TU-114
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Angular - apparently!
Posts: 683
TU-114
I read very recently, that during a visit by Nikita Khrushchev to Andrews Air Force Base in 1959, the steps they provided were not high enough to permit egress from the aircraft, so a makeshift ladder had to be provided, which led me to wonder - just how high is the sill on a TU-114? Does anyone know?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: same planet as yours
Posts: 331
If I understood the OP's question correctly, it's the height (AGL) of the doorsill.
So I don't see the link with the prop radius (except as a useful reference for guesstimating). Had the airframe been a shoulder mounted wing design, prop radius & ground clearance, MLG height, etc would all have remained (largely) unchanged, but the doorsill height AGL would have dropped dramatically.
So I don't see the link with the prop radius (except as a useful reference for guesstimating). Had the airframe been a shoulder mounted wing design, prop radius & ground clearance, MLG height, etc would all have remained (largely) unchanged, but the doorsill height AGL would have dropped dramatically.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Angular - apparently!
Posts: 683
Originally Posted by DIBO
If I understood the OP's question correctly, it's the height (AGL) of the doorsill.
So I don't see the link with the prop radius (except as a useful reference for guesstimating). Had the airframe been a shoulder mounted wing design, prop radius & ground clearance, MLG height, etc would all have remained (largely) unchanged, but the doorsill height AGL would have dropped dramatically.
So I don't see the link with the prop radius (except as a useful reference for guesstimating). Had the airframe been a shoulder mounted wing design, prop radius & ground clearance, MLG height, etc would all have remained (largely) unchanged, but the doorsill height AGL would have dropped dramatically.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 58
Posts: 10,072
Originally Posted by Kiltrash
Poss Cap Comp picture ..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Angular - apparently!
Posts: 683
Originally Posted by Kiltrash
Would have thought Aeroflot who supplied the ground handling Airstair to Andrews would have sent ones the correct size.
Poss Cap Comp picture ..
Poss Cap Comp picture ..
.Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 975
Regarding TU114 the following information can be found from the interweb:
"It has an external length of 54.1 meters, an external height of 8.2 meters, and a fuselage diameter of 3.3 meters. The tail height is 15.44 meters and the wheelbase is 21.3 meters. It has a wingspan of 51.1 meters and a wing area of 311.4 square meters. The aircraft has an empty weight of 91,000 kg, a gross weight of 164,000 kg, a maximum takeoff weight of 171,000 kg, and a fuel tank capacity of 19,280 US gal."
"It produces a maximum takeoff thrust of 14,795 hp each and drives eight-bladed AV-60N contra-rotating reversible pitch propellers with a diameter of 5.6 meters."
So, fuselage 3,3m and external height 8,2m doesn't give the exact door sill height, but one could estimate the door sill being somewhere around 6,0m height, based on pictures of the AC and the 1L location.
"It has an external length of 54.1 meters, an external height of 8.2 meters, and a fuselage diameter of 3.3 meters. The tail height is 15.44 meters and the wheelbase is 21.3 meters. It has a wingspan of 51.1 meters and a wing area of 311.4 square meters. The aircraft has an empty weight of 91,000 kg, a gross weight of 164,000 kg, a maximum takeoff weight of 171,000 kg, and a fuel tank capacity of 19,280 US gal."
"It produces a maximum takeoff thrust of 14,795 hp each and drives eight-bladed AV-60N contra-rotating reversible pitch propellers with a diameter of 5.6 meters."
So, fuselage 3,3m and external height 8,2m doesn't give the exact door sill height, but one could estimate the door sill being somewhere around 6,0m height, based on pictures of the AC and the 1L location.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Danunder
Age: 47
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by barry lloyd
Yes, that was the basis of the question. I understand the radius of the props was 5.6 m (18 ft 4 in), so given some greater than normal ground clearance, bearing in mind the speed at which those propeller tips rotated, as a general scale, we must be looking at about 18ft or more.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Angular - apparently!
Posts: 683
Originally Posted by SpringHeeledJack
Bearing the above in mind, perhaps they carried an extension in the cargo hold to alleviate the high door-sill conundrum ?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 468
Wouldn't a fast large long range turboprop like this be a promising concept for today? At least more promising than battery powered or hydrogen? Although there are not that many engines available to pick from except for the Allison AE2100D3 and the exotic Europrop TP400.
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Up North
Posts: 5
Originally Posted by Less Hair
Wouldn't a fast large long range turboprop like this be a promising concept for today? At least more promising than battery powered or hydrogen? Although there are not that many engines available to pick from except for the Allison AE2100D3 and the exotic Europrop TP400.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 68
Posts: 979
Originally Posted by Less Hair
Wouldn't a fast large long range turboprop like this be a promising concept for today? At least more promising than battery powered or hydrogen? Although there are not that many engines available to pick from except for the Allison AE2100D3 and the exotic Europrop TP400.
