A 380 Body landing gear
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 380 Body landing gear
Why the 3rd axel is without brakes?
with nearly double the size of a jumbo 747, the same number of brakes (16) and only 2 reverser operative (no.2,3) would you ask yourself the same question?
with nearly double the size of a jumbo 747, the same number of brakes (16) and only 2 reverser operative (no.2,3) would you ask yourself the same question?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first of all, i don't think it's double-jumbo size (or weight).
outboard engine don't reverse due to large wingspan and fod risk.
and if the 16 brakes do the job, why build in more weight?
outboard engine don't reverse due to large wingspan and fod risk.
and if the 16 brakes do the job, why build in more weight?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldn't the inboard donks be more susceptible to FOD? being closer to the main wheels and the deck. I would have thought it would be more to do with avoiding large asymmetrical yaw moments when the driver has a high workload.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it's to do with the much lower V speeds, ie at MLW Vref for the A380 is in the order of 130kts where a 744 at MLW has a Vref around 155, the A380 also has much lower TO speeds as well. Also the heavy weight freighter will have the full 20 brakes as will the stretch, so I've been told.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you SMOC, this is a nice explanation why is not necessary to complicate the structure for nothing. I has thinking the reason was in the complication to build an ABS system on such sterring system thay looks quite different from the boeings. I read somewere that Boeing had copyrights on its system too.
