Search Results

Verification of landing gear design strength is accomplished by dynamic and static test programs. This is essentially a verification of the analytical procedures used to design the gear. An industry survey was recently conducted to determine just what analysis and testing are currently being applied to landing gear. Timing in relation to first flight of new aircraft was also questioned. Opinions were solicited from designers of the following categories and/or types of aircraft: a Military - Large Land Based (Bomber) b Military - Small Land Based (Fighter) c Military - Carrier Based (Navy) d Military - Helicopter (Large) e Military - Helicopter (Small-attack) f Commercial - Large (Airliner) g Commercial - Small (Business) h USAF (WPAFB) - Recommendations It is the objective of this AIR to present a summary of these responses. It is hoped that this summary will be useful to designers as a guide and/or check list in establishing criteria for landing gear analysis and test.

CPs are a process that is executed on a critical landing gear (or undercarriage) part, assembly or equipment that if performed incorrectly or omitted would cause: An operational failure of the aircraft; or An unacceptable risk of injury This document identifies CPs that have either caused operational failure or that can be reasonably expected to cause operational failures based on experience. Note that in the interest of brevity, that this document is not intended to be a definitive listing, only an introduction and a consideration of common processes.

This SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) provides guidelines for the development of landing gear fatigue spectra for the purpose of designing and certification testing of Part 25 landing gear. Many of the recommendations herein are generalizations based on data obtained from a wide range of landing gears. The aircraft manufacturer or the landing gear supplier is encouraged to use data more specific to their particular undercarriage whenever possible.

Steel alloys, such as AF1410 (AMS 6527, UNS K92571) and AerMet 100 (AMS 6532), have been developed which have improved Fracture Toughness characteristics compared to the current landing gear steel alloy, 300M (AMS 6419 and AMS 6257, MIL-S-8844, UNS K44220). The 300M steel is the most widely used material in current landing gear designs. It has been successfully used in thousands of applications. The use of the 300M material necessitates a safe life design criterion where components are retired after one-fourth to one-sixth the laboratory test life. This criterion was established in part due to the relatively low fracture toughness of low-alloy steel in the 260 to 300 ksi strength range. The high fracture tough alloys give comparable strength levels with an increase in fracture toughness and better resistance to stress corrosion cracking. These alloys may make possible the consideration of new procedures for operation, maintenance, and inspection.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) provides recommendations on cavity design, the installation of elastomer type spare seals in these cavities, and information surrounding elastomer material properties after contact with typical shock absorber hydraulic fluid(s) or grease. This ARP is primarily concerned with the use of spare seals on shock absorbers where only a single dynamic seal is fitted and in contact with the slider/shock absorber piston at any one time. These shock absorbers typically have a spare (dynamic) seal gland located on the outer diameter of the lower seal carrier. This spare seal gland is intended to house a spare elastomer contact seal. Split Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) backup rings can also be installed in the spare seal cavity. During operation, if the fitted dynamic shock absorber standard seal begins to fail/leak, then the aircraft can be jacked up, allowing the lower gland nut of the shock absorber to be dropped down.

This document provides information on the current practices used by commercial and military operators in regards to hard landings (or overload events designated as hard landings). Since detailed information on inspections would be aircraft specific, this AIR provides only a general framework. Detailed information and procedures are available in the maintenance manuals for specific aircraft. Because hard landings potentially affect the entire aircraft, guidelines are listed here for non-landing gear areas. But, the primary focus of the document is the landing gear and related systems. The document may be considered to be applicable to all types of aircraft. This document does NOT provide recommended practices for hard landing inspections, nor does it provide recommendations on the disposition of damaged equipment. Refer to ARP 4915 and ARP 5600.

The primary focus of this document is to provide information on the impacts hard landings and abnormal load conditions on landing gear and related systems. However, because hard landings potentially affect the entire aircraft, this document also includes information for non-landing gear areas. The document may be considered to be applicable to all types of aircraft. This document does NOT provide recommended practices for hard landing inspections, nor does it provide recommendations on the disposition of damaged equipment. Refer to ARP4915 and ARP5600 for information on dispositions relating to landing gear components or wheels involved in accidents/incidents.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) provides guidance on the definition, development, and establishing a LGIP.

This Aerospace Information Report (AIR) will examine considerations relative to the use of mechanical switches on aircraft landing gear, and present "lessons learned" during the period that these devices have been used.

This SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) discusses the nature of landing gear stability, describes many common landing gear stability problems, and suggests approaches and methods for solving or avoiding them.

This document outlines the most common repairs used on landing gear components. It is not the intention of this AIR to replace Overhaul/Component Maintenance or Technical Order Manuals, but it can serve as a guide into their preparation. This document may also be used as a template to develop an MRB (Material Review Board) plan. The recommendations in this document apply to components made of metallic alloys. These recommendations are intended for new manufactured components as well as for overhauled components. The extent of repair allowed for new components as opposed to in-service components is left to the cognizant engineering authorities. Reference could be made to this document when justifying repairs on landing gears. For repairs outside the scope of this document, a detailed justification is necessary. It must be understood that all the repairs listed in this document are not to be applied without the involvement of the cognizant engineer.

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 AS4716, the accepted gland standard for MS28775, O-ring packing seals. Piston rod diameters, gland internal diameters, groove sidewall angles and the surface finish are all defined by AS4716, but the gland outer retaining wall diameter is changed. The traditional scraper design installed into the glands detailed in Table 1 typically utilize components made from urethane or nitrile materials. These scraper designs, while still acceptable, must be reviewed in consideration to deicing, cleaners and disinfectant fluids applied to or in contact with the landing gear, as the materials of construction for the installed scrapers may not be compatible to these fluids.

The intent of this SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) is to document the design requirements and approaches for the crashworthy design of aircraft landing gear. This document covers the field of commercial and military airplanes and helicopters. This summary of crashworthy landing gear design requirements and approaches may be used as a reference for future aircraft.

The intent of this SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) is to document the design requirements and approaches for the crashworthy design of aircraft landing gear. This document covers the field of commercial and military airplanes and helicopters. This summary of crashworthy landing gear design requirements and approaches may be used as a reference for future aircraft.

The purpose of this SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) is to provide a practical definition of external hydraulic fluid leakage exhibited by landing gear shock absorbers/struts. The definition will outline normal (acceptable weepage) and excessive leakage (unacceptable leakage) of shock absorbers/struts that is measurable. The definition of leakage is applicable to new gear assemblies, refurbished/remanufactured (overhauled) shock absorbers/struts, leakage of shock absorbers/struts encountered during acceptance flights, newly delivered and in-service aircraft. This ARP is intended to provide guidelines for acceptable leakage of landing gear shock absorbers/struts between the ambient temperatures of -65 °F (-54 °C) and 130 °F (54 °C) and to outline the procedure for measuring such leakage. The specific limits that are applied to any particular aircraft shall be adjusted by the aircraft manufacturer before inclusion in the applicable maintenance manual.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) applies to fatigue testing of landing gear and landing gear components.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) applies to fatigue testing of landing gear and landing gear components.

The scope of this document is to discuss the differences between electromechanical and proximity position sensing devices (sensor or switch) when used on landing gear. It also contains information which may be helpful when applying either type of technology after the selection has been made. The purpose is to help the designer make better choices when selecting a position-sensing device. Once that choice has been made, this document includes information to improve the reliability of new or current designs. It is not intended to replace recommendations from sensor manufacturers or actual experience, but to provide a set of general guidelines based on historic infromation of what is being used.

The scope of this document is to discuss the differences between electromechanical and proximity position sensing devices when used on landing gears. It also contains information, which may be helpful, when applying either type of technology after the selection has been made. The purpose is to help the designer make better choices when selecting a position-sensing device. Once that choice has been made, this document includes information to improve the reliability of new or current designs. It is not intended to replace recommendations from sensor manufacturers or actual experience, but to provide a set of general guidelines.