Landing gear doors remove in-field (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

P-51 wheel door:
walkaround_p51_b_226_small.jpg


Yak-3 wheel door:
Yakovlev_Yak-3_20040812_006.jpg


I have always admired how the russians have made these things simply and still workable.
 
Is that a tennis ball just behind the cockpit?? What the....

Looks like it is, stuck on the end of what I guess is the pitot tube (knowing nothing about Soviet aircraft). That's one way of protecting it and any passing heads!
Cheers
Steve
 
And the tail wheel retraction system was also cable actuated. Effectively everything was driven by electric motors mounted on the wing spars. Tank and his fellow Focke-Wulf designers considered this to be less vulnerable to damage than a hydraulic system.
Cheers
Steve

So why did they change to hydraulics with the Ta 152?
 
So why did they change to hydraulics with the Ta 152?
The Ta 152 had a Junkers VS 9 propeller witch had hydraulic operated pitch adjustment, so a hydraulic system was needed anyway. The BMW 801 had the electric pitch VDM propeller and AFAIK there was no hydraulic pump on board at all. This could be the reason of the change.
cimmex
 
The Ta 152 had a Junkers VS 9 propeller witch had hydraulic operated pitch adjustment, so a hydraulic system was needed anyway. The BMW 801 had the electric pitch VDM propeller and AFAIK there was no hydraulic pump on board at all. This could be the reason of the change.
cimmex

Exactly, plus the Ta 152 had hydraulically boosted ailerons. As you say, a hydraulic system, absent on the "Anton", was fitted.

Cheers

Steve
 
Ok, just imagine that a hydraulically operated pitch adjustment is more complicated than an electrical one, is it?
 
Ok, just imagine that a hydraulically operated pitch adjustment is more complicated than an electrical one, is it?

Not necessarily but hydraulics were avoided on the A series Fw 190s because they were perceived as being vulnerable. Whether that is valid or not is a moot point, but that's what Tank thought.

Cheers

Steve
 
The Ta 152 had a Junkers VS 9 propeller witch had hydraulic operated pitch adjustment, so a hydraulic system was needed anyway. The BMW 801 had the electric pitch VDM propeller and AFAIK there was no hydraulic pump on board at all. This could be the reason of the change.j
cimmex
Hydromatic props are usually self contained, separate from the main hydraulic system, I would imagine the 152 was configured this way
 
Hydromatic props are usually self contained, separate from the main hydraulic system, I would imagine the 152 was configured this way

I imagine so too. I can certainly check.
Cheers
Steve
 
Hydraulic props may be self contained or not. The Ham Stand Hydromatic runs from the engine oil. The Aeroproducts is a self contained unit, that sits at the rear of the prop hub. Note the Bearcat and Skyraider that used Aeroproducts have no prop hubs. The BMW 801 engine, according to a BMW manual I translated, used both hydraulic and electrical. This is the text I extracted in translation: The airscrew adjustment system consists of a hydraulic and an electric one, both of which can adjust the airscrew independently of one another. The D model Fw-190s went to the Jumo 213 engines, and as I recall used the Junkers Jumo hydraulic propellors. Most DB engines used the VDM electric prop.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back