![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com... I've been reading the POH for my club's 182RG, and I find myself surprised. The manual gear extension replies upon the same hydrolic pressure system as the powered mechanism. I'm not sure there's enough standardization in gear retraction/extension systems to say what's "normal". However, certainly the lack of redundancy is common enough on light planes. In fact, not only is the gear on my airplane designed similarly, the flaps and elevator trim use the same hydraulic system. A failure in the hydraulic system that takes out certain lines, and/or results in a loss of fluid would affect all three systems simultaneously. Occasionally you might find a "fail safe" system like the one on the Lance that Paul mentions, but as he even points out, those systems come with their own issues. Aircraft designers often come to the conclusion that the extra complexity, cost, and weight isn't worth the marginal increase in safety. Especially when one considers just how dangerous a gear-up landing *isn't*, it's not hard to see why that conclusion is reached so often. As far as I know, such "insufficiently redundant" systems are more common than "sufficiently redundant" ones. Pete |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Duniho" wrote in message I'm not sure there's enough standardization in gear retraction/extension systems to say what's "normal". However, certainly the lack of redundancy is common enough on light planes. In fact, not only is the gear on my airplane designed similarly, the flaps and elevator trim use the same hydraulic system. A failure in the hydraulic system that takes out certain lines, and/or results in a loss of fluid would affect all three systems simultaneously. I suppose you could also run the brakes off the same hydraulic system as the gear, too. After all, if the gear fails you won't be needing any brakes. :-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"C J Campbell" wrote: I suppose you could also run the brakes off the same hydraulic system as the gear, too. After all, if the gear fails you won't be needing any brakes. :-) The B-24 I used to fly is like that. Brakes, flaps, landing gear and bombbay doors all on the same system. There is one engine driven pump (#3 engine), an electric pump and a hand-pump. There are also 2 accumulators. If you have pressure in the accumulators you will have one shot at the brakes...release the brakes and you release the pressure. The copilot will be pumping like crazy on the handpump about then. G The gear will freefall into position (the nose gear has to be manually thrown out), and the flaps can be pumped down using the handpump. I only had one problem with the hydraulics. The main feed line from the engine driven pump cracked at an elbow filling the bombbay with hydraulic fluid...took less than a minute to pump all the fluid out rendering us helpless. Luckily we had just landed and were taxiing to parking when it failed. Mixtures to "cutoff" and coasted to a stop. Had just enough time to say "WHEW!" before the airplane started rolling backward due to a very slight grade on the taxiway. NOT a good feeling. G The crewchief was scrambling trying to get out to throw himself under the wheel as a chock when we came to a stop. If the crack had opened just a minute or two before I probablyl would've parked the airplane in the same gas station Southwest did a few years back. -- Dale L. Falk There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing around with airplanes. http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
... I suppose you could also run the brakes off the same hydraulic system as the gear, too. After all, if the gear fails you won't be needing any brakes. :-) Well, actually...the brakes do use the same reservoir for their hydraulic fluid. But all pressure for the brakes comes from the master brake cylinders, not the hydraulic pump used for the other three systems. Only a leak in the hydraulic line between the master and slave cylinders for the brakes would cause any trouble with the brakes (by emptying out the brake lines, along with the rest of the hydraulic system). Again speaking only of light planes, I doubt there are any that use a hydraulic pump to operate the brakes. As for whether you'd need the brakes, I guess that depends on whether the gear fails in the up position, or down. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 1 | November 24th 03 02:46 PM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 2 | November 24th 03 05:23 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 24th 03 03:52 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart D. Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 22nd 03 06:24 AM |
Wanted clever PA32 engineer's thoughts - Gear extention problem on Piper Lance | [email protected] | Owning | 5 | July 22nd 03 12:35 AM |