Question: There's an interesting incident described here about an F-111 that lost a wheel during take off.

Couple of questions:

1. What are the relative risks of an ejection vs a no-wheels belly landing. I mean obviously the costly loss of airframe. But is the risk to life pretty even odds?

In a conventional aircraft (e.g. civillian) ejecting is just not an option so belly landings are the norm. But in an F-111 is a belly landing still safer than a controlled, planned ejection?
2. The film interviews the pilots & they say something to the effect of

> 
> *"It's good that someone on the ground noticed. Otherwise we'd have tried landing without even knowing that we didn't have a wheel."*
> 
> 
> 

Are there no sensors etc. that'd detect they had lost a wheel? Any other indirect indications based on asymmetric drag, hydraulics etc. that one may expect? In other words, how likely is it that one loses a whole wheel but does not know.

3. Are there standard procedures where ATC uses binoculars etc. to check visually whether all seems OK with a landing aircraft (wheels etc.) I know they will check on request, but is there any standard protocol?
4. Don't military airfields lay down foam for emergency landings? Or is there a downside to foam on the runway?

Answer: 
The F111 uses an ejection capsule, not individual ejection seats. Basically the entire cockpit separates from the rest of the aircraft. It requires 3 parachutes to safely let the capsule down. failure of even 1 parachute can result in a unsurvivable landing. 

I would think a belly landing would be safer.
I also imagine when the landing gear fell off it may had caught the ATCs or another's attention, then directing to the ATC, upon impact or on one of the bounces of hitting the dirt and throwing up a cloud.

Maybe a bit off topic but I believe most military and larger domestic aircraft have the ability to release fuel. So prior to landing they would also release majority of fuel to reduce the weight of the aircraft.