Increased gross weight Landing gear challenge

[Schllc]

My understanding is that the gross weight challenge is a function of the gear limitations. 
Is the gear not able to withstand the weight, or the spar, or the airframe, all three?

The fuselage and gear are chromoly tubing, and the spar extruded aluminum. 
Instant strength could be added by thickening  the wall sizes of both, pivot points could also increase in diameter if necessary. 
The size and shape of all the components would remain static, at least in overall measurements to maintain clearance and tolerance. 
The additional weight would be minimal increase on the grand scale, and you wouldn’t have to redesign half the plane for longer, more complicated and expensive new gear. 

It seems so obvious that I’m sure it’s been ruled out for a reason, Im just curious to know why. 

[Hank]

There's also stall speed to consider. It needs to remain less than 61 KTAS. Stall speed increases with weight . . . .

So two overlapping issues to deal with. Gross weight must increase substantially more than the weight of the new / modified components, too.

[carusoam]

Yes...

Every phase of the flight is affected by weight...

Some phases more than others...

Then there is the part where they hand all of this weight to the Mooney pilot...

Some days, the Mooney pilot is really good to the gear... and some days, he drops it from about 10’....

A Mooney has been proven to come out unscathed after that type of landing...

Now... if you add a few hundred more pounds... the stall speeds and the landing gear are going to need something to not have things get worse...

Lots of data available for how much a Mooney can be overloaded in its current state... often used for ferry purposes...

Lots of data available regarding the current landing gear... We (LBs) have a MGTW, that is different than our Max Gross Landing Weight...

Look to the history of increasing the size of Mooneys... the first LB (M20L) got skinny legs... with are a problem when trying to get a higher MGTW... so they are more UL limited then the next LB to be designed... (M20M)

PP thoughts only, expect some engineers will get a good work out doing the calculations and prototype building... plenty of prior art from previous Mooneys to look into...

Best regards,

-a-

[Hank]

Oh, and that stronger, beefier gear may need a stronger, beefier gear motor. And it has to fold neatly away into the same wing, even if the gear is a different size / shape. 

[carusoam]

10 minutes ago, Hank said:

Oh, and that stronger, beefier gear may need a stronger, beefier gear motor. And it has to fold neatly away into the same wing, even if the gear is a different size / shape. 

I watched a YouTube video for the 737’s landing gear...

Apparently, the old hole the new taller gear needs to fit in causes a challenge like we are discussing... 

 

So.... do we get the...

• Softer trailing link suspension
• Higher MGTW and Landing weight
• Extra HP to get this off the ground
• Prop with Beta mode or stopping distance
• Option A: engine sound - typical recip engine
• Option B: engine sound - typical whir of a continuous compressor....

How much weight can we add to our current MGTW before we exceed the 61kt stall speed?

The O has a stall speed in the landing configuration of 58kias... at max landing weight...

PP thoughts only...

-a-