fixed gear vs. retracts

Wed Jul 16 23:02:23 AKDT 2003

Re: fixed gear vs. retractsBill,

I'm building another Aries. 

Here's a picture of my first one: http://www.fototime.com/9F7C7FD250DD50F/standard.jpg

I love it, it flies so sweet!!

Keith Black

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Carpenter 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 1:14 PM
  Subject: Re: fixed gear vs. retracts

  Keith,

  What are you building?

  Bill

  ----------
  From: "Keith Black" <tkeithb at comcast.net>
  To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
  Subject: Re: fixed gear vs. retracts
  Date: Wed, Jul 16, 2003, 11:30 AM

    It wasn't that long ago that I was asking the same question on this list. I ended up going with retracts for three reasons. 1) Less bounce on landings, 2) Transportation and storage (no gear sticking out from fuse), and 3) Landings in the weeds are less likely to tear something up. All of these are major considerations for me.

    Now I'm building my second 2M plane and I've decided to go with fixed gear for the following reasons. 1) Putting the plane together and taking it apart at the field is faster, no need to mess with hooking up the retract servo. 2) You can set the fuse on the ground and slap the wings on right by the car, no need to use a cradle as with retracts. 3) No need for constant inspection/tweaking with the struts. Even with smooth landings I periodically have to bend the struts back forward and I feel compelled to check them after each flight to avoid having them jam and draining the battery the next time I fly. 4) Makes the wings much easier to build. 5) When flying in poor light conditions, like when the plane is silhouetted by the sun, the gear sticking out gives another reference point to confirm orientation. This can be helpful when doing rolls, etc. and all you can see is a shadow. 6) With fixed gear you can taxi onto the runway and not carry the plane out each time.

    Both approaches have their definite advantages. My main reservations with changing to fixed gear are damaging the fuse from deadsticking landings in high grass and scoring downgrades due to bounced landings. Hopefully these won't be a big issue. I'm looking forward to my fixed gear plane!

    Keith Black  

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Wayne Galligan <mailto:wgalligan at goodsonacura.com>  
      To: discussion at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>  
      Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 10:13 AM
      Subject: fixed gear vs. retracts

         How light is light on the 7075 aluminum l.g. setup?   My setup with Bolly F3A large gear with wheel pants, axles and wheels weights 7.5 oz    I fly off grass and have had no problems with the setup where guys with retracts are constantly fiddleing and tweaking the struts.  The big plus(for me) is set-up.   Easier to build light wings, no linkages, one less servo, sets up in the field in no time flat.   As for tearing it up on hard landing.... just dont land in the tundra.  That is a plus for retracts if you have the gear up, otherwise retracts can tearup a good set of wings if stuck down or if one hangs up or colapses on landing on the runway.  Its a fliers choice.  I have fixed gear on 3 airplanes now and lovem all.  
      I personally like the looks of a nicely setup fixed gear airplane.   

      Wayne G

        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: John Ferrell <mailto:johnferrell at earthlink.net>  
        To: discussion at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>  
        Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:50 AM
        Subject: Re: Nats photos online

        >From this site and personal experience:

        The change to fixed gear on the Prophecy seemed to require less power than those with retracts. 

        It seems to me that the weight is about the same.

        A harsh landing with retracts usually results in needing a little attention on the struts.
        The same landing with fixed gear frequently results in extensive damage to the fuselage.

        There is less bounce with retracts.
        Taxii out is not recomended with retracts.

        Retracts usually provide a wider footprint .

        The wire gear in the pictures on Pastorello's web site looks a little heavy but should be less punishing to the airframe than the fixed aluminum or composite gear.
        7075 Aluminum gear is lighter and more durable than any of the composite gear. Unfortunately, it is harder to work and not nearly as available as 6061.
        6061 aluminum for fixed gear is a waste of time.

        If landings were all scored K4, stif gear would go away...

        John Ferrell 
        6241 Phillippi Rd
        Julian NC 27283
        Phone: (336)685-9606  
        johnferrell at earthlink.net <mailto:johnferrell at earthlink.net> 
        Dixie Competition Products
        NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
        "My Competition is Not My Enemy"

          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: Mike Mueller <mailto:mmueller at triangleprinters.com>  
          To: 'discussion at nsrca.org' <mailto:'discussion at nsrca.org'>  
          Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:27 AM
          Subject: RE: Nats photos online

           I'm flying with my 1st fixed gear plane (Temptation) this year after many years of retract planes. It's all about taste in my opinion. It's also a fad to have fixed gear now. As far as looks I'll take retracts in the air. I still get a thrill out of sucking up the gears on takeoff. Wheels hanging out of my plane give me the constant feeling that my retracts aren't working while I'm flying. The fixed gears are stronger and allow you to taxi easier ans suppose to increase drag. Either way works well. Mike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030717/24992d21/attachment.html