Starship From South Africa, joined Nov 1999, 1098 posts, RR: 18 Posted (11 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4776 times:
The 737, both Classic and New Generation models have traditionally not been fitted with main landing gear doors. I am curious to know as to why, if they are not necessary in the case of the 737, they are in respect of other airliners equipped with single or double wheel main landing gear bogies.
Jim From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 453 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4491 times:
There is also the lack of space on the early model 737s. The wheel well is really JUST big enough to hold the gear and hydaulic equipment. There isn't any room for a door actuator, latch hook, etc.
Of course, we 'vetrans' can cause the 'newbie' grief by having him get the gear door from the parts rack. It is about 20" round and fits over the wheel very nicely.
NKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4466 times:
I think it's great. The 737 wheel well is roomy and easy to work in and you don't have the added weight and complexity of doors, actuators, sequence valves etc. The smooth wheel cover on the outboard mains streamline just fine when retracted. Damn good airplane in general...I like it.
NKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 7 Reply 6, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4378 times:
Why would you think having MLG doors increase range and such? It's not like they're flying around with a big hole under the fuseage-- When the MLG is retracted, the smooth wheel cover on the outboard mains fairs with the tire, which in turn fairs with the bottom of the fuselage...aided by rubber blade type seals around the W/W opening. Increase in drag over a door is negligable. Keep it simple and leave the technology for technology's sake theory to Silicon Valley.
Oxygen From Hong Kong, joined Sep 1999, 672 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4374 times:
Boeing worked out that the lower weight and the simplicity of the system makes up for the slight ineffecience in aerodynamics, so they decided to omit it.
C172sb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4317 times:
Since the 737 is used mostly on short haul flights, the benefits of adding gear doors are negligible. Boeing did put on those cool hubcaps to help cut drag. I like Southwest's color coordinated orange hubcaps myself.
B727-200 From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1051 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4309 times:
What does the outside air temperature, friction at cruise speed and lower pressure at altitude do to the tyre with it being exposed? Are the tyres on the B737 made of a special compound or thickness?
Jkelley480 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 127 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4304 times:
N949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (11 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4297 times:
Since landing gear bays are not pressurized, the tires will be subjected to the same frigid outside temperatures at cruise levels, with or without landing gear doors. As for heat generated due to air friction at cruise speeds, I suppose the rise in temperature on the tires are going to be negligible (if at all), as they are retracted into the fuselage away from the slipstream. Besides, tires are designed to handle much much higher temperatures during landings, high-speed rolling, and heavy braking.
Sponsor Message: 
From South Africa, joined Nov 1999, 1098 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 210 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Sep 1999, 672 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2131 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1051 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
