|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 27, 2006 22:58:01 GMT 12
Captain Rockow pulls the gear on his F-16 as soon as the weight is off. I wonder does he flip the "up" switch moments before rotation so that the gear starts the retraction sequence immediately? Pretty fancy stuff and highly dependent on a successful launch.  |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 27, 2006 23:04:51 GMT 12
Cool shot! He certainly is confident in getting the wheels up early!
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 27, 2006 23:10:19 GMT 12
A lightly loaded Viper certainly doesn't take much to get airborne either: roll on Avalon 2007!
Another great shot, Pete. If only I could pull those sorts of shots out of the bag! ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 28, 2006 11:16:52 GMT 12
Is "Viper" another name for the F-16 "Fighting Falcon".
Like most photography, it is a case of being there at the time and having a sense of anticipation. This was with a 300 mm (480mm on a DSLR with the 1.6 factor). I usually prefer to time the shots manually rather than using motor drive.
Further shots in this sequence show the gear retracting. Not much of the rest of the a/c but they sure spell out the detail.... even to the point of seeing the names of the ground crew inside the gear doors. I will make files for them and post them later.
|
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 28, 2006 11:55:00 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 28, 2006 12:32:48 GMT 12
Viper is just an informal name for the F-16; I think it was the USAF crews who came up with this term, but it also seems to be popular amongst other users e.g. Belgium and The Netherlands. This probably sounds really nerdy - but I love to see how the gear on different types of aircraft retracts and extends: it's such a precise process, and a miracle on some aircraft that they can actually fit everything into place!  |
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 28, 2006 15:18:05 GMT 12
You nerd 'em, I'll shoot 'em!
It is an incredibly involved process. These shots give some idea of the system on the F-16. It involves some rotation of the main wheels' axis as well.
The ugliest system is the Cessna 210. It looks like a Duck trailing its feet. An as for the manual extension involving 50 or so pumps on a handle!!!!! Great fun if you are approach to minima on a dirty night and the normal system fails. Almost as bad as having to lie on one's back while reaching behind the seat to wind the handle on Beech's A36 and B58 types. Sheer lunacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 28, 2006 15:20:49 GMT 12
BTW, did you spot the difference between the nose wheel and the two mains? Aside from its size, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jul 28, 2006 15:56:08 GMT 12
The C210 has an amazing system, despite the appearance of the "duck trailing its feet" the whole geometry of that retraction comes down to a simple angled hinge point - There must have been a fair few paper clips bent to work it out though!
re your question - the nose wheel is still spinning when it retracts? the Pilots normally tap the brakes after lift off which stops the mains spinning, but the nose keeps on going. Is that what you were thinking?
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 28, 2006 18:22:03 GMT 12
Main gear going forward, nose gear going back? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 28, 2006 18:41:02 GMT 12
Does a Cessna 210 retract its gear like a Cessna O-2? The O-2 looks pretty odd - almost like the gear is going to drop off. ;D
The A-4 Skyhawk is another aircraft with a complex looking gear retraction cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jul 28, 2006 19:21:39 GMT 12
Yes the O-2 uses the same retraction method as the 210, in fact the system is used on the R172, R177, R182, 210, and 337. The undercarriages themselves do vary in that some have round tubular spring steel legs, and others such as the 337 and the O-2 Have flat leaf spring legs. there is also a lot of variation in the complex door arrangements (the most complex part of the whole design). The first part of the retraction sequence the legs actually free fall out of the downlocks, then they are pumped up into the up position. Emergency extension (as mentioned, lots of pumping) is similar, and once again the gear free falls part way. One drawback is that very tall jacks are needed for doing retraction tests in the hangar (been there - done that)
The Corsair and P40 and Hellcat have interesting cycles as well, where the leg rotates as it retracts - the Mainwheels on Aero Commanders do a similar thing. There have been some complex historical undercarriage configs too - The Stirlings multi-jointed folding (where the outer doors actually are mounted part way down the leg), The Heinkel 177 Uhu's double legs folding both inward and outward, The liberators huge outward folding legs and the B52s inward folding narrow track gear (Which folds inwards, one in front of the other - and castors as well!) There is some serious engineering involved with even "simple" retracts!
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jul 28, 2006 23:38:18 GMT 12
The condensation in the intake mouth is kinda cool. Never noticed that before on an F-16. Seen it in pics of other aircraft though, like the A-7, and B747.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 28, 2006 23:52:21 GMT 12
Well I'm pleased to see that I'm not alone in being mesmerised by different aircraft's undercarriage retraction and extension cycles.
As you mentioned Bruce, there is some complex engineering required for even simple gear retraction/extension cycles, most of which I don't understand! :-(
Mumbles, there are some great images around of F-16s with moisture forming a vortex from the ground up into the intake in wet conditions. I'll see if I can remember where I have found them on the 'net for you and link them from here.
|
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 29, 2006 0:42:45 GMT 12
It was the nose wheel spinning with the mains having been braked that caught my eye. Interesting stuff about the various gear-retraction systems, too.
I guess that is the vortex/condensation in the induction mouth.
Thanks for the comments everybody.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 29, 2006 16:56:45 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Jul 29, 2006 17:10:18 GMT 12
Sure it's not the pilot having a quick leak before T/O?
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jul 31, 2006 1:08:02 GMT 12
Cool ;D
|
|
