6
$\begingroup$

Compared to other wide bodies the 757 seems to stand on very tall landing gear.

Considering strength, weight, cost, stowage space and ease of ground servicing you would want the shortest possible undercarriage you can achieve. The B737 isn't a much smaller aircraft but is much lower, so low it was a challenge to fit modern engines.

Was there a specific design/operation reason or was it just styling - it certainly looks nice !

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Indeed it does look nice $\endgroup$
    – Super
    Jul 14, 2018 at 20:52
  • $\begingroup$ The 757 is a narrow-body, not a wide-body (maybe that's what you meant). $\endgroup$
    – Daniele Procida
    Jul 14, 2018 at 22:10

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

Rotation angle at takeoff is often the limiting factor in gear height. The 757-300 is 178ft long, 30ft longer than the Airbus 321 which also has tall landing gear. The first 737s were less than 100ft long, which allowed the short gear and later caused problems with the max9/10 stretches which went to 143ft.

ente

source

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .