Retracts vs Fixed gear

[rbridges]

The RV10 is fixed gear only and that's just fine.

After building it and now maintaining it the advantages are obvious despite the lack of any comparison. I can do 155 (economy) to 165 with gear fixed in place... and I NEVER have to worry about a gear up anything.

There are those that have and those that will and those that can't. I like can't and the speeds are just what I signed up for.

I love the RV10 but that would probably be a 170-180 knot plane with retract.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I get awfully tempted by a Mooney sometimes. Similar in price to a decent Cherokee 180. So if the Cherokee would cost ~$900 a year, what would a Mooney cost? I have about 275TT and 1 hour of retract.

I pay about 2% with 150 hours, you would need 10 hours of transition training, plus 10 hours of solo time before taking passengers.

I like retracts because they don't look like trainers, it's a real airplane

 

[Theboys]

One of the reasons I went retract was I wanted to be able to operate off grass strips. The travel plane I had before with fixed gear was only airworthy with its pants on which only gave about 2 inches of ground clearance. I found out the hard way a pant for it was 800$

 

[TUPilot]

I did an analysis a while back on a Cherokee 180 versus an Arrow 180 in terms of cost per mile. General result was the Arrow was 10 to 15 knots faster on a similar fuel flow, resulting in slightly shorter flight times; the time savings offset the cost of the gear swing and normal care of the gear, but not any major gear issues.

Additionally, insurance would be a big factor, but varies a lot from pilot to pilot. In general, though, overall cost of ownership for a specific mission is very close, with the Arrow being slightly more. The delta increases for low time pilots or if you are unfortunate and run into a major gear issue.

 

[Hank S]

Another interesting comparison:

I regularly flew from S FL to N GA in my Tiger. About 5 hours @ 132 k. At 10 gph and with 50 gals, almost always required a fuel stop.

Moved up to a Cirrus SR22. Same trip was about 3 1/2 hours at about 170k. LOP at about 13.5 gph, actually burned less fuel to save an hour and a half flight time plus eliminating a fuel stop.

Again, kudos to Cirrus for that kind of efficiency, especially since the Tiger itself is no slouch in that department.

Really off topic now, but before I let my medical lapse and settled on Light Sport, I considered a Maule taildragger of some description. The amount of fuel required for any given trip length was depressingly high. Though admittedly, efficient crosscountries are not what a Maule is built for.

Wow! I flew from far west WV to FXE and back, about 6 hours each way. My C is 180 hp, carbureted and won't go LOP. Stopped once each way.

Don't have fuel records from that trip any more, but I generally get 9gph block time at 140 knots. The electric gear is stone simple, and with Instruments and > 100 hours make&model, insurance is now <$1000/year. The first year sucked, plan to fly at least 100 hours before renewal, you'll save more than the fuel costs.

 

[docmirror]

When I see an advanced plane with a fixed gear, I typically wonder; 'how much faster would it be if they tucked the gangly wheels in?'

Since drag increases at the cube of speed, no matter how streamlined you make it, putting it inside the plane and closing the door is a massive reduction in drag.

 

[JohnAJohnson]

If you had the same exact plane but you had a choice between fixed gear and retractable gear which one would you choose and why?

When I was looking, there were two Cessna Cardinals for sale, with the owners living next door to each other. One was a 177B, the other was a 177RG. Avionics, engine and hull times, etc., were comparable. The RG needed paint, but they were priced close.

My mission is pancake and burger runs, and one or two ~400 mile (one way) XCs a year. I thought I'd be putting 50-60 hours per year on the plane and that's what it has worked out to.

I wanted the retract because:

- They look so damn cool
- It's a big boy airplane, and not a trainer
- They go fast
- They look so damn cool

But I chose the fixed gear because:

- There was not enough travel to make up, in fuel savings, the extra cost of gear maintenance and insurance.
- With 50-60 hours of flying per year, I wouldn't be flying enough to rote memorize every step of operating the airplane for at least a couple of years, and you only need to forget to put the gear down once to learn a very expensive lesson.
- For the pancake run flying I mostly do, simple is preferable for a nice pleasure flight

 

[brian]]

When I see an advanced plane with a fixed gear, I typically wonder; 'how much faster would it be if they tucked the gangly wheels in?'

Since drag increases at the cube of speed, no matter how streamlined you make it, putting it inside the plane and closing the door is a massive reduction in drag.

Always heard it would add weight to fold the gear. But with the speeds the SR22s are making, it really makes me wonder what the speed would be if they did raise the gear ..



I did notice they fixed both the gear problem and the tail problem on the SR22 with the Vision Jet

 

[JHW]

Always heard it would add weight to fold the gear. But with the speeds the SR22s are making, it really makes me wonder what the speed would be if they did raise the gear ..



I did notice they fixed both the gear problem and the tail problem on the SR22 with the Vision Jet

it's a little easier to package lightweight folding gear when it doesn't have to be long enough for prop clearance. Look at the tiny gear under the sonex jet

 

[Henning]

I'm not sure if this has been posted or not but I was wondering. If you had the same exact plane but you had a choice between fixed gear and retractable gear which one would you choose and why? I understand there is a bit of speed difference.

Retract for the efficiency. I'll save far more money in fuel over the ownership cycle than the gear will cost me.

 

[Henning]

Always heard it would add weight to fold the gear. But with the speeds the SR22s are making, it really makes me wonder what the speed would be if they did raise the gear ..



I did notice they fixed both the gear problem and the tail problem on the SR22 with the Vision Jet

About 15-20 kts is the typical gain at that horsepower.

 

[docmirror]

One of the funniest aviation things I ever saw was the low pass at the airshow by the BD5J and his retract/extension of the gear. I guess it has a little handle and the whole thing pops down or up like a Jack-in-the-box. He was flying down the centerline, about 50 feet up and 'bloop!' the gear pops out. 'Bloop!' again and it goes in. Does that a few more times in the space of 1000 feet or so down the runway. All the time he's on the mic; "gear-down. gear-up. watch close!". I was impressed.

 

[nddons]

Chicks dig retracts.



QED.

My wife thought it was super cool to yank the gear up in a Cutlass.

 

[brien23]

Only two types of people fly retracts those who have landed wheels up and those about to land with the wheels up.

 

[Fearless Tower]

One of the reasons I went retract was I wanted to be able to operate off grass strips. The travel plane I had before with fixed gear was only airworthy with its pants on which only gave about 2 inches of ground clearance. I found out the hard way a pant for it was 800$

Had to have the wheel pants on to be airworthy? What airplane?

 

[Henning]

Had to have the wheel pants on to be airworthy? What airplane?

Probably a Cirrus or Cessnubia, I remember hearing that about them.

 

[Theboys]

Only two types of people fly retracts those who have landed wheels up and those about to land with the wheels up.

I disagree with this common statement. I am not sure I could get slow enough to land without putting gear down.
Also plane that had to have pants to be airworthy was a columbia.

 

[brian]]

I disagree with this common statement. I am not sure I could get slow enough to land without putting gear down.
Also plane that had to have pants to be airworthy was a columbia.

Yea, not sure about this as well. It happens and good people here on this board have had the misfortune.

All I can say is slowing my V-Tail down to the 100MPH gear speed takes a little effort in the pattern. Pointing the nose down at the runway can get a little exciting. The common saying is that the flaps have to be down for a gear up in these old Bos. Not sure about other retracs.

 

[jordane93]

I disagree with this common statement. I am not sure I could get slow enough to land without putting gear down.
Also plane that had to have pants to be airworthy was a columbia.

Never say never!

 

[Hank S]

Yea, not sure about this as well. It happens and good people here on this board have had the misfortune.

All I can say is slowing my V-Tail down to the 100MPH gear speed takes a little effort in the pattern. Pointing the nose down at the runway can get a little exciting. The common saying is that the flaps have to be down for a gear up in these old Bos. Not sure about other retracs.

Flap speed = 125 mph
Gear speed =120 mph
Pattern speed = 90 mph
Final speed = 85 mph Max (weight dependent)
Flare speed = 70 mph

Flaps go out first, gear abeam intended point of landing. Base entries and straight ins are, of course, different. Gear being down helps with speed control

Most gear ups happen when the pilot is distracted or something affects the normal landing routines.

 

[Henning]

I disagree with this common statement. I am not sure I could get slow enough to land without putting gear down.
Also plane that had to have pants to be airworthy was a columbia.

Hell, I've landed gear up and I disagree with the statement. Just because everyone can make that particular mistake doesn't mean everyone will. Also just because someone doesn't land gear up doesn't mean they won't make a fatal error.

As far as an aviation mistake goes, a gear up is the most painless. I even made a couple of good FSDO contacts out of it.

 

[Hank S]

Only two types of people fly retracts those who have landed wheels up and those about to land with the wheels up.

You could also say the following:

Only two types of people fly airplanes, those who have landed engine out and those who are about to land with the engine out.

Ready to turn in your certificate?

 

[Bill Watson]

I love the RV10 but that would probably be a 170-180 knot plane with retract.

No doubt. But the build and the maintenance would have been significantly more involved. I would have done it in exchange for a great 4 place homebuilt but prefer not having to. Retracts have some 'macho' value but simplicity is its own reward.

RV10 builders generally get to experience the performance improvement that faired gear legs and wheel pants provide, and it's pretty amazing. The suggestion is to do the initial flights without pants in order to slow the plane down and keep engine temps up for the break-in. When you put them on you find quite a difference - >10 knots. RV10 speed increase

Then there is this...

One of the reasons I went retract was I wanted to be able to operate off grass strips. The travel plane I had before with fixed gear was only airworthy with its pants on which only gave about 2 inches of ground clearance. I found out the hard way a pant for it was 800$

I guess it varies by plane. When I first approached Lancair at a Sun & Fun and told them I was interested in building one to operate off my relatively rough grass field, they suggested I not do it due to the retracts. The guy literally turned his back to me and I quickly joined the RV crowd.

OTOH, my '10 pants are cut closer to the ground than any production plane and, well I've had a repair and an unrepaired crack but they've held up much better than I would have thought. It's quite amazing actually.

 

[rbridges]

Flap speed = 125 mph
Gear speed =120 mph
Pattern speed = 90 mph
Final speed = 85 mph Max (weight dependent)
Flare speed = 70 mph

Flaps go out first, gear abeam intended point of landing. Base entries and straight ins are, of course, different. Gear being down helps with speed control

Most gear ups happen when the pilot is distracted or something affects the normal landing routines.

they must have reinforced the flap in later short body mooneys. My gear down speed is much higher than the flap speed.

 

[N3368K]

I'll fly my RV-4 if it is a bit squishy on our grass field when I'll leave the Swift in the hangar. Cleaning mud out of the wheelwells suck. BTW, the RV with 160hp and a wood prop will absolutely blow the doors off my 145hp Swift with metal prop. RV will also out climb it almost 2X rate of climb. So much for retracts.


Jim R
Collierville, TN

N7155H--1946 Piper J-3 Cub
N3368K--1946 Globe GC-1B Swift
N4WJ--1994 Van's RV-4

 

[docmirror]

All I can say is slowing my V-Tail down to the 100MPH gear speed takes a little effort in the pattern. Pointing the nose down at the runway can get a little exciting. The common saying is that the flaps have to be down for a gear up in these old Bos. Not sure about other retracs.

Pretty sure your gear max is 125MPH, or ~110Kts. However, if you just meant that your preferred speed is 100 I can understand that. Due to the age of the gear, and motor, I often don't operate my gear until ~80-85MPH.

 

[mondtster]

I disagree with this common statement. I am not sure I could get slow enough to land without putting gear down.
Also plane that had to have pants to be airworthy was a columbia.

Depends on the airplane. It is easy to get a draggy airplane like an Aztec down slow enough to land with the wheels up. It is more challenging to do it in something like a Baron, but not impossible.

they must have reinforced the flap in later short body mooneys. My gear down speed is much higher than the flap speed.

What model year is your plane and what is your gear extension speed? I thought that Mooneys even as new as the J models had relatively low gear extension speeds, however my experience with newer Mooneys is limited.

 

[mondtster]

Pretty sure your gear max is 125MPH, or ~110Kts. However, if you just meant that your preferred speed is 100 I can understand that. Due to the age of the gear, and motor, I often don't operate my gear until ~80-85MPH.

The gear speed was lower on the older planes. I believe that Brian is correct on the 100mph figure.

 

[Pilawt]

Which planes came in both fixed and retract versions?

The most similar fixed/retract counterparts I can think of are the Saratogas -- PA-32-301 and PA-32R-301, and the turbo versions PA-32-301T and PA-32R-301T.

There's also the 1980 PA-28-201T Turbo Dakota and the 1978 PA-28R-201T Turbo Arrow III.

 

[Marky_24]

A Cirrus has fixed gear and is still able to achieve incredible performance numbers that can compete with retracts in similar categories, so I would say it would depend on the plane for me.

Cirrus sr22t=213kts with 310hp
Mooney acclaim type s=242kts with 280hp
If you want to go fast, fold up them legs.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Depends on the airplane. It is easy to get a draggy airplane like an Aztec down slow enough to land with the wheels up. It is more challenging to do it in something like a Baron, but not impossible.







What model year is your plane and what is your gear extension speed? I thought that Mooneys even as new as the J models had relatively low gear extension speeds, however my experience with newer Mooneys is limited.

78 and later have higher Vge speeds

 

[brian]]

The gear speed was lower on the older planes. I believe that Brian is correct on the 100mph figure.

POH says 100MPH for both flaps and gear. I have a beech A&P that says with all the mods to mine I could probably hang the gear out at 120MPH. Since I'm paying the bills, 100MPH it is.

The E Series guru says gear befor flaps on the way down (and flaps befor gear on the way up), and you can procedurally help yourself out - especially in a slick airplane like a VTail. A low pass wit the gear up has a totally different sight picture than when the gear is hanging out. Something I might carry to any other retrac I find myself in....

 

[Hank S]

they must have reinforced the flap in later short body mooneys. My gear down speed is much higher than the flap speed.

I think it was 67-68. The whole flap attachment was redone; don't recall which has a sub-spar for the flaps. Flaps go to Takeoff around 120, and I use the gear to start descending in the pattern or 1½ dots high on glideslope.

When the J's were "improved" as already noted, gear speed went to about 130 knots, where as my 120 mph is 104 knots. Must be nice, they get to use gear as air brakes.

 

[FastEddieB]

Cirrus sr22t=213kts with 310hp
Mooney acclaim type s=242kts with 280hp
If you want to go fast, fold up them legs.

Admittedly, since drag goes up as the square of the velocity increase, pulling up the gear is a much bigger deal at 242 kts than 213 kts.

And for an apples to apples comparison, one would need to compare them with well-faired fixed gear on the Mooney.

That said, and to be fair, one should also compare the size of the passenger compartment as it relates to frontal area. In the Cirrus you're sitting upright in a Lexus with lots of elbow room. In the Mooney, it's more like a Corvette.

Nothing wrong with that at all, and not a dig.

One given is that Mooneys are still flying after 50 years of service. Maybe Cirrus' will be around in 50 years - we'll see. Here's some video I shot about a week ago of a friend's '66 model Mooney:

http://youtu.be/PX2OZg60DAo

 

[Theboys]

On my plane I do pretty much full power descent which usually is between 180 and 200 kts indicated. I use my gear as speed brakes. My gear and flap speed is 170kts. I like 100 in downwind and 80 on final.

 

[Jthamilton]

Personally I'm preparing to sell my 98 Saratoga II TC, after paying insurance and getting ready to write check for annual I've decided to go back to 182.

I love the Toga and will fly it right up till the time it sells, I plan 175 knots and can stretch out in for the crew long flights I've taken in it.

Bought run out 182, doing engine upgrade on it in near future and will lose 15 knots, less maintenance, lower insurance and it is more appropriate for my mission. However I wish my mission of frequent trips back home worked out!

The 182 more appropriate to fly low and slow around the mountains but it is going to suck getting rid of that Turbo.

 

[UngaWunga]

Admittedly, since drag goes up as the square of the velocity increase, pulling up the gear is a much bigger deal at 242 kts than 213 kts.

And for an apples to apples comparison, one would need to compare them with well-faired fixed gear on the Mooney.

That said, and to be fair, one should also compare the size of the passenger compartment as it relates to frontal area. In the Cirrus you're sitting upright in a Lexus with lots of elbow room. In the Mooney, it's more like a Corvette.

Nothing wrong with that at all, and not a dig.

One given is that Mooneys are still flying after 50 years of service. Maybe Cirrus' will be around in 50 years - we'll see. Here's some video I shot about a week ago of a friend's '66 model Mooney:

http://youtu.be/PX2OZg60DAo

Nice. How long is that runway?

 

[FastEddieB]

Nice. How long is that runway?

It's Kings Port in Lake Placid, FL - FD72

Looks like 2,500'.

I'm pleased to say I taught that pilot to fly from hour one - in my Citabria in the early 1980's. I think he turned out well.

 

[Rcmutz]

Those open wheel wells are pretty draggy. You might compare an old M20C with an M20D Master; or a '68 Cherokee 180 with a 180-hp Arrow; or an early '80s Piper Saratoga with an otherwise-similar Saratoga SP.

My '78 172N (180 hp) gives up less than ten knots in cruise to a similarly-powered 172RG.

And my 180hp Grumman Tiger is as fast as some of the older M20C's with the gear up! :wink2:

 

[Rcmutz]

When I was looking, there were two Cessna Cardinals for sale, with the owners living next door to each other. One was a 177B, the other was a 177RG. Avionics, engine and hull times, etc., were comparable. The RG needed paint, but they were priced close.

My mission is pancake and burger runs, and one or two ~400 mile (one way) XCs a year. I thought I'd be putting 50-60 hours per year on the plane and that's what it has worked out to.

I wanted the retract because:

- They look so damn cool
- It's a big boy airplane, and not a trainer
- They go fast
- They look so damn cool

But I chose the fixed gear because:

- There was not enough travel to make up, in fuel savings, the extra cost of gear maintenance and insurance.
- With 50-60 hours of flying per year, I wouldn't be flying enough to rote memorize every step of operating the airplane for at least a couple of years, and you only need to forget to put the gear down once to learn a very expensive lesson.
- For the pancake run flying I mostly do, simple is preferable for a nice pleasure flight