Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums

Origin of Short Sterling Long Landing Gear?

Aviation Discuss Origin of Short Sterling Long Landing Gear? in the World War II - Aviation forums; One of my most favorite British bombers of WWII is the Short Stirling. So brutally ugly and purposeful. However, at ...


Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Aviation

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-30-2006, 03:33 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Matt308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8,985
Country:
Question Origin of Short Sterling Long Landing Gear?

One of my most favorite British bombers of WWII is the Short Stirling. So brutally ugly and purposeful. However, at almost 23 feet off the ground, maintenance must have been a challenge and accidents must have occurred.

A question though. What was the technical origin for the rather lengthy main gear struts? I've read that with the narrow wings driven by RAF specifications to keep them 100ft or less resulted in changes to configurations to minimize take-off rolls. Changes included both wing incidence and gear extension. But good God man...that much? Besides as a tail dragger the aft will rise as V1 approaches. I've read that the gear was extended to account for a 3 degree increase in incidence. Are they referring to a realized 3 degrees at V2?

What do you think?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Short Sterling.jpg (22.3 KB, 68 views)
Matt308 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2006, 10:01 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 151
This is the story I remember: First off, the Stirling was designed to fit in existing RAF hangers, which dictated a 100 ft. wingspan. That in turn ment the wing had to have a very high aspect ratio. While that gave the Stirling good manoeuvability, it also restricted the operational ceiling, and required quite a bit of wing incidence for take-off. To avoid a nose-down flight attitude, and due to the mid-upper wing mounting the long landing gear was required.
V-1710 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2006, 07:36 AM   #3
Master of Ewes
 
the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country:
Send a message via MSN to the lancaster kicks ass
A very good question, which is however easily answered.

the stirling started life as the S.31 (better known as the M4), a half scale plywood model powered by four 90hp engines (very cute by aircraft standards), her cheif designer did want a 112ft wingspan but the air ministry were having none of it, insisting on the 100ft still, which reduced range but also made the stirling manouverable enough to earn it the nicname "The Fighting Bomber", it also hugely increased the lake off and landing runs

It was found with using the S.31 that an extra 3 degrees of wing incidence would hugely help the problem, and so the landing gear was lenthened to give the extra 3 degrees, hance all stirlings had the long legs

this wasn't the only problem, the landing gear was too long to retract into the nacelles! so a two stage system was introduced, first the gear was taken virtically upwards, then backwards, the motors for this process bing inside the fusilage in case of a motor failure

this wasn't to be the stirling's last undercarriage problem though, the gear on the first full size prototype's first flight collapsed on landing! this was to do with the alloy used for the legs which was later replaced by steel, and the indercarriage problems were finally solved! so there you go, long legs= higher incidence..........
__________________

"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."
the lancaster kicks ass is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2006, 12:53 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 42
Country:
Just by looking at that photo might it be something to do with clearance for loading the rear of the bomb bay(s didn't it have hundreds of them?)
__________________
Cave Deus Videt

Dyslexics Untie!
hole in the ground is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2006, 12:26 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Matt308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8,985
Country:
Thanks Lanc. That's what I thought too. Seems like overkill to me though. Hole has a point, but this must have been a secondary consideration over flight characteristics.
Matt308 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 08:05 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
R988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Londonium
Posts: 610
A grand uncle of mine flew Halifax's and was telling me last time I spoke to him that the Stirling had a lot of problems with the landing gear and that it would often collapse.
__________________
Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life.
R988 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 11:18 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Matt308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8,985
Country:
That I can believe. The structural engineering must have been very complex for that time.
Matt308 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 06:03 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 151
Are there any Sterlings still fyling?i
V-1710 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 06:14 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
mosquitoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saffron Walden/Sheffield
Posts: 3,001
Country:
Send a message via MSN to mosquitoman
There aren't any complete ones left- I know that most of a rear fuselage was found being used as a chicken coop near Arnhem in the past year or 2 but apart from wrecks, that's it
__________________

When you realise that the light at the end of the tunnel is actually an oncoming train, you know it's time to run for your life
mosquitoman is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 10:32 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Matt308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8,985
Country:
Man, what a shame. What a beaut. How many of the Stirlings were converted to glider tugs and what was the modifications?
Matt308 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2006, 09:00 AM   #11
Master of Ewes
 
the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country:
Send a message via MSN to the lancaster kicks ass
i can't give you numbers but baisically the Mk.V was stripped of all turrets and other bombing equiptment, everything else was faired over and the rear end was fitted with the nessisairy towing gear, little structural work was needed because she was immencely strong anyway.........
__________________

"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."
the lancaster kicks ass is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The 9th FS Unit History... Nov 1944 - Sept 1945.... lesofprimus Stories 12 12-10-2006 05:06 PM
Lancaster Vs. B-24 the lancaster kicks ass Polls 506 10-30-2006 02:34 PM
The Best Bf - 109 Variant ? lesofprimus Aviation 522 07-12-2005 10:35 PM
The P-108/B-17/Lancaster Thread Hot Space Old Threads 172 12-05-2004 05:04 AM
The Story of Charles Hoffman Crazy Stories 4 06-19-2004 06:50 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
   

AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83