuisance, but they don't have to be a nightmare. The reliability of a retract system and the cost of maintaining it are unique to each system. Beech Bonanzas have a crazy complex gear system, Beech Sierras (same era) have a very simple, overbuilt system. Standard annuals on my Sierra are not much more than annuals on a Musketeer. But, if something breaks in the gear system then I am down, and it costs money to fix it. Partnerships help a lot, here. My cost per flying hour this year has been astronomical, but considering the corrosion and avionics failures, my one landing gear issue seems pretty cheap in comparison.

[@gringoloco8576]

@@hempelcx what are you averaging per year to maintain beech Sierra?

[@edham78580]

thanks for posting. your teaching me so much.

[@jameswhitman3934]

In regards to Insurance one of the other big liabilities is the fact that retractable gear Landing systems tend to be the ones that fail on Landing. There aren't too many fixed-geared aircraft that pilots forget to lower the gear for landing.

[@craiga2002]

This is very thoughtful and well organized! Thanx!

[@Spec62]

That Aerostar. . .curious that he did a "skin/belly" touch and go !. I can only assume the pilot landed later WITH wheels down. I wonder what the price tag was for that repair.

[@gringoloco8576]

Maybe he thought the nose was high enough the props didn't touch the ground or get any damage?. That seemed very risky to take back off again, he seemed slow so maybe he lost one engine...

[@jurgenswolfaardt6610]

One more for the list: retracts are heavier, so although you gain cruise speed, you lose payload and have more induced drag at low speeds.

[@georgeregis1611]

Jurgens Wolfaardt has

[@AndyMcGeever]

Pretty sure that on retractable gear aircraft the gear is also a permanent part of the structure... And they definitely don't disappear.

[@luisrosas3012]

Hi Mike great job man!, all the help you provide to all of us, aviation aficionados, do you have or know of any solid work on the reliability of the Mooney family and the Ovation in particular. Thanks. Luis

[@VestedUTuber]

With the Bristol example, I want to bring something up... it's a cost difference of $30,000 just for retracts. That seems a bit... off. Think about it - a retract system generally uses some sort of linear actuator to retract the landing gear, and then more actuators to close the gear bay doors. This isn't really that complex of a setup. On a small single-engine plane like that, you're looking at maybe a couple thousand for manufacturing costs including parts sourcing at most. That $30,000 is a MASSIVE markup.

[@spendingtimetogether8428]

It doesn't matter unless the costs are crazily outrageous. The retractables simply look SO much better, besides the aerodynamic aspects.

[@eshtiak25]

positive side of RGs are also forced landing. i mean if you need to land due to emergency where theres no hard surface its better to land on the belly.

[@erix777]

Does the retractable make any favorable difference at all (tire life, wheel protection, ...etc)?

[@juanbaitx8740]

hi Mike the 6 problem could be more weight? by retraction systems the aircraft weighs more sacrifices payload. Cheers

[@Optatius]

That Lancair was sleek as hell though.

[@yellowhammer4747]

Nice explanation sir.

[@97TRAKIN]

I'll take fixed landing gear please. Yes, retractable looks VERY cool, but the additional upfront costs, additional maintenance costs, and the off chance that something might get hung-up: I'm good with fixed.

[@Andaluxsystems]

Romeo Guishard Jr yes I’ll second that. You can have a lovely looking and fast fixed landing gear aircrafts like Cirrus Vans etc...it is safer and cheaper to run.

[@gotmilk91]

And all the extra space for more fuel - which prob offsets aerodynamic efficiency-to-range performance of the RG

[@jbinkley22]

Your videos are dope man!

[@Frogs114]

Accurate video! Dont forget to say you need a complex endorsement :P Alot of pilots who forget have a distraction when running checklists

[@scottgreaves8569]

Or you can be a little bit crafty as I did. When I decided that I had outgrown my beloved Cherokee and it was time to upgrade to something a little faster, I realised a long term dream by purchasing a Mooney. Specifically, a Mooney M20C, for the reason that the "Charlie's" retractable gear was completely mechanically operated by way of a lever, or "Johnson bar" in the cabin. This system takes a little time to get used to, as some considerable effort is required, not a lot, but certainly more than the flicking of a switch. The great benefit however is that I experienced no significant increase in maintenance or insurance costs, and the system is all but bulletproof. So much so that there isn't even an emergency procedure in the manual to follow in the case of the gear not deploying properly, basically the system simply doesn't fail.

[@rkan2]

It is still has moving parts, and systems with moving parts tend to fail at some point...

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

@@rkan2 fixed landing gears also have moving parts aka the wheels and brakes, and even the fixed part can fail hell all your control surfaces are moving parts, if moving parts worry you never get in an airplane

[@rkan2]

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD That is one of the reasons why multirotors will become superior for a lot of flying.. Yes they have quite a few moving parts, but they are very robust ones being brushless electric motors. For safety's sake you can also have a couple extra without too much of a performance drawback.

[@thisismagacountry1318]

Any other makers offer a mechanical landing gear system?

[@MikeVallez1]

What is the speed difference between fixed and retractable?

[@Pfsif]

Great Graphics/editing.

[@ibiufos]

Do you know how to end up a millionaire out of aviation start with 2 million dollars.

[@Justwantahover]

How to end up owning a super yacht and end up a millionaire.

[@spendingtimetogether8428]

I think a similar saying was "How do you become a millionaire running an airline? Start as a billionaire." LOL.

[@nexofpv9588]

lancair , i love them

[@NighthawkCarbine]

Insurance premiums go up 50%? LOL. Failure to put the gear down are VERY RARE. It is called using the checklists!!!

[@senseofstile]

I don't know if it is urban legend but, I heard your insurance actually goes down if you forget to put the gear down and land. The rationale is the insurance company is confident you won't do that again.

[@davem5333]

If the aircraft is primarily for pleasure flying, the slower speed of a fixed gear airplane is not as important as the lower purchase, maintenance and insurance cost. But on a traveling machine, the greater speed offsets the higher costs with reduced flight time.

[@adventureairinc7355]

I have no choice other than a retractable gear..... flying an amphibian airplane. But the good thing is: if it doesn´t deploy, just keep it retracted safely and head for a water landing.

[@sw3w537]

Any amphibious recommendations under 200k..cross country?

[@urielstud]

I’d be the guy who forgot to lower it on landing, I’m sure 😂. I never even thought of a 50% insurance premium, tho 😱

[@gringoloco8576]

It's not that much though compares to maintenance or other items. I was quoted about double...but that's just $1k more than fixed gear for me and I'm pretty low time pilot.

[@tomcorwine3091]

Be the guy who always follows the checklist, and you will never be the guy who lands with the gear up.

[@dieselyeti]

Now that Cirrus has shown a fixed-gear single can be fast there's really no need for the added expense of retractable gear imo. (insurance, maintenance, up-front a/c cost) Unless you need 6 seats, then that opens up the choices a bit with fixed and retractable gear options.

[@hempelcx]

In newly designed aircraft in the wind tunnel and computer modeling era, that's true. For older aircraft (which make up the majority of the GA fleet), retracts were a simple means to gain performance without adding a bigger power plant.

[@tinoesterhuizen4433]

I have spoken to guys that did gear up landings, all had one thing in common, "I heard the warning go off, but it just didn't register while I was concentrating on the landing. There are 2 types of pilots, those who have done gear up landings, and those who are still going to do gear up landings

[@threexfromwsg]

Tino Esterhuizen lol

[@unplug7776]

Absolutely not true.....😂 it’s called proper checklist usage..... there are literally hundreds of thousands of pilots that have gone through their entire career without a gear up landing...

[@tinoesterhuizen4433]

Its a thing you hear said in South-Africa when someone did a belly landing. It does in fact happen as rare as you say. But its said as a joke and a warning to other pilots.

[@unplug7776]

Tino Esterhuizen we have three checklists and call outs where gear is confirmed down so if you miss all three of those you have a major malfunction of brain power. Flying a personal aircraft and being lazy just makes everyone else look bad as pilots. Checklist checklist checklist... that’s the key 🔑

[@tinoesterhuizen4433]

I agree 100%. But it happens, Very very seldom, but it does.

[@matrixist]

What about extra fuel cost? Lots of drag from fixed gear.

[@mojogrip]

Yea you would have more fuel cost on the retractable because it goes faster. And more speed generally means more fuel burn in aviation. NOT always, but that's the typical case.

[@hempelcx]

That's not accurate. The 'faster = higher burn rate' assumption is only true if the way you're achieving that speed is through power, i.e. more throttle or a bigger engine/prop. Taking the exact same airplane and making it more aerodynamically efficient will make it fly faster at the *same* power setting, therefore it will burn fuel at the same rate, but since it arrives earlier, will burn less fuel in total. Retracts improve aerodynamic efficiency, and therefore typically reduce net fuel burn.

[@alexandrefrossardnogueira3894]

@@hempelcx Right!! I´d love to make the maths around that and come up with the numbers that shows the gains in efficiency VS the bigger investment when purchasing + maintenance + insurance difs.

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

20% more cost but 100% more cool. Low wing planes with fixed gear look so so bad..

[@Araye]

I think taildraggers look sweet. But, like you, not a fan of most tricycles.

[@marshallallensmith]

Sometimes but I have seen plenty that are outfitted with fairings etc. that look absolutely stunning. All depends on where, how and the dimensions/shape of the fixed gear are on the low wing design i.e the Piper PA-140 Cherokee with fairings looks perfectly proper to me.

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

I am reminded of a kilted Scot piper with white spats. Not a pretty sight... For me at least. :) kzbin.info/www/bejne/hmPKdZ6Zpb6hg8U

[@marshallallensmith]

What the Cirrus SR20 ? Do you find that to be an ugly aircraft ? Low Wing + Fixed-Gear + fairings/pants/spats. Don't get me wrong though I mean I am a helicopter pilot so my wheels are detachable and we usually leave them at the hangar once we roll the bird out and put it on its skids but to me ugly is not really the reason I would consider if opting for retracts vs FG. I would go more towards aerodynamics as the real reason to consider retractable.

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

Unfortunately I do... I can handle wheel pants on tail wheels when they are vertically positioned(JU 87 style) but a fairing on a nose wheel is a shopping trolley to me especially the free casting type. I also think the LSA rule of fixed gear is a regulation too far because it stifles a lot of choice for the sports pilot. There are some fantastic tandem low wing ultra lights such as the shark yet who would buy those with fixed tricycle gear. Of course it is only my opinion yet I am sure many are like minded.

[@davem5333]

Virtually all aircraft with retractable gear airplane, there is a backup extension method. How many pilots know it? How many practice it?

[@iyizjewelsisley3821]

what plane did you get!

[@cmdmd]

Insurances are worried about people landing without the gear down, brother.

[@astral9872]

1. Cost 2. Cost 3. Cost 4. You might forget to put the gear down 5. Your gear might get stuck up. Closing: The author of this video is not an airplane owner but would buy a retract if he could buy an airplane.

[@Lancair320]

If you forget to put the gear down I have one question: Why weren't you using your checklists? If you buy the right retractable having the gear get stuck in the retract position isn't possible. In my plane their held up by hydraulic pressure alone. They're coming down one way or another, nothing mechanical to hold them in position.

[@astral9872]

I agree but not everyone uses checklists on relatively simple planes they have been flying for years. All retracts I know of have emergency gear extension systems, but they will not always bail you out of a mechanical failure. They all have different designs, but an example would be a failure of the gear to lock into place once it is down. The emergency gear extension on a Bonanza for example won't help with that failure.

[@Lancair320]

My point was that it all depends on what you get. In my case: Lancair, it's not possible for the gear to stay up. If the pump fails of the down switch doesn't work, or whatever, releasing the hydraulic pressure causes the gear to come down. The only way they could stay up is physical damage to the assembly, which should have been caught in preflight / annual / condition inspection. It's rather difficult to hide damage that would keep them up. Bonanza's is a mechanical emergency system. The gear has to be released. Not so in all aircraft. As for checklists, EVERY pilot is taught to use them for EVERY flight. Not using them is a failure of the pilot, not the machine. And if you don't use a written checklist then why aren't you using GUMPS? That's just a memory lesson. Basically, there is ZERO excuse for a pilot forgetting to put the gear down. The only reason it shouldn't come down is for a physical issue.

[@Jon-tt9bo]

I regularly rent a 1968 Arrow 180 and that's exactly how the gear system works. If the hydraulic system fails, there's no lock to keep the gear up. They simply fall. There are checklists for getting the gear locked in that situation (mostly waggling the tail to pop the gear into place). If you can't get the gear down, push the emergency hydraulic blow and the pressure is released. It's a very safe system. ALWAYS use checklists! I'll run a before landing check with a written checklist prior to pattern entry and then the GUMPS on downwind AND final.

[@gotmilk91]

Wouldn't we aviation enthusiasts and travelers all own a custom private 787 if we have the means?

[@johnnydaller]

There are two types of pilots: 1 - Those who DID FORGET to extend the landing gear. 2 - Those who WILL FORGET to extend the landing gear.

[@ferrarikingdom]

I know many pilots who have never forgotten to extend their gear, if you just do your gumps check everytime it's not possible to forget.

[@GeneralSirDouglasMcA]

#3 should be those who will have a landing gear malfunction and have to belly-land.

[@vitordelima]

Why modern airplanes don't warn the pilot about this according to the ground distance?

[@gringoloco8576]

@@vitordelima many planes can have an audible horn installed to warn you at low altitude.

[@johnmajane3731]

There are many variables to what insurance costs, age of the pilot and plane. Hours and licenses the pilot holds. The maintenance costs for the gear are not that much on my Bonanza.

[@gonzaloluna1989]

Thanks for the info on this subject. If I can go more than 140 miles per hour cruising speed, I am fine with fixed landing gear. Never thought of insurance. That right there is a deal breaker. Will concentrate on fixed gear

[@JoshuaPlays99]

If you live in the US, aircraft insurance is not required.

[@hempelcx]

But probably a good idea unless you can afford to throw away an airplane and pay for any damages assessed in the lawsuits from the house/farm/road/car/people you hit during your emergency landing and the lawyer fees that go with it.

[@bhc1892]

It shouldn't be a deal breaker. The insurance on my mooney G model (tons of videos of it in my channel) is less than $900 year, with full hull coverage. When I was renting, I was paying $1200/yr. Insurance is only about 10% of my annual cost - it would be silly to base a buying decision on that. The author is doing an apples-to-apples comparison between fixed and retract models of the same airframe, same year. In a real life buying scenario, you rarely have that choice. You are choosing between tons of makes, models, and years, all of which will drive your insurance costs as much as the presence or absence of fixed gear.

[@toadman506]

@@bhc1892 Beat me to it, when I was flying Insurance for the Plane cost less than Car Insurance in NJ, even a Retract is probably going to be under $1K/Year, and the reality is if you can afford a New GA Aircraft in today's market, then you arent going to blink at the cost of Insuring it.

[@gringoloco8576]

@@bhc1892 how much do you average per year on maintenance for your Mooney? I'm looking at vintage M20s but the fixed versus retractable debate for maintenance and the cramped space in Mooneys so mechanics charge more has me a bit concerned.

[@markmayer7495]

insurance, isn't a legal requirement in the USA.

[@unplug7776]

Mark Mayer it’s a requirement at almost every airport so if you plan to land or park your aircraft at a airport you will need to have it....

[@767kevin]

It isn’t but any smart pilot flying anything other than a 40,000 sh*tbox will have it

[@TXLorenzo]

For the life of me why can't there be an altitude warning built in modern aircraft for retracts.

[@patrickroher4760]

Issues with retractable gear is a real problem, you can't just let it slide.🤤

[@OperatorBayArea77788]

Tail dragging all day Bro haha

[@rawmark]

Umm, sorry to challenge you a bit, but all airplanes with retractable landing gear do have a manual drop for the landing gear. It may mean that you have to grab a handle and move it counter or clockwise a few times but as long as I can remember, a manual release is a requirement by the FAA. Heck, even the big Jets have a manual release for their retractable landing gear. So why didn't you mention this?

[@kukajin9560]

so im just getting my license eta next year and i know alot of people are going to say its a bad idea to get a rg aircraft off the bat but i have a nice seller ive known for a while giving it to me for a reasonable price, should i take his offer of the rg aircraft or go with conventional fg?

[@mojogrip]

For reasons already listed in this video and then some, FG is always a good choice mainly because of cost (maintenance & insurance). At the end though it's all about your own personal preference. If the plane you are buying fits the bill and mission, then why the hell not :)

[@kukajin9560]

MojoGrip :D

[@scottgreaves8569]

Anybody that says retractable gear planes aren't a good idea for a first purchase or even for ab initio training is probably just jealous 'cause your first aircraft will be cooler than theirs. Sure there's a little more to flying them, an extra couple of checklist items, sure, but in my estimation nothing too demanding!

[@trehl639]

To me, an aircraft with fixed landing gear is like a speedboat with permanently installed fenders right at the waterline. Makes life a bit easier, but is otherwise an utter waste of speed and fuel - not to mention style.

[@TomCook1993]

I don’t have any of these problems with my manual gear Mooney.

[@pmh1nic]

I'm pretty sure the $30K difference in price between the twp Bristell aircraft involves much more then the difference in landing gear. Probably a different engine and avionics.

[@amorestperpe]

I'm surprised Ole boy went around... There's no way he didn't have a prop strike.

[@BigDickMark]

dude same, and it looked like it was struggling to climb, too.

[@Justwantahover]

Most fastest 2 seat light sport planes are fixed gear. Why is that? The Dyne Air 80 hp 2 seater goes up to 190 mph on just 80 hp. And it's fixed gear and (most probably) a fixed pitch prop. This is mostly faster than a retractable of 100 hp. Another example of a 2 seater plane. I forgot the name but it's supposed to go 250 mph on 120 hp (a fixed gear tail dragger). And you see that with the fastest in that class, they all seem to be fixed gear (and mostly tricycle). Also there is a whole host of this class planes that are slow and retractable (but not all of them, though, and there are also many slow fixed gear planes). I reckon the reason fixed gear is just as efficient (in this class) is cos it may be a "reverse physics" thing. Maybe it's cos the small size plane and the extra weight on such a light aircraft causes too much angle of attack required on the critical "laminar flow" wing, causing more drag. And the air foil isn't as efficient at the slightly higher angle of attack. Just a theory. They could go for a bigger wing but that also makes it slower. And it seems to come down to weight. Look up top speeds of 2 seat light sport planes. It's mind blowing how much faster the fixed gears go. Fucking LOL.

[@gotmilk91]

😦😦😦 6:45 😧😧😧 Although somehow not as terrible as jumping out an airplane on a skydive and forgetting the parachute, which also has happened before 😪😪😪

[@nicolasmagnussen6923]

+MojoGrip Quick question is there any reason thar you're always having your hand out of the window while taxiing

[@mojogrip]

Yea, it's HOT :)

[@roadstar499]

more complex planes are the more things can malfuction....even if one gear malfuctions you and your plane could be toast,,,

[@LanielPhoto]

Forgot to mention the big savings in fuel with retractable gear, though I don't know if it would eventually pay other additional costs.

[@GeneralSirDouglasMcA]

It doesn’t. But then again, you fly for convenience, not for economics.

[@speedomars]

Fuel savings, relative to what? The Cirrus has a 2kt penalty for its fixed gear. Hardly worth mentioning.

[@GeneralSirDouglasMcA]

@@speedomars Agreed. Unless there’s a huge increase in airspeed, the astronomical costs of maintenance (let alone insurance) aren’t worth it. Hence the reason the Skylane RG and Saratoga are no longer in production.

[@LanielPhoto]

@@speedomars Yeah - but look at the Cessna 182. Or the F-18 :-)

[@speedomars]

@@GeneralSirDouglasMcA Jets and Jetprops get retractable gear for that reason...they cruise over 250 or 260 kts and so the drag penalty is far higher. But piston singles with retractable are a waste of insurance cost and cost more to maintain..one more thing to break that's critical.

[@andrepatacchini]

I ve aways think about the mechanical failure problem.

[@philipritson8821]

But you forgot the biggest reason for a retractable landing gear. People only know it's a tricycle geared aircraft when it's on the ground! I the air, no one can tell whether its a taildragger or a tricycle gear.

[@davem5333]

Insurance premiums won't increase 50%. The big chunk of your insurance bill is liability. A gear-up landing will be claimed under your hull insurance. Retractable gear is a good bit more maintenance. Annual inspection, jacking up and swinging the gear, replacing bungees and overhaul the gearbox all cost.

[@mauriciocastro7505]

Fixed landing gear better, safer, less costly....

[@lejink]

All added equipment increases maintenance costs.. No free performance gains in the airplane world

[@karlk6860]

I am not going to argue with any of what you said except a retractable plane/complex aircraft has a LOT more to it to make it a "COMPLEX" aircraft than just the retrac gear. I fly and have for 20 years for business and I want a good cruise speed and my Mooney will fly in the 180 mph range and of course its IFR certified, its a complex aircraft had many redundant systems has a GPS that is IFR certified in the dash and its used in almost everything but known ice, and damned few if any will fly in that. My bottom line is this, do you want to fly? great buy a Cessna 140 and go to town. Or do you want to fly where your presence is required and on schedule? If so then you buy a plane that is equiped in such a way as to make that the most probable! Does it cost more, do you want to play? then you have to pay!

[@oisnowy5368]

If you as a pilot can flick a switch *and* see the landing gear retract ... either you have a camera or you're in a very peculiar position.

[@Lancair320]

In the US a retractable aircraft does not make it a complex aircraft on its own. The aircraft must have retractable gear, flaps and adjustable pitch propeller.

[@ronaldreed7698]

Your full of shit, retractable gear doesn't require any of those things, again, your full of shit

[@Lancair320]

RETRACTABLE doesn't require it. COMPLEX airplane, in the USA, HAS TO HAVE ALL THREE. Do you know to research anything? Are you even a pilot? I am.

[@Lancair320]

CRF 61.1 - Complex airplane means an airplane that has a retractable landing gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch propeller.

[@unplug7776]

Ronald Reed you are the one full of 💩.... joe is 100% correct..... also a 👨🏻‍✈️ and instructor and you must have all three of those things to consider it a complex aircraft.....

[@Ulbre]

there's a point where, if you do enough yearly hours, the fuel savings will overcome the extra maintenance costs........I think you're probably talking a couple hundred hours a year for a single engine GA aircraft......but not real sure

[@garymccann2960]

I have over a 1000 hours in retractable gear aircraft and owned super swift, A36 and Chynne never had any issues with a gear. Never cared for flying milk stools or birds too lazy to tuck there feet up. But.I never landed off airport.... well never on purpose.

[@ccetc1]

I’ve seen a cirrus for more than a 340

[@nunyabidness3075]

Not a bad presentation, but one thing was completely wrong, and another you seemed to miss the mark. Your insurance company doesn’t care about any of that stuff when calculating your premium. They look at the claims from the pool for that model in that region and charge you. They might rationalize with that stuff. That stuff likely affects the claims, but if for some reason 172RG pilots stopped making claims their rates would drop below 172SP rates. I kid you not. So, the cost of ownership is the cost of ownership. Maintenance will be higher for the gear, but that’s just one thing you pay for. You can get cost of ownership info from aviation consumer. You don’t then add more for retracts. It’s in there. What else is in there is parachutes, problematic vs not problematic engines, crazy AD maintenance, etc. Faster can be faster, but it can also be more efficient. You can save a lot of money for gear maintenance flying 170 knots on 10.5 gph lean of peak. Going non stop saves money as well. If you aren’t buying a plane to burn holes in clouds that matters. Comparing to a plane with fixed gear and less range and maybe not able to run lean of peak will make the retract CHEAPER. There you go.

[@tristanmoller9498]

Your videos are always very informative. It would just be nice if you could talk a little faster.

[@garryanderson2399]

A lot comments here by people who don’t what they’re talking about...

[@JesusIsMySaviorILoveJesus]

What plane is at 7:40?

[@AdalaAkeri]

No Body Piper PA-30 Twin Comanche aviation-safety.net/wikibase/201528

[@FiddlePig]

I've heard some planes will drop gear automatically when going below a designated altitude. Is that true?

[@dmitrischeidel8255]

Fred Butch nope. If it goes below a certain speed a horn will sound.

[@Lancair320]

Actually there were a few Pipers, and I think some Beech as well, that had auto drop.

[@rodrigo7097]

That's news to me. Which models? I would love to look into them.

[@Lancair320]

Arrow IV - below 87kts and either idle RPM or below a certain MP. I forget which. But it exists. Look it up.

[@rodrigo7097]

Looks like it might be on the Arrow III as well. It's pretty interesting but I don't think I would like that in an airplane. Even the POH warns you to make sure you override the systems in some situations. It's a really cleaver system though. I added that link in case anyone wanted to see how it operates. www.euroga.org/forums/maintenance-avionics/5202-trying-to-make-sense-on-gear-hydraulics-schematic

[@tiretool69]

If you own your own plane and it’s paid for.. you don’t have to have insurance to be legal. It’s not like a car if it’s paid for. Lol

[@jimsound7888]

At the end of the day its all relative. If you can afford to buy a private plane, who gives a shit about the cost of landing gear

[@richardcharles290]

I think every plane (even fixed) should have a landing gear switch, even if it's fake. Humans like repetition, would ingrain good habits.

[@olegoleg1838]

It’s hardly worth it if you’re flying just for fun

[@jonathanjackson9208]

You show a lot of stuff we can’t get here in America