Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

King Air B200 Landing gear questions

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
propsarebest said:
if you get one with the hi float gear, get the Raisback gear doors. You will be glad you did.
Any idea what these run?($)
 
prpjt said:
KA 200's after serial # BB1192 are hydraulic gear (with a few exceptions), those previous were mechanical. There are quite a few moving parts in the mechanical system, think lots of weak links and increased maint. cost.

High float gear uses a lower pressure ( larger ) tire. The high float tires don't retract all the way into the well (Raisebeck solves this. Some say the high float gives a better landing but its just a different technique.

I prefer the standard gear due to the few extra knots speed and lower accel stop/go numbers.

Hope that helps.

Thanks, thats exactly what I was looking for.
 
... As a matter of fact, my last employer had a 99 with mech gear fail. The pilots chopped through the floorbard with a crash axe and pulled the chain through to get a stuck nose gear down. It worked, but the guy cut his hands up to hell! ...

Between the axe and the chain, sounds like a good way to lose fingers ... hands ... or worse. :eek: Just about as stoopid as the guy on the car (and I still haven't decided which of those three -- the driver, the pilot, or the guy with the skyhook -- was the most stoopidest.)

FWIW, I watched a coworker land a 99 with jammed nose gear at BUR years ago. Damage was minimal. IIRC, he feathered the props; maintenance later decided it might have been better if he hadn't done that.
 
81Horse said:
FWIW, I watched a coworker land a 99 with jammed nose gear at BUR years ago. Damage was minimal. IIRC, he feathered the props; maintenance later decided it might have been better if he hadn't done that.

Specifically, why?
 
A flat prop (low pitch) will bend backwards and absorb energy as it bends. A feathered prop on a forward moving aircraft will not bend as easily when it strikes the ground and tends to transfer energy. Creates a bending moment at the hub. That's the theory anyway.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top