Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-21-2012, 11:20 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Eastern TN
Posts: 20,841
how big does landing gear have to be?

Comparing an A-26 -



Or a Constellation -



To, say, a 737 -



Why are the wheels of older aircraft so big for the size and weight of the aircraft?

Sixto
87 300D

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-21-2012, 11:22 PM
tbomachines's Avatar
ಠ_ಠ
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 7,364


And then you got dem rimz
__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-21-2012, 11:26 PM
Inna-propriate-da-vida
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,969
I would imagine that it all depends on what you are going to be landing on.

Fresh, smooth tarmac.... little wheels, no problem, and less weight...

Old bumpy dirt strip... may want a little more rubber...
__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-22-2012, 02:58 AM
Stretch's Avatar
...like a shield of steel
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Somewhere in the Netherlands
Posts: 14,461
^^^^ Indeed a lot of the earlier stuff had to land on grass for example - but as planes got bigger and heavier they needed stronger runways to support the weight.

It's the the old concrete to rubber ratio again...
__________________
1992 W201 190E 1.8 171,000 km - Daily driver
1981 W123 300D ~ 100,000 miles / 160,000 km - project car stripped to the bone
1965 Land Rover Series 2a Station Wagon CIS recovery therapy!
1961 Volvo PV544 Bare metal rat rod-ish thing

I'm here to chat about cars and to help others - I'm not here "to always be right" like an internet warrior



Don't leave that there - I'll take it to bits!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-22-2012, 07:29 AM
engatwork's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Soperton, Ga. USA
Posts: 13,646
I suspect it has to do with needing the room for the props too.
__________________
Jim
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-22-2012, 08:00 AM
jplinville's Avatar
Conservative
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dayton, Ohio region
Posts: 302
Technology has changed since those days...so has the alloys and compounds used.
__________________
1987 560SL
85,000 miles




Meet on the level, leave on the square. Great words to live by

Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread. - Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-22-2012, 08:19 AM
Grok this
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 232
The big tires were for landing on unimproved or makeshift runways.
__________________
Remember, Safety Third!
'99 E300 Turbodiesel, '82 300TD, 1996 12V Cummins Turbo, '94 Neoplan - Detroit 6V92TA
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-22-2012, 01:14 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,318
Because military aircraft are designed to be slammed down hard on short poorly made runways.

Commercial planes land on nice runways.

Navy planes have extremely strong gear for aircraft carrier landings.
__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-22-2012, 01:37 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Eastern TN
Posts: 20,841
I meant the wheels and tires more than strut beefiness and length. I was thinking of the load. Wouldn't a dirt or gravel runway have more give than a concrete runway? The A-26 looks to have flotation tires compared to the 737. I'd expect to see curb rash on the 737's wheels after a hard landing. A C-130 will land in places I'd hesitate to take a W461 and it doesn't have higher profile tires than the A-26 with respect to the landing load, granted only a small bit of the C-130 gear is exposed.

Sixto
87 300D
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-22-2012, 02:34 PM
MS Fowler's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Littlestown PA ( 6 miles south of Gettysburg)
Posts: 2,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
I meant the wheels and tires more than strut beefiness and length. I was thinking of the load. Wouldn't a dirt or gravel runway have more give than a concrete runway? The A-26 looks to have flotation tires compared to the 737. I'd expect to see curb rash on the 737's wheels after a hard landing. A C-130 will land in places I'd hesitate to take a W461 and it doesn't have higher profile tires than the A-26 with respect to the landing load, granted only a small bit of the C-130 gear is exposed.

Sixto
87 300D
I think you are right, but for a different reason. The concrete is harder for sure. So on dirt runways, the tire is always trying to run up hill- out of the "give" you mentioned above.That puts more load on the strut than if on concrete.

Anyone agree that the supper constellation was one of the prettiest prop planes ever?
__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-22-2012, 03:12 PM
Stretch's Avatar
...like a shield of steel
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Somewhere in the Netherlands
Posts: 14,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Fowler View Post
...
Anyone agree that the supper constellation was one of the prettiest prop planes ever?
It has a certain charm - I'm still pretty nuts about virtually any prop boat plane though...
__________________
1992 W201 190E 1.8 171,000 km - Daily driver
1981 W123 300D ~ 100,000 miles / 160,000 km - project car stripped to the bone
1965 Land Rover Series 2a Station Wagon CIS recovery therapy!
1961 Volvo PV544 Bare metal rat rod-ish thing

I'm here to chat about cars and to help others - I'm not here "to always be right" like an internet warrior



Don't leave that there - I'll take it to bits!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-22-2012, 03:32 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 11
The bigger the wheel, the lower the rolling resistance (not the same as drag) but the greater the centripetal force that tries to pull the tyre off the rim. Modern aircraft have higher take-off and landing speeds than older, slower machines, necessitating wheels that can reach higher angular velocities - hence, smaller diameters. Not having to provide clearance for a prop helps as well.

To reduce contact pressure on the tyres, add more tyres:


Just one reason, maybe not the reason. It would also be cheaper to manufacture more smaller tyres than fewer larger ones.

BTW, hyia. New guy here.
__________________
1995 W202 C250 Diesel, OM605 NA engine, 5-speed manual
1986 W123 200, OM617 NA engine, 5-speed manual, rev counter
1989 W126 300SE, 5-speed manual
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-22-2012, 05:00 PM
engatwork's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Soperton, Ga. USA
Posts: 13,646
Welcome aboard PC.
__________________
Jim
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-22-2012, 05:21 PM
Grok this
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
I meant the wheels and tires more than strut beefiness and length. I was thinking of the load. Wouldn't a dirt or gravel runway have more give than a concrete runway? The A-26 looks to have flotation tires compared to the 737.
That's for taking off / landing in mud / wet grass.
__________________
Remember, Safety Third!
'99 E300 Turbodiesel, '82 300TD, 1996 12V Cummins Turbo, '94 Neoplan - Detroit 6V92TA
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-22-2012, 05:24 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Eastern TN
Posts: 20,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Army View Post
It has a certain charm - I'm still pretty nuts about virtually any prop boat plane though...
Not exactly prop driven and not exactly an airplane - Orlyonok - YouTube

Sixto
87 300D

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page