Search Results

Consideration for the damaging effects to aircraft from the failure of wheels and tires should be evaluated. This document discusses the types of problems in-service aircraft have experienced and methodology in place to assist the designers when evaluating threats for new aircraft design. The purpose of this document is to provide a history of in-service problems, provide a historical summary of the design improvements made to wheels and tires during the past 40 years, and to offer methodology which has been used to help designers assess the threat to ensure the functionality of systems and equipment located in and around the landing gear and in wheel wells.

This specification covers a direct reading, remote control, pneumatic pressure inflator assembly, for use on aircraft tires and struts having pneumatic pressure requirements up to 600 psi. It includes pressure relief provisions to provide for safe inflation. Also included are dual chuck stem gages for measuring tire pressure.

This specification covers a direct reading, remote control, pneumatic pressure inflator assembly, for use on aircraft tires and struts having pneumatic pressure requirements up to 600 psi. It includes pressure relief provisions to provide for safe inflation. Also included are dual chuck stem gages for measuring tire pressure.

This document discusses the work done by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Waterways Experiment Station (WES) in support of SAE A-5 Committee activity on Aerospace Landing Gear Systems. It is an example of how seemingly unrelated disciplines can be combined effectively for the eventual benefit of the overall aircraft system, where that system includes the total airfield environment in which the aircraft must operate. In summary, this AIR documents the history of aircraft flotation analysis as it involves WES and the SAE.

This document discusses the work done by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Waterways Experiment Station (WES) in support of SAE A-5 Committee activity on Aerospace Landing Gear Systems. It is an example of how seemingly unrelated disciplines can be combined effectively for the eventual benefit of the overall aircraft system, where that system includes the total airfield environment in which the aircraft must operate. In summary, this AIR documents the history of aircraft flotation analysis as it involves WES and the SAE.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) includes recommended ground flotation analysis methods for both paved and unpaved airfields with application to both commercial and military aircraft.

This document is divided into five parts. The first part deals with flotation analysis features and definitions to acquaint the engineer with elements common to the various methods and the meanings of the terms used. The second part identifies and describes current flotation analysis methods. Due to the close relationship between flotation analysis and runway design, methods for the latter are also included in this document. As runway design criteria are occasionally used for flotation evaluation, including some for runways built to now obsolete criteria, a listing of the majority of these criteria constitutes the third part. The fourth part of this document tabulates the most relevant documents, categorizing them for commercial and civil versus military usage, by military service to be satisfied, and by type of pavement. This document concludes with brief elaborations of some concepts for broadening the analyst’s understanding of the subject.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) is intended to document the process of landing gear system development. This document includes landing gear system development plans for commercial/military, fixed wing, and rotary wing air vehicles.

This Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) is therefore intended to document the process of landing gear system development. Some of the steps covered are mandatory and others are elective, or dependent upon customer requirements or desires. Economics is a very significant factor and for each analysis or test performed, more confidence and assurance of success is gained, but at a price. Some of the steps are performed as a matter of “good engineering practice” and without special recognition. Others are unique to the particular landing gear system and all together comprise a complete development.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) is intended to document the process of landing gear system development. This document includes landing gear system development plans for commercial, military, fixed wing and rotary wing air vehicles.

This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) covers an alternate gland design for the installation of scraper/wiper rings in the lower end of landing gear shock struts for the purpose of contaminant exclusion. The defined scraper gland covered by this document, as shown in Table 1, is a variant of MIL-G-5514, the accepted gland standard for MS28775. Piston diameters, gland internal diameters, and the groove sidewall angles and surface finish are defined by MIL-G-5514, but the gland outer retaining wall diameter is changed. AS4088 is similar to this document, but was developed by SAE A-6 for flight control and general purpose cylinders. It differs from this document primarily by the clearance between the rod (piston) and outer gland wall. Since landing gears are more susceptible to dirt contamination, the additional clearance provides a larger path to allow excessive dirt accumulation to exit the gland.

The landing gear system is a major airframe system that needs to be integrated very efficiently to minimize the penalties of weight, cost, dispatch reliability and maintenance. As the landing gear system business develops and large scale teaming arrangements and acquisitions become increasingly common, it may be desirable in some instances to procure an Integrated Landing Gear System. This document provides guidelines and useful references for developing an integrated landing gear system for an aircraft and is divided into four sections: Landing Gear Configuration Requirements (Section 3) Landing Gear Functional Requirements (Section 4) Landing Gear System Integrity Requirements (Section 5) Landing Gear Program Requirements (Section 6) The landing gear system encompasses all landing gear structural and subsystem elements. Structural elements include shock struts, braces, fittings, pins, wheels, tires and brakes.

The landing gear system is a major and safety critical airframe system that needs to be integrated efficiently to meet the overall aircraft program goals of minimizing the penalties of weight, cost, dispatch reliability and maintenance. As the landing gear system business develops and large-scale teaming arrangements and acquisitions become increasingly common, it may be desirable in some instances to procure an Integrated Landing Gear System. This document provides guidelines and useful references for developing an integrated landing gear system for an aircraft. The document structure is divided into four sections: Landing Gear System Configuration Requirements (Section 3) Landing Gear System Functional Requirements (Section 4) Landing Gear System Integrity Requirements (Section 5) Landing Gear System Program Requirements (Section 6) The landing gear system encompasses all landing gear structural and subsystem elements.

This SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) provides an overview of the tire properties, strut properties, damper properties, and other landing gear mechanical properties that contribute to shimmy stability and are required for shimmy analysis. A variety of analysis techniques and assumptions are presented.

Electrolytically deposited chrome plate is the current standard surface treatment for landing gear component interface surfaces that require good wear resistance and corrosion protection. Chrome plated components are typically plagued by a slight debit in fatigue performance, detrimental mud cracking surface pattern, susceptibility to scoring, wear, and seal leakage. In addition, recent changes in environmental compliance standards place further restrictions on the use of electrolytically deposited chromium. Some commercial applications have already eliminated the use of chrome plate on current and future products. As a result, a substitute for electrolytically deposited chrome plate has been sought for several years. High Velocity Oxygenated Fuel (HVOF) thermal spray coatings have been developed to the point where they are being implemented as an alternative to hard chrome plate on high strength low alloy steels for external surfaces on landing gear applications.