In the interest of simultaneously re-inventing the wheel and further delaying completion We. have been kicking around the idea of making composite gear. What research I have done seems to indicate that it would be easier and cheaper to build the LEXL for round trip lunar missions, but here we go......
You all spew coffee and scream: "Rick....Why would you even consider such a thing, you raving lunatic?" (Then fall to the floor, laughing until your sides ache) Well, we're always thinking of ways to improve everything. I figure that even if the required structure weighs the same as the plans built gear it would have aerodynamic benefits. (And remember: we're just CONSIDERING such a thing. In all probability we'll end up using the tried and true, cheap, easy 100 year old design, so such aeronautical heresy must be forgiven in the end if no actual aeronautical sin was committed)
Now, having said all that, I know for a fact it has been done, cuz, Youtube/ Putt-Putt. What I don't know is.......pretty much everything else. To wit: What kind of material was used? How was it constructed? What did it weigh? What about longevity? Did it start cracking after 100 landings? What modifications were required for the fuselage structure? How did he come up with dimensions, considering aircraft weight and stresses? Etc. Etc. Etc.
We're thinking of using a laid up epoxy/ carbon fiber arrangement with a constant curve from fuselage to axle. Here's where it gets sticky, (No pun intended), because I figure in order to get the strength and flexibility needed the weight will be prohibitive and I might as well just call up Grove and order an aluminum variant because it'll weigh the same and be a lot less work.Then when Grove tells me the cost, I really start to appreciate the simple, cheap, sturdy Leonard version and start cutting tubing and ordering springs.
Were I a rocket scientist I could understand the calculations needed to ensure success in the design. As it is, I rely on the old Mark 1, Mod 0 eyeball for things and we'd be using the TLAR method of engineering the actual layup, trying to keep things as simple and cheap as possible. I've done enough research to note the good- better- best designs, and they aren't always in keeping with simple and cheap, but as with all things airplane, there's trade offs. I also note that most of the designs are for "real" airplanes with considerably higher GW's than our beloved Eagle, so the stresses are somewhat reduced in scale.
Our general thinking is to construct the gear in such a way that it starts out a little overbuilt/ too stiff, and by reducing the width of the gear legs we could "adjust" how the gear responds to loading.(Maybe allowing a normal stance at 1 G, (About 500 lbs), yet flexing only enough at 3 G to ensure propeller clearance and such, (About 1500 lbs)
Thinking about all the variables and requirements does seem to make this the stuff of pipe dreams, but again, we're just thinking, so your own thoughts would be greatly appreciated. And if in the end you just say: "Sorry, Rick, but the guys with the straight jackets are enroute", then I'll understand.
