I've noticed that on almost all aircraft (Boeing, Airbus etc.) the nose gear rotates forwards for retraction.
However, on a some aircraft, in particular a few Russian models, the opposite is used: the nose gear is rotated towards the rear for stowage:
(this includes the Tu154, Tu134)
Is there any logic behind this decision? I imagined it was better to place it folding forwards, such that the gear was assisted into place by the air, especially for manual free fall. Looking at pictures of the TU-154 with its gear down, there seems to be plenty of space forward.
For both main and nose landing gear the main and really only consideration is where they can make space for the gear (there is no standard direction for retracting the main landing gear either; the Tu-154 retracts main gear rearwards into the anti-shock body).
The most common configuration is retracting nose gear forward, because it's easy to make space for it there leaving more space for the cargo hold. I don't think the air pressure during gravity extension plays any role in the decision.
Most older Russian planes were however originally designed with glass nose seating navigator, so they did not have the room there. It was no longer the case with Tu-154 though. So they either had other equipment there or were simply used to making it retract rearward and didn't think about the advantage of changing it.
The most common configuration for main gear is retracting it inward into the wing box, but note that the Tu-154 is exception there as well retracting the main gear into the rather large anti-shock bodies. Because they needed the anti-shock bodies they thought how to use them and there were not that many options.
I've noticed that on almost all aircraft (Boeing, Airbus etc.) the nose gear rotates forwards for retraction. However, on a some aircraft, in particular a few Russian models, the opposite is used: the nose gear is rotated towards the rear for stowage: (this includes the Tu154, Tu134) Is there any logic behind this decision? I imagined it was better to place it folding forwards, such that the gear was assisted into place by the air, especially for manual free fall. Looking at pictures of the TU-154 with its gear down, there seems to be plenty of space forward.
I took a couple of pictures of various aircraft and I would like to know which aircraft I photographed. I have no idea, expect that all of them took off from ZRH and should be commercial airliners:
The MD-900 is a helicopter which seems to be quite popular with law enforcement agencies. As you can see, instead of an anti-torque tail rotor, a fan exhaust is directed out slots in the tail boom. I was wondering if this works in regards to auto rotation, should the aircraft lose its engines.
Is it just my imagination, or is it a fact that many large airliners actually touch down "crabbed" on difficult crosswind landings? Here's what I mean: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtnL4KYVtDE (watch at 01:10) Or this: Is the main landing gear specifically designed to allow this? Is it recommended or discouraged by the manufacturer?
What is the black pod starboard of the front landing gear on this F-16-I? At first I thought that it was a laser finder, but upon closer inspection it seems to resemble some type of short cannon. What might it be?
I was looking through my virtual radar logs one of the days and found this "glitchy" ADS-B behavior. I am almost 100% sure that this is not due to my antenna or setup since two independent different... of occurrence is approximately: 3/16/2014 6:09pm CST I have also verified FlightAware is ALSO showing the same weird glitch. See below "yellow" highlighted airplane: Same A/C from FlightRadar24: UPDATE: This seems to be related to THIS aircraft. The explanations given (GPS->INS->GPS switching) still applies in my opinion, but wanted to give another screen shot. Here it is today (3/30/2014
What should a pilot do to perform a successful emergency water landing, also known as ditching of a big commercial jet? Is there any checklist, or best practices, like "elevate the nose" or "retract the landing gear", to make it safer? Are commercial Jets buoyant?
There are two main types of supplementary oxygen devices in light aircraft: Cannula: Oxygen mask: What are the major differences between these two devices? Is one more suitable for specific siutations than another, or is it just a matter of personal preference?
I hope this is a relevant place for me to ask a math question regarding aircraft design. I am trying to understand how one would implement a controller to control the pitch angle of an airplane for a small exercise. I understand the control part and its implementation. What I do not grasp is how one acquires the longitudinal equations of motions (which are then used for the control part) which serves as the starting point. What is the starting point or what are the principles used to derive these equations? If I know how to derive these equations for a very simple case, then I know I have
The Soloy Dual Pac apparently allows two engines to rotate one propeller -- here's a picture of it on an Otter: Is this recognised as a centreline thrust twin engine aircraft, a "standard" twin engine aircraft or just an aircraft with a single engine for FAA certification? What about for pilot licensing?