Why is the Constellation's nose gear so long? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat are the advantages of more than 4 propeller blades?Why does landing gear retract with an offset?Is it possible to control an aircraft on the runway if the nose gear collapses?Why is the Eurofighters nose gear door shorter than the bay?Why does landing gear extend backwards and retract forwards?How can I calculate the force on the nose gear at landing?What is the typical weight distribution ratio between nose gear and main gear?Why is the nose landing gear of a Rutan Vari Eze up during parking?Which is the technically correct term: Nose Gear or Nose Landing Gear?What is this item on the nosewheel of the Sukhoi PAK-FA?How long does the gear extension/retraction takes on the ATR-42?

Identify boardgame from Big movie

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

Is a "Democratic" Oligarchy-Style System Possible?

Where to refill my bottle in India?

Falsification in Math vs Science

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Have you ever entered Singapore using a different passport or name?

Resizing object distorts it (Illustrator CC 2018)

Why isn't airport relocation done gradually?

Delete all lines which don't have n characters before delimiter

Why can Shazam fly?

Geography at the pixel level

How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect

What are the motivations for publishing new editions of an existing textbook, beyond new discoveries in a field?

Deal with toxic manager when you can't quit

Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

Multiply Two Integer Polynomials

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

Pokemon Turn Based battle (Python)

What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?

Origin of "cooter" meaning "vagina"



Why is the Constellation's nose gear so long?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat are the advantages of more than 4 propeller blades?Why does landing gear retract with an offset?Is it possible to control an aircraft on the runway if the nose gear collapses?Why is the Eurofighters nose gear door shorter than the bay?Why does landing gear extend backwards and retract forwards?How can I calculate the force on the nose gear at landing?What is the typical weight distribution ratio between nose gear and main gear?Why is the nose landing gear of a Rutan Vari Eze up during parking?Which is the technically correct term: Nose Gear or Nose Landing Gear?What is this item on the nosewheel of the Sukhoi PAK-FA?How long does the gear extension/retraction takes on the ATR-42?










1












$begingroup$


The Lockheed Constellation has an enormously long nose gear, which causes the aircraft to slant appreciably backwards when sitting on the ground:



L-049



tilted L-049



(Image by Greg and Cindy at Flickr, modified by Cobatfor at Wikimedia Commons.)



L-649



tilted L-649



(Image by the San Diego Air and Space Museum, via Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



L-749



tilted L-749



(Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



L-1049



tilted L-1049



(Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



L-1649



tilted L-1649



(Image by Robert Togni at Flickr, via JuergenKlueser at Wikimedia Commons. Note that, due to the gigantic nose gear, the fuselage is approximately level, despite the ground sloping downwards considerably towards the aircraft's nose.)



In contrast, other airliners of the era had a much-less-ridiculous nose gear length, like the DC-7:



DC-7



(Image by Ted Quackenbush at airliners.net, modified by Fæ at Wikimedia Commons.)



and the Stratocruiser:



Boeing 377



(Image by Bill Larkins at Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



Why is the Constellation's nose gear so much longer?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    1












    $begingroup$


    The Lockheed Constellation has an enormously long nose gear, which causes the aircraft to slant appreciably backwards when sitting on the ground:



    L-049



    tilted L-049



    (Image by Greg and Cindy at Flickr, modified by Cobatfor at Wikimedia Commons.)



    L-649



    tilted L-649



    (Image by the San Diego Air and Space Museum, via Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



    L-749



    tilted L-749



    (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



    L-1049



    tilted L-1049



    (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



    L-1649



    tilted L-1649



    (Image by Robert Togni at Flickr, via JuergenKlueser at Wikimedia Commons. Note that, due to the gigantic nose gear, the fuselage is approximately level, despite the ground sloping downwards considerably towards the aircraft's nose.)



    In contrast, other airliners of the era had a much-less-ridiculous nose gear length, like the DC-7:



    DC-7



    (Image by Ted Quackenbush at airliners.net, modified by Fæ at Wikimedia Commons.)



    and the Stratocruiser:



    Boeing 377



    (Image by Bill Larkins at Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



    Why is the Constellation's nose gear so much longer?










    share|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      The Lockheed Constellation has an enormously long nose gear, which causes the aircraft to slant appreciably backwards when sitting on the ground:



      L-049



      tilted L-049



      (Image by Greg and Cindy at Flickr, modified by Cobatfor at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-649



      tilted L-649



      (Image by the San Diego Air and Space Museum, via Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-749



      tilted L-749



      (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-1049



      tilted L-1049



      (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-1649



      tilted L-1649



      (Image by Robert Togni at Flickr, via JuergenKlueser at Wikimedia Commons. Note that, due to the gigantic nose gear, the fuselage is approximately level, despite the ground sloping downwards considerably towards the aircraft's nose.)



      In contrast, other airliners of the era had a much-less-ridiculous nose gear length, like the DC-7:



      DC-7



      (Image by Ted Quackenbush at airliners.net, modified by Fæ at Wikimedia Commons.)



      and the Stratocruiser:



      Boeing 377



      (Image by Bill Larkins at Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



      Why is the Constellation's nose gear so much longer?










      share|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      The Lockheed Constellation has an enormously long nose gear, which causes the aircraft to slant appreciably backwards when sitting on the ground:



      L-049



      tilted L-049



      (Image by Greg and Cindy at Flickr, modified by Cobatfor at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-649



      tilted L-649



      (Image by the San Diego Air and Space Museum, via Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-749



      tilted L-749



      (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-1049



      tilted L-1049



      (Image by RuthAS at Wikimedia Commons.)



      L-1649



      tilted L-1649



      (Image by Robert Togni at Flickr, via JuergenKlueser at Wikimedia Commons. Note that, due to the gigantic nose gear, the fuselage is approximately level, despite the ground sloping downwards considerably towards the aircraft's nose.)



      In contrast, other airliners of the era had a much-less-ridiculous nose gear length, like the DC-7:



      DC-7



      (Image by Ted Quackenbush at airliners.net, modified by Fæ at Wikimedia Commons.)



      and the Stratocruiser:



      Boeing 377



      (Image by Bill Larkins at Flickr, via Wikimedia Commons.)



      Why is the Constellation's nose gear so much longer?







      landing-gear lockheed-constellation






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 4 hours ago









      SeanSean

      5,94532874




      5,94532874




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          The Connie's fuselage has a subtle S shaped contour which was intended to conform somewhat to the upwash ahead of the wing and downwash aft of the wing, with a final upturn at the end to place the horizontal tail at the desired vertical location.



          enter image description here



          They also tapered the fuselage to the smallest cross sectional area possible at the nose, to part the air gently you might say, so the bottom ends up sloping up toward the nose.



          Then you have main gear legs that are fairly long because the R3350's propellers are quite large.



          The wing incidence is set to optimize the fuselage curvature's presentation into the airflow in cruise.



          At the same time, you want to have wing chord in a certain desirable AOA range sitting on the ground, and you want to keep the tail from sitting too high (the Connie has the 3 surfaces to keep the vertical height of the tail low enough to fit the common hangars of the day).



          Combine all those factors together and you end up having to the make the strut really long, and ending up with the most graceful airliner ever designed.



          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
            $endgroup$
            – Sean
            54 mins ago


















          1












          $begingroup$

          You can see that the underside of the Connie's fuselage ahead of the wing root is contoured upwards to begin the taper which ends at the tip of the plane's nose. The other planes had constant-section fuselages ahead of the wing root, in which the nose does not begin to taper down until just aft of the cockpit.



          To maintain the same propeller tip ground clearance, the Lockheed design then required a longer nose gear strut because the attach point for the nose wheel was higher in the air.



          (In the case of the Douglas aircraft, maintaining a constant fuselage cross-section forward and aft of the wing reduced tooling costs and enabled fuselage stretches in future revisions of the airframe.)






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$




















            1












            $begingroup$

            enter image description here

            (Top, bottom)



            Despite having the same engine (Wright R-3350), low-wing mounting, and that the main landing gear of both the DC-7 and the Connie retracted into the cowls of the inboard engines, those alone would not count for the taller nose landing gear of the Connie.



            What does is the propeller diameter. Lockheed went with three bladed propellers, compared to the DC-7's four bladed propellers, resulting in a difference of 5.5 ft (1.7 m) in diameter (19 ft$^1$ vs 13.5 ft$^2$ propellers). The Connie also sat with a higher pitch angle, as evident by the 3-view drawing.



            The above answers the geometric reason.



            As for the design choice, fewer blades are more efficient, albeit bigger. As for the nose pitch on ground, it could mean the wing is attached at a lower angle of incidence, permitting a more level floor in cruise.




            $^1$ https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/l-049-specs.htm
            $^2$ http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dc-7_review_booklet_1954.pdf (page 4; PDF page 6)






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "528"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader:
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              ,
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62261%2fwhy-is-the-constellations-nose-gear-so-long%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2












              $begingroup$

              The Connie's fuselage has a subtle S shaped contour which was intended to conform somewhat to the upwash ahead of the wing and downwash aft of the wing, with a final upturn at the end to place the horizontal tail at the desired vertical location.



              enter image description here



              They also tapered the fuselage to the smallest cross sectional area possible at the nose, to part the air gently you might say, so the bottom ends up sloping up toward the nose.



              Then you have main gear legs that are fairly long because the R3350's propellers are quite large.



              The wing incidence is set to optimize the fuselage curvature's presentation into the airflow in cruise.



              At the same time, you want to have wing chord in a certain desirable AOA range sitting on the ground, and you want to keep the tail from sitting too high (the Connie has the 3 surfaces to keep the vertical height of the tail low enough to fit the common hangars of the day).



              Combine all those factors together and you end up having to the make the strut really long, and ending up with the most graceful airliner ever designed.



              enter image description here






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
                $endgroup$
                – Sean
                54 mins ago















              2












              $begingroup$

              The Connie's fuselage has a subtle S shaped contour which was intended to conform somewhat to the upwash ahead of the wing and downwash aft of the wing, with a final upturn at the end to place the horizontal tail at the desired vertical location.



              enter image description here



              They also tapered the fuselage to the smallest cross sectional area possible at the nose, to part the air gently you might say, so the bottom ends up sloping up toward the nose.



              Then you have main gear legs that are fairly long because the R3350's propellers are quite large.



              The wing incidence is set to optimize the fuselage curvature's presentation into the airflow in cruise.



              At the same time, you want to have wing chord in a certain desirable AOA range sitting on the ground, and you want to keep the tail from sitting too high (the Connie has the 3 surfaces to keep the vertical height of the tail low enough to fit the common hangars of the day).



              Combine all those factors together and you end up having to the make the strut really long, and ending up with the most graceful airliner ever designed.



              enter image description here






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
                $endgroup$
                – Sean
                54 mins ago













              2












              2








              2





              $begingroup$

              The Connie's fuselage has a subtle S shaped contour which was intended to conform somewhat to the upwash ahead of the wing and downwash aft of the wing, with a final upturn at the end to place the horizontal tail at the desired vertical location.



              enter image description here



              They also tapered the fuselage to the smallest cross sectional area possible at the nose, to part the air gently you might say, so the bottom ends up sloping up toward the nose.



              Then you have main gear legs that are fairly long because the R3350's propellers are quite large.



              The wing incidence is set to optimize the fuselage curvature's presentation into the airflow in cruise.



              At the same time, you want to have wing chord in a certain desirable AOA range sitting on the ground, and you want to keep the tail from sitting too high (the Connie has the 3 surfaces to keep the vertical height of the tail low enough to fit the common hangars of the day).



              Combine all those factors together and you end up having to the make the strut really long, and ending up with the most graceful airliner ever designed.



              enter image description here






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              The Connie's fuselage has a subtle S shaped contour which was intended to conform somewhat to the upwash ahead of the wing and downwash aft of the wing, with a final upturn at the end to place the horizontal tail at the desired vertical location.



              enter image description here



              They also tapered the fuselage to the smallest cross sectional area possible at the nose, to part the air gently you might say, so the bottom ends up sloping up toward the nose.



              Then you have main gear legs that are fairly long because the R3350's propellers are quite large.



              The wing incidence is set to optimize the fuselage curvature's presentation into the airflow in cruise.



              At the same time, you want to have wing chord in a certain desirable AOA range sitting on the ground, and you want to keep the tail from sitting too high (the Connie has the 3 surfaces to keep the vertical height of the tail low enough to fit the common hangars of the day).



              Combine all those factors together and you end up having to the make the strut really long, and ending up with the most graceful airliner ever designed.



              enter image description here







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 2 hours ago









              John KJohn K

              24.9k13675




              24.9k13675











              • $begingroup$
                I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
                $endgroup$
                – Sean
                54 mins ago
















              • $begingroup$
                I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
                $endgroup$
                – Sean
                54 mins ago















              $begingroup$
              I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
              $endgroup$
              – Sean
              54 mins ago




              $begingroup$
              I already knew about the streamlining and the tail-height restrictions, but now I see how that necessitates tilting the fuselage back slightly!
              $endgroup$
              – Sean
              54 mins ago











              1












              $begingroup$

              You can see that the underside of the Connie's fuselage ahead of the wing root is contoured upwards to begin the taper which ends at the tip of the plane's nose. The other planes had constant-section fuselages ahead of the wing root, in which the nose does not begin to taper down until just aft of the cockpit.



              To maintain the same propeller tip ground clearance, the Lockheed design then required a longer nose gear strut because the attach point for the nose wheel was higher in the air.



              (In the case of the Douglas aircraft, maintaining a constant fuselage cross-section forward and aft of the wing reduced tooling costs and enabled fuselage stretches in future revisions of the airframe.)






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                You can see that the underside of the Connie's fuselage ahead of the wing root is contoured upwards to begin the taper which ends at the tip of the plane's nose. The other planes had constant-section fuselages ahead of the wing root, in which the nose does not begin to taper down until just aft of the cockpit.



                To maintain the same propeller tip ground clearance, the Lockheed design then required a longer nose gear strut because the attach point for the nose wheel was higher in the air.



                (In the case of the Douglas aircraft, maintaining a constant fuselage cross-section forward and aft of the wing reduced tooling costs and enabled fuselage stretches in future revisions of the airframe.)






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  You can see that the underside of the Connie's fuselage ahead of the wing root is contoured upwards to begin the taper which ends at the tip of the plane's nose. The other planes had constant-section fuselages ahead of the wing root, in which the nose does not begin to taper down until just aft of the cockpit.



                  To maintain the same propeller tip ground clearance, the Lockheed design then required a longer nose gear strut because the attach point for the nose wheel was higher in the air.



                  (In the case of the Douglas aircraft, maintaining a constant fuselage cross-section forward and aft of the wing reduced tooling costs and enabled fuselage stretches in future revisions of the airframe.)






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  You can see that the underside of the Connie's fuselage ahead of the wing root is contoured upwards to begin the taper which ends at the tip of the plane's nose. The other planes had constant-section fuselages ahead of the wing root, in which the nose does not begin to taper down until just aft of the cockpit.



                  To maintain the same propeller tip ground clearance, the Lockheed design then required a longer nose gear strut because the attach point for the nose wheel was higher in the air.



                  (In the case of the Douglas aircraft, maintaining a constant fuselage cross-section forward and aft of the wing reduced tooling costs and enabled fuselage stretches in future revisions of the airframe.)







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 3 hours ago









                  niels nielsenniels nielsen

                  2,5691515




                  2,5691515





















                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      enter image description here

                      (Top, bottom)



                      Despite having the same engine (Wright R-3350), low-wing mounting, and that the main landing gear of both the DC-7 and the Connie retracted into the cowls of the inboard engines, those alone would not count for the taller nose landing gear of the Connie.



                      What does is the propeller diameter. Lockheed went with three bladed propellers, compared to the DC-7's four bladed propellers, resulting in a difference of 5.5 ft (1.7 m) in diameter (19 ft$^1$ vs 13.5 ft$^2$ propellers). The Connie also sat with a higher pitch angle, as evident by the 3-view drawing.



                      The above answers the geometric reason.



                      As for the design choice, fewer blades are more efficient, albeit bigger. As for the nose pitch on ground, it could mean the wing is attached at a lower angle of incidence, permitting a more level floor in cruise.




                      $^1$ https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/l-049-specs.htm
                      $^2$ http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dc-7_review_booklet_1954.pdf (page 4; PDF page 6)






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$

















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        enter image description here

                        (Top, bottom)



                        Despite having the same engine (Wright R-3350), low-wing mounting, and that the main landing gear of both the DC-7 and the Connie retracted into the cowls of the inboard engines, those alone would not count for the taller nose landing gear of the Connie.



                        What does is the propeller diameter. Lockheed went with three bladed propellers, compared to the DC-7's four bladed propellers, resulting in a difference of 5.5 ft (1.7 m) in diameter (19 ft$^1$ vs 13.5 ft$^2$ propellers). The Connie also sat with a higher pitch angle, as evident by the 3-view drawing.



                        The above answers the geometric reason.



                        As for the design choice, fewer blades are more efficient, albeit bigger. As for the nose pitch on ground, it could mean the wing is attached at a lower angle of incidence, permitting a more level floor in cruise.




                        $^1$ https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/l-049-specs.htm
                        $^2$ http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dc-7_review_booklet_1954.pdf (page 4; PDF page 6)






                        share|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$















                          1












                          1








                          1





                          $begingroup$

                          enter image description here

                          (Top, bottom)



                          Despite having the same engine (Wright R-3350), low-wing mounting, and that the main landing gear of both the DC-7 and the Connie retracted into the cowls of the inboard engines, those alone would not count for the taller nose landing gear of the Connie.



                          What does is the propeller diameter. Lockheed went with three bladed propellers, compared to the DC-7's four bladed propellers, resulting in a difference of 5.5 ft (1.7 m) in diameter (19 ft$^1$ vs 13.5 ft$^2$ propellers). The Connie also sat with a higher pitch angle, as evident by the 3-view drawing.



                          The above answers the geometric reason.



                          As for the design choice, fewer blades are more efficient, albeit bigger. As for the nose pitch on ground, it could mean the wing is attached at a lower angle of incidence, permitting a more level floor in cruise.




                          $^1$ https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/l-049-specs.htm
                          $^2$ http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dc-7_review_booklet_1954.pdf (page 4; PDF page 6)






                          share|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          enter image description here

                          (Top, bottom)



                          Despite having the same engine (Wright R-3350), low-wing mounting, and that the main landing gear of both the DC-7 and the Connie retracted into the cowls of the inboard engines, those alone would not count for the taller nose landing gear of the Connie.



                          What does is the propeller diameter. Lockheed went with three bladed propellers, compared to the DC-7's four bladed propellers, resulting in a difference of 5.5 ft (1.7 m) in diameter (19 ft$^1$ vs 13.5 ft$^2$ propellers). The Connie also sat with a higher pitch angle, as evident by the 3-view drawing.



                          The above answers the geometric reason.



                          As for the design choice, fewer blades are more efficient, albeit bigger. As for the nose pitch on ground, it could mean the wing is attached at a lower angle of incidence, permitting a more level floor in cruise.




                          $^1$ https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/l-049-specs.htm
                          $^2$ http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dc-7_review_booklet_1954.pdf (page 4; PDF page 6)







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered 21 mins ago









                          ymb1ymb1

                          70.2k7225372




                          70.2k7225372



























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded
















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62261%2fwhy-is-the-constellations-nose-gear-so-long%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Force derivative works to be publicAre there any GPL like licenses for Apple App Store?Do you violate the GPL if you provide source code that cannot be compiled?GPL - is it distribution to use libraries in an appliance loaned to customers?Distributing App for free which uses GPL'ed codeModifications of server software under GPL, with web/CLI interfaceDoes using an AGPLv3-licensed library prevent me from dual-licensing my own source code?Can I publish only select code under GPLv3 from a private project?Is there published precedent regarding the scope of covered work that uses AGPL software?If MIT licensed code links to GPL licensed code what should be the license of the resulting binary program?If I use a public API endpoint that has its source code licensed under AGPL in my app, do I need to disclose my source?

                              2013 GY136 Descoberta | Órbita | Referências Menu de navegação«List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects»«List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects»

                              Mortes em março de 2019 Referências Menu de navegação«Zhores Alferov, Nobel de Física bielorrusso, morre aos 88 anos - Ciência»«Fallece Rafael Torija, o bispo emérito de Ciudad Real»«Peter Hurford dies at 88»«Keith Flint, vocalista do The Prodigy, morre aos 49 anos»«Luke Perry, ator de 'Barrados no baile' e 'Riverdale', morre aos 52 anos»«Former Rangers and Scotland captain Eric Caldow dies, aged 84»«Morreu, aos 61 anos, a antiga lenda do wrestling King Kong Bundy»«Fallece el actor y director teatral Abraham Stavans»«In Memoriam Guillaume Faye»«Sidney Sheinberg, a Force Behind Universal and Spielberg, Is Dead at 84»«Carmine Persico, Colombo Crime Family Boss, Is Dead at 85»«Dirigent Michael Gielen gestorben»«Ciclista tricampeã mundial e prata na Rio 2016 é encontrada morta em casa aos 23 anos»«Pagan Community Notes: Raven Grimassi dies, Indianapolis pop-up event cancelled, Circle Sanctuary announces new podcast, and more!»«Hal Blaine, Wrecking Crew Drummer, Dies at 90»«Morre Coutinho, que editou dupla lendária com Pelé no Santos»«Cantor Demétrius, ídolo da Jovem Guarda, morre em SP»«Ex-presidente do Vasco, Eurico Miranda morre no Rio de Janeiro»«Bronze no Mundial de basquete de 1971, Laís Elena morre aos 76 anos»«Diretor de Corridas da F1, Charlie Whiting morre aos 66 anos às vésperas do GP da Austrália»«Morreu o cardeal Danneels, da Bélgica»«Morreu o cartoonista Augusto Cid»«Morreu a atriz Maria Isabel de Lizandra, de "Vale Tudo" e novelas da Tupi»«WS Merwin, prize-winning poet of nature, dies at 91»«Atriz Márcia Real morre em São Paulo aos 88 anos»«Mauritanie: décès de l'ancien président Mohamed Mahmoud ould Louly»«Morreu Dick Dale, o rei da surf guitar e de "Pulp Fiction"»«Falleció Víctor Genes»«João Carlos Marinho, autor de 'O Gênio do Crime', morre em SP»«Legendary Horror Director and SFX Artist John Carl Buechler Dies at 66»«Morre em Salvador a religiosa Makota Valdina»«مرگ بازیکن‌ سابق نساجی بر اثر سقوط سنگ در مازندران»«Domingos Oliveira morre no Rio»«Morre Airton Ravagniani, ex-São Paulo, Fla, Vasco, Grêmio e Sport - Notícias»«Morre o escritor Flavio Moreira da Costa»«Larry Cohen, Writer-Director of 'It's Alive' and 'Hell Up in Harlem,' Dies at 77»«Scott Walker, experimental singer-songwriter, dead at 76»«Joseph Pilato, Day of the Dead Star and Horror Favorite, Dies at 70»«Sheffield United set to pay tribute to legendary goalkeeper Ted Burgin who has died at 91»«Morre Rafael Henzel, sobrevivente de acidente aéreo da Chapecoense»«Morre Valery Bykovsky, um dos primeiros cosmonautas da União Soviética»«Agnès Varda, cineasta da Nouvelle Vague, morre aos 90 anos»«Agnès Varda, cineasta francesa, morre aos 90 anos»«Tania Mallet, James Bond Actress and Helen Mirren's Cousin, Dies at 77»e