Retractable nose gear

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
16,018
Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
Saw this ad and thought it was a Photoshop fail.

I looked up the plane and there it is. A single retractable nose wheel.

That's kinda funky.

20180710_055127-800x477.jpg

media_Mako-flight0817a (2)-800x600.jpg
 
Indeed lancair under new ownership is developing a new kit called the mako. it has a retractable nose wheel only.
Mixed opinions within the lancair community. If you are going to retract one, why not all 3 seems to be the common question. I have read the plane was based off of the lancair es and the wing spar prevented a retractable main gear. Also I read they plan to have automatic override to lower the nose gear. The belief is insurance rates will be lower while good cruise speed achieved by a retractable nose gear.
 
Last edited:
Seems like a lot of complexity and cost to only gain half the benefit. I looked it over at last years Airventure, good looking airplane but not my cup of tea.
 
Sooooooooo.......... do you need a complex endorsement? It's not really a retractable nor a fixed gear.
 
Unit74 said:
Sooooooooo.......... do you need a complex endorsement? It's not really a retractable nor a fixed gear.
Click to expand...

Does it count as complex time if the system is handling the gear (retraction and extension) and not the pilot? :confused:

It's experimental, so the builder can have it fixed gear if they want.

Apparently the speed difference is biggest for the nose wheel due to being behind the prop. That makes sense. Lancair is claiming 10-12 knots gained by retracting the nose wheel. That sounds high to me as I thought Cirrus has said that the fixed gear is less of hit than that on the SR22.

I like the specs for the Mako. The question is how close does it come to the specs? Like the 1350 lb useful load. Once things get added where does it end up? I like to travel via GA, so useful load is, well useful. ;)

Fully built out though and it's not even remotely inexpensive. Maybe compared to a fully appointed brand spankin' new SR22. Plus you have to have the time to build it too. The NA version fully optioned is listed at $475k and the turbo edition at $510k. Not exactly chump change.

I'm not fond of the center stick. Like most people I'm right handed, which would make writing and flying a little challenging. Sure, you could have it on autopilot, but you won't always have it on autopilot. And it's like ATC has a camera in your plane, as soon as you are busy they have a frequency change for you. o_O There is supposed to be an option for a side stick.

I'd like to see how well they do and how some of the things like a side stick go. Not sure that I'll ever build, but if I do the Mako would be on my list.
 
wayne said:
I'm not fond of the center stick. Like most people I'm right handed, which would make writing and flying a little challenging. Sure, you could have it on autopilot, but you won't always have it on autopilot. And it's like ATC has a camera in your plane, as soon as you are busy they have a frequency change for you. o_O There is supposed to be an option for a side stick.

I'd like to see how well they do and how some of the things like a side stick go. Not sure that I'll ever build, but if I do the Mako would be on my list.
Click to expand...

Set it up to be flown from the right seat instead of the left seat, then the stick will be in your left hand.
 
Grum.Man said:
Set it up to be flown from the right seat instead of the left seat, then the stick will be in your left hand.
Click to expand...
wayne said:
I'm not fond of the center stick. Like most people I'm right handed, which would make writing and flying a little challenging.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make sense. In side-by-side aircraft, from the left seat you fly with your left hand. The throttle quadrant is still in the middle of the aircraft and is controlled with your right hand.(i.e Diamonds)

It's only in tandem planes like cubs and citabrias that are set up to have throttle in left hand.
 
I just pulled the wings off a Propjet this weekend. I can tell you wings are not going to fall off those things. Those spars were amazing. We had trouble getting the wings off (with a half dozen guys) even after all the bolts were taken out.

Speaking of bolts, the main spar was held on by the biggest bolt I ever laid eyes on. But if was solid titanium and didn't weigh a thing. Color me impressed. I'd fly in one of those in a heartbeat. Very, very solid.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
That doesn't make sense. In side-by-side aircraft, from the left seat you fly with your left hand. The throttle quadrant is still in the middle of the aircraft and is controlled with your right hand.(i.e Diamonds)

It's only in tandem planes like cubs and citabrias that are set up to have throttle in left hand.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is. The Mako has throttles on both sides and a stick in the middle. All he would have to do is arrange the primary flight instruments on the right instead of the left. That is how my airplane is setup.
 
Grum.Man said:
Not sure what your point is. The Mako has throttles on both sides and a stick in the middle. All he would have to do is arrange the primary flight instruments on the right instead of the left. That is how my airplane is setup.
Click to expand...
My mistake. I didn't know it had throttle on the sides. I assumed it was like the diamond and had the throttle in the center.
 
Grum.Man said:
Set it up to be flown from the right seat instead of the left seat, then the stick will be in your left hand.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I suppose with dual displays you could do that. Oh, but then the GPS would be on the left too; I'm thinking flight plan entry and changes. I guess Flightstream would be needed and make the updates on the iPad.

Nah, just get some side sticks.

I can use my left hand, and better than most right handed people. But it's certainly easier right handed.

Not much of an issue right now as I'm not planning on building one in the short term.
 
In 1981 Cessna evaluated the idea of a T182 with retractable nosewheel and fixed main gear. A former Cessna engineer and test pilot described the issues that led them to abandon the idea:

(1) SAFETY - When some pilots do their 'gear' check in a Cessna prior to landing, they look out the side window to verify 'main gear down.' Since the main gear was fixed (possibly with wheel fairings) this habit could result in nose-gear-up landings. I requested that experimental rig up the prototype in the hangar to support the nose of the airplane (by the engine hoist ring), retract the nose gear and lower the nose to just sky of contact with the floor. As you can imagine, the 'attitude' was dramatic and showed the seriousness of a 'nose-gear-up' landing.

(2) COSMETICS - The airplane, in my opinion was very ugly in flight with the nose-gear retracted and main-gear fixed. We did some performance testing, and the speed and climb differences between the standard T182 and the retractable nosegear T182 were 6-8 knots and 60 fpm, respectively. However, after the hangar demonstration in item (1) above, the program was canceled.​
 
Eheeem.....but, low winger's can't see the gear...up or down. That dog ain't hunt'n anyways......o_O
 
skier said:
Long-EZ does the same.
Click to expand...

There's a reason for that, and it's not primarily for more speed. The canard's CG is ahead of the main (rear) wing, and so is the pilot. If, on the ground, he leaves the nose gear extended and gets out of the airplane, the CG shifts back and it might fall on its tail. Dropping the nose to the ground moves the CG forward some, ahead of the mains, so it doesn't fall backward.

612830as.jpg
 
Grum.Man said:
Set it up to be flown from the right seat instead of the left seat, then the stick will be in your left hand.
Click to expand...

I read in one of the many articles about the Mako that the controls can be built in a more conventional manner (side stick and center throttle) if the owner desires. From what I've read, and maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds like the gear is fully automated up and down, with an override available. There are like 5 parameters that have to be met for retraction (weight off wheels, airspeed, altitude, throttle, etc.), and several for extension as well.
 
Pilawt said:
. We did some performance testing, and the speed and climb differences between the standard T182 and the retractable nosegear T182 were 6-8 knots and 60 fpm, respectively.
Click to expand...
So if that was the difference between the T182 and the TRN182 then what was the speed/climb difference between the TR182 and the TRN182?
 
wayne said:
Apparently the speed difference is biggest for the nose wheel due to being behind the prop. That makes sense. Lancair is claiming 10-12 knots gained by retracting the nose wheel. That sounds high to me as I thought Cirrus has said that the fixed gear is less of hit than that on the SR22.
Click to expand...
When I see these figures, I always wonder if we’re doing an apples to apples comparison. 10-12 knots sounds right for a pant-less nose wheel compared to retracted. Cirrus is probably comparing their well faired gear with retracted. Take the fairings and pants off and it’s probably more than 10-12 knots.

As many other RV-10 builders did, I broke my engine in by leaving the fairings and pants off initially. When I put them on I got an 18 knot speed increase. I guess that’s why fixed gear can make sense in this class of plane.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Bill Watson said:
Take the fairings and pants off and it’s probably more than 10-12 knots.
...

I guess that’s why fixed gear can make sense in this class of plane.
Click to expand...

Even if it is10-12 knots it's just bragging rights. Going from 180 to 190 knots is a ~6% increase. Sure it's nice, but isn't going to impact flight time much. That's about 7 min for a 400 nm trip.

Fixed gear is lighter too. Most planes in this category could do with a little more useful load.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
I'm interested. Love the article in AOPA Pilot. It's a lot of plane for the money. The builder assist program is attractive.
 
You sense from many of their design decisions a compulsion to think a bit outside the box. They also hedged all of those outside the box moves.

I like it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top