[-]

Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit

Our Cessna 195 taildragger had castering main gear. There was a small detent keeping the wheels straight, but a small side-load made them pivot.

The fun part was deliberately kicking them into.pivot, while taxiing. We got the MOST puzzled calls from the tower. ""Uh... 42 Charlie, are you ... Ok?"

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Caster main gear? 😮😎 That could be so much fun at slow speeds with a ruddered vehicle, kinda similar to power sliding a FWD car 🤘

[-]

Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit

Yep. Also the mains were on a single bar of spring steel like "V" upside down, so no shock absorbers. Bouncy, bouncy if you got sloppy on touchdown.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Damn, that's cool, sounds like a ton of fun. Might not be ideal for some situations like high wind or something, but that's really cool

[-]

Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit

It was my father's idea to get a round engine plane. He spent the first part of his flying life behind R-2800s

[-]

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say, are you referring to a radial engine? Because those are awesome. They sound amazing and are just cool in general. A radial with caster main gear would be such a cool combo. Please correct me if I misunderstanding

[-]

Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit

The 195 had a Jacobs R-755 7-cylinder radial

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_195

Dad flew F4U Corsair with a R-2800 Double Wasp 18 cylinder radial.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_F4U_Corsair

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Oh my God, the double wasp is my favorite engine ever! R4360 wasp majors are my favorite engine and engine configuration ever. They are wasp based. I flew on a steerman that I believe May have been a wasp radio? This summer, it was one of the coolest things I've ever done. Corsair is a military plane, so you might not have been able to see it, but did you ever get to see his plane? I love hearing radials man, they are 👌

Thanks for sharing your experience dude, that's really cool. I love airplanes, everything about them. I wish I could make money with them because they are my passion. My vision is not good enough to be a pilot, it's good enough to be an FPV pilot, but that's a hell of a lot less responsibility and cost than an actual airplane lol.

I've considered AIM for aircraft maintenance certification, I wish I could find something that could combines My engineering and quality systems administration background with my love of aviation. Aerospace engineering is an entire 4-year degree, so that's kind of out of the question probably, but I could totally do some sort of master's degree or something because although aircraft maintenance is really cool, I'm not sure if it makes a lot of money. I'm sure there's potential, but I'm not familiar with the system

[-]

Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit

I was born too late to see his plane, from USMC VMF 312 squadron, though I do have the memorial model of it that my mother gave him for an anniversary.

As it happens I did get to "fly" a Convair 340, which has two 2800 engines. Dad wanted to shoot landings at OAK to keep current, and brought me along. (This was before I had any real training). He let me fly a couple approaches, which I sucked at. The cool thing was resting fingers on the yoke so I could feel how he flew his approaches - quite an education. That, and the power surge on takeoff when he turned on water injection. So cool.

In hindsight I can't believe anything we did that day could have been really legal, but it happened anyway. Rules were looser in those days I guess.

I too never pursued a flying career, because of bad eyesight. I barely qualified for PP-SEL.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Correction, the double wasp is not my favorite engine, wasp major is

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Additionally, I used speech to text, so please forgive my grammar and spelling

[-]

Knarlus@reddit

How is that controlled? Does a processor control the aft wheels in a way airliners have stabilized yaw? Or is it some manually controlled, or not at all like follow-axles?

[-]

ablino_blackbear@reddit

Disclaimer: just a maintainer, not a pilot.

The "swivel" is called crosswind crab. There's a "dial" the pilots use to steer front wheels and they can also rotate all 4 of the landing gears. There are calculations involved in determining the degrees. It's all mechanical and hydraulic from the "dial" to the cables and landing gears. Nothing on the B-52 is really automatic besides the stability augmentation system, like 65% of the autopilot, and heading systems, and maybe a handful of other systems. It's not a high tech aircraft

[-]

Limeaway510@reddit

Crosswind crab sounds like a wrestling finisher

[-]

Independent-Water321@reddit

"Big Buff has Ivan the Terrible locked up in the Crosswind Crab! He's gonna tap!"

[-]

Paul_The_Builder@reddit

The fact that the BUFF can fly with semi-automated systems that only rely on a handful of gyroscopes and magnetic compasses just makes it even more bad-ass.

[-]

AceThunderstone@reddit

They have this high tech chart in the cockpit that tells them what angle to dial in for the gear. It's just a manual setting.

[-]

Hourslikeminutes47@reddit

Nifty!

[-]

TommiHPunkt@reddit

1952 moment

[-]

RobertWilliamBarker@reddit

Lol about as high tech as it gets!

[-]

Select_Cantaloupe_62@reddit

Here's the ChatGPT copy-and-paste:

The B-52 Stratofortress features a unique swiveling landing gear system, officially called a crosswind landing gear system, which allows the aircraft to perform crosswind landings more effectively. Here's how it works and how it is operated:

Operation of the Swiveling Landing Gear

Landing Gear Layout:
The B-52 has four main landing gear assemblies, arranged in pairs under the fuselage and under each wing root.
Unlike conventional aircraft, the main landing gear can swivel up to 20 degrees left or right, independent of the aircraft's body.
Swiveling Mechanism:
Hydraulic actuators control the swiveling of the landing gear. These actuators are part of the aircraft's hydraulic system and are linked to the control systems in the cockpit.
The system is connected to a steering mechanism operated by the pilots.
Control in the Cockpit:
Pilots adjust the landing gear angle through a dedicated crosswind steering control knob or lever in the cockpit.
This control allows the pilots to set the desired angle for the landing gear based on wind direction and crosswind strength.
Coordination with the Aircraft's Heading:
The landing gear's swiveling capability enables the aircraft to maintain a crabbed (angled) approach and touchdown alignment with the runway during crosswind landings.
After touchdown, the landing gear aligns with the runway, absorbing side loads and preventing excessive stress on the aircraft structure.

Why It’s Needed

The B-52’s large wingspan and high-aspect-ratio wings make it particularly sensitive to crosswinds during landing. The swiveling gear allows the aircraft to safely operate under more challenging crosswind conditions than would be possible with a fixed-gear configuration.

This innovative system helps to reduce stress on the airframe and ensures safe operations in varied weather conditions, making it a critical feature of the B-52’s design.

[-]

Rolex_throwaway@reddit

Not commenting on things you don’t know anything about is free.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Everyone has Wikipedia my guy, it's okay if you aren't familiar with something lol 🤷‍♂️

[-]

whywouldthisnotbea@reddit

I would imagine it tracks ground heading and compares it to the planes heading and automatically adjusts.

[-]

NoShirt158@reddit

I wonder what the error percentage is and the lateral force the landing gear can handle.

“Hey steve, what’d you set the gear at?”

“Well i figured crosswinds X degrees opposed to the runway. But you know, there’s some rough wind gusts so i figured, mehh, 7 degrees? You think that’s right?”

“Well we’re about to find out. If you mess it up it’s another 3 days fixing it. ”

“9 degrees it is. Karaoke night tomorrow!”

Disclaimer: not an aviation engineer.

[-]

kona420@reddit

The pilot just sets it to the magnetic heading of the runway and it tracks that. Doesn't matter where the pilot is pointing and flying the aircraft, that runway is and will continue to be on that heading.

Good news, if the landing gear has an issue you've got a 0-90 ejection seat. Unless you're down below, then good luck to you!

[-]

kona420@reddit

My understand is that the pilot dials up (literally with a dial) the runway heading, and it simply uses a magnetic compass to keep the gear aligned. Could very well be done with the original electro-mechanical mechanism for all I know.

[-]

Select_Cantaloupe_62@reddit

This entire video is so fucking baller. Off-topic, the wings on the B-52 look comically large, especially when you compare it to the B-1 which has a roughly the same take-off weight

[-]

Frankk142@reddit

The B52 isn't a particularly big aircraft. See this comparaison.

[-]

SwitchMallGrabs@reddit

I’m always surprised at the size of the B1.

[-]

Select_Cantaloupe_62@reddit

Fantastic comparison, thank you, this helps fill the gaps in my brain. The way the wings are stooped make it *feel* like it's huge, similar to something like the Antonov, but it's far smaller than I realized.

[-]

antariusz@reddit

I mean, all of those are huge planes. “Well it’s smaller than a c5” doesn’t seem like a compelling argument to me.

[-]

RespectTheH@reddit

Perspective makes it weird though - I don't know how to explain it but the body to wing ratio changes how my brain processes the distance/size, so a B52 will seem very far away but still have huge wings, while a C17 just looks enormous which makes it seem like it's much closer than it is.

I guess you could say the B52 looks like a giagantic aircraft that's far away, but the C17 looks gigantic but nearby, it's odd.

[-]

Any-Technician-1371@reddit

It’s the same trick of perspective that makes the Disney castle look really tall and far away even when you’re standing quite close. It’s all about the scale and proportions. B52 fuselage is fairly skinny, making the wings look much bigger/longer by comparison.

[-]

seidmel19@reddit

If anyone's ever at the Seattle Museum of Flight, they now have a park with a B52 that's directly behind the first 747. Really put the size difference into perspective for me!

[-]

probablyfixingstuff@reddit

It is a big aircraft. The c-5 is just… bigger

[-]

_Poopsnack_@reddit

I was gunna say, well just about everything looks small next to a C5 lol

[-]

mrvarmint@reddit

WWII size aircraft, WWII size tail

[-]

gcwposs@reddit

HOWEVER, when you start talking about its weight vs its empty weight (185k lbs) vs its max take off weight (488k lbs) your eyes get big… 👀

[-]

planes01@reddit

I used to think they were big too until up close at an airshow.not much bigger than a fighter

[-]

HumpyPocock@reddit

RE: comparisons

Boeing B-52 vs Boeing 747 via Spencer Wilmot

As an aside, the bracket-ish dealios, not to mention the presence of the NASA meatball logo, indicate that’s one of NASA’s old 747-based Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, spent a few decades as a designated giver of piggybacks to the Shuttle Orbiter.

Now, to return to sizing up Bombers…

RE: bomber… BIG?

B-2 Spirit can be an odd one to gauge as it’s rather short in both height (5m) and length (21m) while at the same time having rather significant 52m wingspan, about 4m less than the BUFF. Lack of a tail plus the dimensions as noted results in the B-2 Spirit looking especially small in profile. For example, refuelling from an RAAF KC-30, a modified Airbus A330, the B-2 looks TINY.

USAF and RAAF in formation during bilateral training provides a nice reference on the relative scale of the B-2 Spirit, not to mention just a fucking spectacular series of photos IMO.

an RAAF E-7A Wedgetail
two USAF B-2 Spirits
four RAAF EA-18G Growlers

Links via PACAF —

E-7A Wedgetail is based on a 737 NG if that helps with calibration somewhat, for all intents and purposes it’s a 737-700 with 737-800 wings, thus 34m wingspan.

[-]

Whatdoesgrassfeelike@reddit

As someone who worked on them for 7 years. I can assure you, wing walking them is oh so fun.

[-]

Slungus_Bunny@reddit

Wish I could.

[-]

Beahner@reddit

There has been a -52 on display at the airport near me as the airport used to be a SAC base. You can walk all around it.

The wings look so large not just because they are a good size, but because they look even larger against the fuselage. The fuselage is pretty long, but also pretty thin and the combo of that fuselage and those wings is jarring up close at first.

It was absolutely by fantastic design, but it’s always looked odd in person to me.

[-]

Poltergeist97@reddit

Rocky Mountain Air Museum? Was just there visiting a few weeks ago! Loved seeing a B-52 and B-1 in person.

[-]

Beahner@reddit

No. But I’ll have to check it out next time I’m out that way.

This is at Orlando International. It used to be McCoy AFB and a SAC base.

[-]

Poltergeist97@reddit

Gotcha! Yeah I was just in Denver visiting friends and they have a great selection. Just got a Mig-23 I was able to see the cockpit of because of the friendly staff noticing me freaking out over it lmao

There is also a guy who does a great video series covering the airframes at that museum on YouTube. Didn't connect the dots it was the same place until a little TV playing those videos there made me aware.

[-]

IISerpentineII@reddit

Check out the wings on the B-36

[-]

Type-21@reddit

The B-1 uses the lift generated by its wings for lots of payload capacity. The B-52 uses it to strap on some more old inefficient heavy engines. So yeah. Just a few decades of different tech

[-]

rsta223@reddit

The engine weight isn't the reason. The max takeoff weight is actually a bit lower for the B-1 too (477k vs 488k pounds). It's purely just design trade-offs and the realistic payload of both is quite similar (and their empty and max weights are also very similar).

[-]

Battlemanager@reddit

Why don't all heavies have this tech?

[-]

Secondarymins@reddit

Because crosswind landing aren't difficult in a heavy. Crab and kick in the flare. This solution is due to the wing clearance

[-]

LevitatingTurtles@reddit

Weight and complexity, I assume.

[-]

Battlemanager@reddit

Maybe, but this jet was designed in the 50s. It can't be that complicated.

[-]

rsta223@reddit

It is heavy though, and if you don't need it, that's a bunch of extra inefficiency that would better be used for extra fuel or payload.

[-]

Battlemanager@reddit

True

[-]

TestyBoy13@reddit

Designed in the 50s, modernized in the 60s, modernized in the 90s, modernized in the 20s

At this point, it’s gotta be a nightmare of complexity in there.

[-]

zincboymc@reddit

That plane is going to outlive us all.

[-]

Strained-Spine-Hill@reddit

As they say, Grandpa BUFF was made for WWIII, and he has no plans on missing it.

[-]

Paul_The_Builder@reddit

[

[-]

Telepornographer@reddit

It's almost like a modern-day ship of Theseus.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Hell yeah 🤘 I believe that atoms in the human body also cycle through

[-]

get_MEAN_yall@reddit

For long range classified military operations it's not like you can just divert to a different airport, so I assume it's common for B52s that there is only 1 viable runway and they would therefore have to be able to land in any weather conditions.

[-]

Messyfingers@reddit

Minimizing risks of losing a bomber carrying nuclear weapons by guaranteeing you could land at certain airfields probably was a consideration as well.

[-]

kona420@reddit

Because it's only necessary due to the undersized rudder. The B52 wouldn't pass FAA qualification today as it's rudder authority is inadequate for many engine out scenarios let alone landing in heavy crosswinds.

[-]

No-Total-4896@reddit

Don't know about the rudder, but the vertical stabilizer certainly is not undersized.

[-]

rsta223@reddit

Relative to what you'd see on a quad of similar size, and especially relative to a twin, the vertical stabilizer is quite small.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Dang, for whatever reason, I used to think that the whole assembly was called the rudder, but your comment made me really think about how it works. The vertical stab is huge on the B-52 😮 neat stuff!

[-]

Paul_The_Builder@reddit

Who needs rudder authority when you have 8 freakin engines, amirite?

[-]

kona420@reddit

Apparently as there have been recorded mishaps with 4 engines out and the aircraft recovered.

[-]

Hugh-Mungus-Richard@reddit

The dreaded 7 engine approach, eh?

[-]

No_More_Dakka@reddit

Deja vu
I've just been in this place before
Higher on the street
And I know it's my time to go
Calling you and the search is a mystery
Standing on my feet
It's so hard when I try to be me uoooh!

[-]

ChefEmbarrassed1621@reddit

I still love to watch that big monster fly

[-]

Imperial_12345@reddit

How I ride my bike after a crash

[-]

nighthawke75@reddit

Crosswind limit is 41kts at 90 degrees to the runway. About as most as I've seen any aircraft can handle. The bicycle arrangement goes a long way to handle that.

[-]

FingFrenchy@reddit

I'm sorry, what the hell?! How did I not know about this? That's amazing, what incredible utility to be able to land in any cross wind condition.

[-]

whiteboardlist@reddit

Had to have a solution to the tiny rudder

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

I believe that it is also used to clear narrow taxiways (and possibly help add some room for error on narrow runways?) because the wings are so long

[-]

Paul_The_Builder@reddit

Another reddit comment says the crosswind limitation is 41 knots crosswind component at max gross landing weight. That's pretty insane.

[-]

FugginOld@reddit

Crab landing mode activated

[-]

Lonely_Ad4551@reddit

The BUFF looks like it was designed to end the world.

[-]

pitchfork_2000@reddit

That’s some serious swivel engineering

[-]

mohawk990@reddit

Screw GMC. This is the original crab walk. Go BUFF!

[-]

superimu@reddit

Eurobeat intensifies...

[-]

bacondesign@reddit

Deja vu

[-]

waitinp@reddit

I've just been in this place before

[-]

tar--palantir@reddit

And I know it's my time to go

[-]

homer-price@reddit

Will the updated engines for the b-52 have reverse thrust?

[-]

_MartinoLopez@reddit

Oh this is how my student try to land a 172.

[-]

Legitimate-Royal3540@reddit

The wingtip support wheels do not swivel. If they contact the runway while crabbing, will they break off or can they take the sideways rolling movement?

[-]

KC5SDY@reddit

She just cannot be beaten by any means.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

It's a very thoroughly engineered/overbuilt plane, not without it's flaws if course, but certainly has some very solid, timeless elements from years of bomber refinement

[-]

KC5SDY@reddit

Oh, absolutely. The old BUFF is that grandfather who is just as strong and able as he was in his youth and shows it every single day. It will be very hard to replace it. Granted, we may never need the capability of what it can and has done but, just keeping it around is enough to keep people on notice.

[-]

bumbumpopsicle@reddit

Must be hard to keep centerline with the cockpit so far angled away from direction of travel.

[-]

DominicRo@reddit

Beautiful touchdown.

[-]

pupeno@reddit

I always wondered why airplanes didn't do this. I guess one does.

[-]

CellistTh@reddit

Did dude just drift a -52???

[-]

mborbey@reddit

Nobody:

B52: OMWTFYB

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

in style

[-]

Resident_Proposal_57@reddit

Why is it moving sideways.

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

To counteract crosswind mainly. (also potentially due to relatively narrow horizontal clearance of a runway.) Diagonal movement of wheeled vehicles in this way is sometimes called "crab walking" and can be used for this reason among others including obstacle avoidance. 👍

[-]

missingsoldier@reddit

why do they need the parachute? is it because of the weight of the plane?

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Yes, plus the length of the runway may also necessitate additional stopping power

[-]

Therealdickdangler@reddit

Wouldn’t the parachute be pulled straight with the plane instead of the crosswind unless it’s like 100 mph+ crosswind?

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

Somewhat, yeah. The force is basically point source based on how the chute is deployed, so as long as the body it is acting on is sturdy, it should be able to handle an askew force. The B-52 is apparently VERY sturdy, so no prob here. Lol

[-]

HAILsexySATAN@reddit

The planes crab walking

[-]

sexrex_1@reddit

What is the purpose of this function?

[-]

2beatenup@reddit

Land sideways

[-]

AdRepresentative8236@reddit

And clear obstacles on narrow taxiways

[-]

TimeVendor@reddit

That’s one superb landing video.

[-]

CaptainSur@reddit

To me this appears to be a high pilot skill requirement maneuver given that this is all manual as I understand it from reading comments to this post. This and watching those Canadian water bombers and their fancy maneuvering while water bombing in LA has made it an enjoyable week of plane watching.

[-]

BantaySalakay21@reddit

Grampa Buff drifting over here!

[-]

thisdogofmine@reddit

This is a fantastic aircraft. I love it.

[-]

slvrpltd@reddit

it wanted to look right into the camera

[-]

TweakJK@reddit

I worked at a transient line on a Navy base for a while. When the buffs would come by, we had to walk out and escort it in as it taxi'd by all the taxiway signs because the wingspan was wider than the distance between the signs. They would crab walk through to give us some more room. We'd stand on the signs and slap the wingtips.

[-]

The F&F team will have done everything else by movie 16.

[-]

jbabiak@reddit

♫♫♫♫
I wonder if you know
How they live in Tokyo

[-]

ITMCBHPBGF@reddit

"oooh, yeah, baby, grandpa's got the rizz! any you fly honeys wanna see my fire moves?!"

lol

[-]