Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Aviation History and Nostalgia
Reload this Page >

Aircraft with unusual landing gear configurations

Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.

Aircraft with unusual landing gear configurations

Old 11th Feb 2021, 11:00
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Havant
Posts: 9
Originally Posted by FlightlessParrot View Post
I have a poor imagination for this sort of thing, and still can't understand what is happening. Is there a drawing anywhere (I have Googled, and only found the site where Spooky gave his description earlier).
Confused here too, but as lowly SLF. I'm envisioning something similar to what the old Austin Morris 1100 did on a hill start...so the gear on the Connie sort of raised against spring tension with brakes on and power applied? Then dropped with brakes off? I love this working from home...
Leecj1 is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2021, 11:15
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 1,245
Did we have the Brodie system already? Hanging on a wire for landing?
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brodie_L-4.jpg#/media/File:Brodie_L-4.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brodie_landing_system
Less Hair is online now  
Old 11th Feb 2021, 15:26
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 1,891
There's an L.1049 crew operating manual here: https://aviatechno.net/files/l1049c_...ing_manual.pdf Perhaps that contains some clues (I haven't checked yet...).

Edit: from page 117.


Pages 66 and 67:



From this, it would appear that the drag strut, which normally restricts forward and aft motion of the main gear leg, incorporates a hydraulic cylinder that permits some movement, damped by hydraulic fluid.

Last edited by Jhieminga; 11th Feb 2021 at 17:12. Reason: Added screenshots from manual
Jhieminga is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2021, 19:31
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,087
Whilst I was at Wenzhou in the late nineties watching the daily TU154 take off was a must. It had to backtrack the runway and there wasn't a turning circle so you could hear the twelve main wheels howling and screaming as it was turned around. It would then start the take off and as it passed you there would be an absolute pandemonium of noise and smoke. It would then disappear and one would then see it as it reappeared above the smoke haze retracting the undercarriage to get some altitude and leaving behind a trail of asphyxiated pigs.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2021, 16:25
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,207
FWIW, I believe the Martin 404 had a similar walking gear design as the Connie.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2021, 18:06
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 33
Posts: 119
I like this one:




Video:
digits_ is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2021, 18:26
  #107 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 57
Posts: 7,684
I can't find a pic of it but I believe 1930s US airshow pilot Mike Murphy had a similarly configured aircraft named "Cheek to Cheek", though it could actually only be landed upside down if I recall correctly! The "right way up gear" was for show...
treadigraph is online now  
Old 16th Feb 2021, 09:22
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New Zealand
Age: 49
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
Well if you want "ugly" you surely have to include the exceptional efforts put in by Blackburn to include almost everything they ever made. Whether it be the Blackburd:


And it fits with the theme of this thread, as, note that there is an axle connecting the two wheels together, not specifically unusual, but it is carrying a torpedo. The Blackburd (and the Short Shirl topedoplanes) were built to the same specification and took off with their wheel/axle combo attached, but dropped them before the torpedo was dropped, landing on the carrier on those prominent skids inboard of the wheels...
Nuuumannn is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2021, 09:26
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New Zealand
Age: 49
Posts: 23
I'm surprised no one's mentioned this yet...


Here's another one that is less unusual than the Komet, but made for tricky handling on the ground; look at the angle of those wheels.


For comparison, here's a Spitfire.

Nuuumannn is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2021, 18:56
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Nice, Cote d'Azur
Age: 41
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Why specifically the -300 ?
Now corrected. Thanks
nuisance79 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2021, 22:14
  #111 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 74
Posts: 3,418
Nuuumannn; I'm led to believe that the splay on the undercarriage of the Me109 was for tactical reasons. The legs are actually attached to the fuselage. This means that once the wings are removed, the aircraft can be carried on the back of a lorry, or on a railway car. Not so easy with the Spitfire, which would have had to have some sort of supporting cradle. So I've been told by people who know about these things.
Herod is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2021, 05:00
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New Zealand
Age: 49
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by Herod View Post
Nuuumannn; I'm led to believe that the splay on the undercarriage of the Me109 was for tactical reasons. The legs are actually attached to the fuselage. This means that once the wings are removed, the aircraft can be carried on the back of a lorry, or on a railway car. Not so easy with the Spitfire, which would have had to have some sort of supporting cradle. So I've been told by people who know about these things.
That is true, the Bf 109's undercarriage legs attached to the fuselage and the removal of the wings could be done with relative ease. The splaying out of the wheels is certainly a consequence of this, but whether it was done to facilitate such a thing is not known. It certainly made for a difficult time during taxiing, which was tricky in the type. It was tail heavy, so tended to 'lead' from the tail. Ground loops on rollout after landing were commonplace - combine that with a terrible view forward from the cockpit and it required careful handling on the ground.
Nuuumannn is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2021, 10:01
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North UK
Posts: 229
I suspect the splaying out of the gear was probably concerned with ground handling - making the wheel track wider than the very narrow track that would have resulted if the struts were vertical. A vary narrow track would have made taxiing - especially at high speed - much more challenging when turning.
DH106 is online now  
Old 17th Feb 2021, 12:22
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 1,891
There's a good account of flying a Bf.109E here: https://haa-uk.aero/document/flying-...hmitt-bf-109e/ (click on 'download' on the right). He discusses the reasoning behind the undercarriage layout on page 4/5.
Jhieminga is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2021, 14:16
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 39
Originally Posted by Nuuumannn View Post
And it fits with the theme of this thread, as, note that there is an axle connecting the two wheels together, not specifically unusual, but it is carrying a torpedo. The Blackburd (and the Short Shirl topedoplanes) were built to the same specification and took off with their wheel/axle combo attached, but dropped them before the torpedo was dropped, landing on the carrier on those prominent skids inboard of the wheels...
According to Wikipedia, the "simple lines" were to assist "rapid production". I'll just let the full futility of that paradox sit there.

Personally, and speaking as a Yorkshireman, I think that when a Yorkshire Drawing Office invests in ruler, they are damn well going to use it.
DuncanDoenitz is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 08:31
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,287
Not sure there's much "futility" in an aeroplane that was designed for manufacturability. IIRC according to "Narrow Margin" it took around a third of the man-hours to make a 109 compared to a Spitfire, and when first designed it was a world-class fighter (and arguably not too far short of that for much of the following 8 years). Features like a fuselage made from short flanged tube sections bolted together with no longerons made final assembly much quicker and simpler. It also allowed damaged mid-sections to simply be replaced rather than patched, arguably making it more battle-worthy. The design concept of having a fuselage with two separate wings rather than a fuselage and a 1-piece wing also made for much simpler manufacture. Remember that the very small numbers of spitfires available in 1939 was largely due to the difficulties experienced in ramping up production from the "Supermarine hand-built-by-craftsmen" to large factories. Spitfire depended on far too many large, hand-wheeled, compound-curved panels with tight tolerances in 3-dimensions (like the whole upper and lower wing LE skins).

Just putting the other side of the argument...

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 09:15
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 39
As a technician, I have no problem with simplicity of design and ease of manufacture/repair and, if the result is an aeroplane with an operational record and scope for development like the Bf109, then bring it on.

On reflection, perhaps "irony" would have been a better choice of word, when their focus on mass-production results in the manufacture of 3 aeroplanes, Apparently it flew like it looked. (It wouldn't surprise me if the wings could be stowed inside the fuselage for transportation).
DuncanDoenitz is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 10:31
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Derbyshire
Age: 69
Posts: 288
Spitfires also have a fuselage and two separate wings.

I thought the "futility" was referring to the Blackburn aircraft anyway.
DHfan is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 11:49
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 120
While talking about unusual landing gear config: the Antonov A40 used a tank...





Beamr is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 19:01
  #120 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 64
Posts: 9,339
Antonov A40 used a tank ... or was a tank?
PAXboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.