Trailing link landing gear is known to be wonderful in terms of both landing performance and taxi performance, and my experience with my Commander confirms that — it’s the best ground-handling plane I’ve been in, and makes even the craziest landings bounce-free.
So… why? Compared to simple oleo gear, I’m aware of three characteristics. First, the total travel is higher than most simple oleo struts. Second, the suspension angle is tilted back of vertical. Third, that the suspension angle changes with stroke.
The first two of these seem trivial to achieve with a simple oleo strut, although potentially at a weight penalty compared to trailing link. The third less so, as it’s a property of the short link arm.
So, would an oleo with well-chosen rates, stroke equal to a trailing link, and an inclined strut (how inclined?) feel as good as the trailing link I’m used to? Or does that third factor, or something else, really make that difference?
So… why? Compared to simple oleo gear, I’m aware of three characteristics. First, the total travel is higher than most simple oleo struts. Second, the suspension angle is tilted back of vertical. Third, that the suspension angle changes with stroke.
The first two of these seem trivial to achieve with a simple oleo strut, although potentially at a weight penalty compared to trailing link. The third less so, as it’s a property of the short link arm.
So, would an oleo with well-chosen rates, stroke equal to a trailing link, and an inclined strut (how inclined?) feel as good as the trailing link I’m used to? Or does that third factor, or something else, really make that difference?
