| Warthog Territory Forums https://warthogterritory.net/forum/ |
|
| Question about exposed landing gear https://warthogterritory.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10798 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 31 May 2006, 01:11 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Is the entire purpose of the hog's exposed gear a for battledamaged landings or is there another design goal at play as well? Though i dont think they are- just for clarification, are the tires runflats? Thanx. <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | sgtgoose1 [ 31 May 2006, 07:04 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Snipe, They'll run flat, shot-up! Thread Thrown etc..... But only the "STRESS MAN" could tell you the reason for the Tire being exposed. But if she belly lands those tires do work, seen it before up close,not say much for anything under the the belly. Goose They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin, (1706 - 1790) |
|
| Author: | Ice Pirate [ 31 May 2006, 10:50 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I always thought they were exposed because the increased drag of a pod that would fully enclose the tire would be too great. Also if the tire were fully enclosed, then there'd have to be more panels. This way it saves weight and cuts drag. My two cents anyway. I did see one come back from the range at Gila Bend with a hunk of cactus stuck in the Rt tire. Me and my partner at EOR spent almost 15 minutes pulling it out. "Slow is Fast - Fast is Slow" |
|
| Author: | 30mike-mike [ 31 May 2006, 11:46 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Did the extended road hazard warrantee apply?<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> The Second Amendment: America's original homeland security. Ya just can’t take life too seriously, because you aren’t going to get out of it alive anyway. Edited by - 30mike-mike on May 31 2006 11:43 |
|
| Author: | sgtgoose1 [ 31 May 2006, 12:12 ] |
| Post subject: | |
We could do Threads--------------- On what has been found in Wheel Wells before or after flights. Goose They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin, (1706 - 1790) |
|
| Author: | Hawg166 [ 31 May 2006, 16:26 ] |
| Post subject: | |
There may be multiple reasons. I believe that a wheels up landing without them exposed would cause the barrels t dig into the pavement causing a cart wheel because of the CG. "By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory |
|
| Author: | gifted [ 31 May 2006, 19:17 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd think that a tire would produce more drag than a fairing of any kind, so that doesn't seem to fit. Ignorance may be bliss, but it sure ain't fun! |
|
| Author: | Dice-man [ 01 Jun 2006, 00:46 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I know I will be corrected if I say something wrong but, here goes anyway. The reason for placing the gear in “Pods” to begin with was to save the space “inside” the wings area for things like structural members (stronger wings) and more fuel. This also allowed the gear to be longer (extending past the leading edge of the wing) raising the aircraft further off the ground for the “unprepared” (damaged) runways it was designed to operate from. The exposed tires (I believe) are only for gear-up landing, that’s their sole purpose in life. The tires are not “run flats” but if you do have a flat/damaged tire the aircraft will ride on the rim long enough to stop the aircraft during a gear-up landing. Fairings or doors would not cause drag and would more than likely increase the aircrafts aerodynamics. Hawg166 you may be right but, if you put a fairing over the wheel and you had to belly land it would just eat the fairing away, or rip it off, exposing the tire anyway....right? Visit my A-10 website at http://www.warthogpen.com |
|
| Author: | Hawg166 [ 01 Jun 2006, 12:38 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not sure. I was just ading one of the theories that I had heard of. But what you said must be true. Adding to that, is the fact that having the wheels retract forward without rotating allows for the doors to assist in pulling the gear down when you use the emrgency blow down bottles. The bottles just overide the uplocks and the wind against the fairings pulls the doors down. Hence the reason that you are only allowed to fly missing one fairing on the main gear, and it cant be the main door. You can only be missing only the middle or ower door with an engineering waiver. "By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory |
|
| Author: | hawgstruck [ 02 Jun 2006, 01:32 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Our Dash 1 checklist says that with any gear malfunction, the preferable configuration is with gear completely up. With the configuration, it says the jet will probably touch down first on the vertical stabs and then the main gear. There is not a huge danger of the gun barrels. The scary ones are when one of the gear will not extend or only one DOES exend. In this case, they prescrible either ejection or a few hail Mary's. Another advantage to those gear pods in addition to those already mentioned is an increased chaff/flare capacity...huge for a jet of our size/speed/Air-to-Air capability. |
|
| Author: | sgtgoose1 [ 02 Jun 2006, 09:12 ] |
| Post subject: | |
That point is made in 2/91 with the crash at KKMC when the nose gear was damaged and buckled ,digging the barrell into the ruway,we all know the rest of that story <img src=newicons/smiley_salute.gif border=0 align=middle> Goose They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin, (1706 - 1790) |
|
| Author: | Old Chief [ 02 Jun 2006, 16:58 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've always been amused at the exposed tires on the hawg. The only other aircraft with that "feature" was the venerable DC-3..and that was designed when? OC Some days it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints |
|
| Author: | HogDog [ 02 Jun 2006, 21:13 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ah yes the goonie-bird, yet another of my favorite aircraft. And another designed to use primitive runways...(or did it just end up that way?) Seems like all the really good ones have similar qualities.....slow, ugly, but effective and designed to function, not look pretty in the air. Although they are pretty, in their own way! Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a GAU-8A at your side, kid...--Hawg Solo |
|
| Author: | 30mike-mike [ 04 Jun 2006, 16:55 ] |
| Post subject: | |
FYI, the B-17 was exsposed, too.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> The Second Amendment: America's original homeland security. Ya just can’t take life too seriously, because you aren’t going to get out of it alive anyway. |
|
| Author: | Hawg166 [ 04 Jun 2006, 17:59 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I used to fly the old Charlie One Fifty Two. It had exposed gear. <img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle> "By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory |
|
| Author: | Old Chief [ 05 Jun 2006, 06:27 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>FYI, the B-17 was exsposed, too. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> Damn, how could I forget that one? Guess that goes along with Hog Dog's post about great aircraft. OC Some days it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|