Does Nitrogen inside commercial airliner wheels prevent blowouts on touchdown?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







12












$begingroup$


I just watched the first episode of Inside Mighty Machine where civil engineer-turned-host, Chad Zdenek, discussed innovations of the 747. One innovation he discussed was the increased number of wheels and trucks, along with this tidbit:




When the 747 touches down, the wheels must accelerate from 0 to 150 mph in a heartbeat, making them skid before they start to spin. That's why they smoke on touchdown. That friction causes heat to build inside the wheel, creating the risk of an explosion, so the 747's tires are filled with nitrogen, an inert gas which, unlike oxygen, won't aid combustion. That helps protect the plane from blowouts and keep landings safe.




That seems like an oversimplification and backhandedly suggests that the alternative is to fill the tires with pure oxygen—a surefire recipe for combustion I would think.



So, (1) is nitrogen really "the thin line" between safe landings and blowouts on modern commercial airliners and (2) is nitrogen landing gear inflation a legitimate innovation of the 747?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$










  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 14:40






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
    $endgroup$
    – TripeHound
    May 24 at 15:38










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    May 24 at 23:45






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 23:59










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
    May 26 at 10:08


















12












$begingroup$


I just watched the first episode of Inside Mighty Machine where civil engineer-turned-host, Chad Zdenek, discussed innovations of the 747. One innovation he discussed was the increased number of wheels and trucks, along with this tidbit:




When the 747 touches down, the wheels must accelerate from 0 to 150 mph in a heartbeat, making them skid before they start to spin. That's why they smoke on touchdown. That friction causes heat to build inside the wheel, creating the risk of an explosion, so the 747's tires are filled with nitrogen, an inert gas which, unlike oxygen, won't aid combustion. That helps protect the plane from blowouts and keep landings safe.




That seems like an oversimplification and backhandedly suggests that the alternative is to fill the tires with pure oxygen—a surefire recipe for combustion I would think.



So, (1) is nitrogen really "the thin line" between safe landings and blowouts on modern commercial airliners and (2) is nitrogen landing gear inflation a legitimate innovation of the 747?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$










  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 14:40






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
    $endgroup$
    – TripeHound
    May 24 at 15:38










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    May 24 at 23:45






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 23:59










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
    May 26 at 10:08














12












12








12


1



$begingroup$


I just watched the first episode of Inside Mighty Machine where civil engineer-turned-host, Chad Zdenek, discussed innovations of the 747. One innovation he discussed was the increased number of wheels and trucks, along with this tidbit:




When the 747 touches down, the wheels must accelerate from 0 to 150 mph in a heartbeat, making them skid before they start to spin. That's why they smoke on touchdown. That friction causes heat to build inside the wheel, creating the risk of an explosion, so the 747's tires are filled with nitrogen, an inert gas which, unlike oxygen, won't aid combustion. That helps protect the plane from blowouts and keep landings safe.




That seems like an oversimplification and backhandedly suggests that the alternative is to fill the tires with pure oxygen—a surefire recipe for combustion I would think.



So, (1) is nitrogen really "the thin line" between safe landings and blowouts on modern commercial airliners and (2) is nitrogen landing gear inflation a legitimate innovation of the 747?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I just watched the first episode of Inside Mighty Machine where civil engineer-turned-host, Chad Zdenek, discussed innovations of the 747. One innovation he discussed was the increased number of wheels and trucks, along with this tidbit:




When the 747 touches down, the wheels must accelerate from 0 to 150 mph in a heartbeat, making them skid before they start to spin. That's why they smoke on touchdown. That friction causes heat to build inside the wheel, creating the risk of an explosion, so the 747's tires are filled with nitrogen, an inert gas which, unlike oxygen, won't aid combustion. That helps protect the plane from blowouts and keep landings safe.




That seems like an oversimplification and backhandedly suggests that the alternative is to fill the tires with pure oxygen—a surefire recipe for combustion I would think.



So, (1) is nitrogen really "the thin line" between safe landings and blowouts on modern commercial airliners and (2) is nitrogen landing gear inflation a legitimate innovation of the 747?







safety landing-gear boeing-747 temperature






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 24 at 20:42









Community

1




1










asked May 24 at 4:13









cfxcfx

5201 gold badge6 silver badges12 bronze badges




5201 gold badge6 silver badges12 bronze badges











  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 14:40






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
    $endgroup$
    – TripeHound
    May 24 at 15:38










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    May 24 at 23:45






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 23:59










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
    May 26 at 10:08














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 14:40






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
    $endgroup$
    – TripeHound
    May 24 at 15:38










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    May 24 at 23:45






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    May 24 at 23:59










  • $begingroup$
    @Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
    May 26 at 10:08








2




2




$begingroup$
Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 24 at 14:40




$begingroup$
Your title says "prevent", but the quote says "protect". Those are quite different. "Prevent" means "it doesn't happen", "protect" means "the frequency decreases".
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 24 at 14:40




3




3




$begingroup$
Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
$endgroup$
– TripeHound
May 24 at 15:38




$begingroup$
Does "protect the plane from blowouts" mean reduce the frequency of blowouts, or minimise the damage from a blowout should one occur?
$endgroup$
– TripeHound
May 24 at 15:38












$begingroup$
@Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
$endgroup$
– Michael
May 24 at 23:45




$begingroup$
@Acccumulation Thanks for the English lesson... armed with that I'm now going to march down to the local police station and demand they change their slogan to "To serve and prevent"! ;)
$endgroup$
– Michael
May 24 at 23:45




3




3




$begingroup$
@Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 24 at 23:59




$begingroup$
@Michael No, that's the motto of Planned Parenthood.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 24 at 23:59












$begingroup$
@Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
$endgroup$
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
May 26 at 10:08




$begingroup$
@Acccumulation: Perhaps you’re referring to some technical/legal sense I’m not aware of, but un normal use, “prevent” can perfectly well mean “reduce the frequency of”. Most statements that “X prevents Y” mean “X prevents a significant amount of Y” not “X prevents 100% of Y”, just as most statements “X protects Z from Y” mean “X protects Z from most of the danger of Y” not “…from 100% of the danger of Y”.
$endgroup$
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
May 26 at 10:08










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















22












$begingroup$

Apart from the paragraph you quoted, here are a few more reasons.




  1. Dry nitrogen is specified for aircraft use. I believe the rules say that any gas used cannot exceed 5% oxygen content. Because its dry it reduces corrosion.


  2. Nitrogen moleculeas are slightly larger than oxygen and takes longer to escape.. hence tyres stay inflated longer.


  3. But more importantly, nitrogen has a lower rate of expansion/contraction than normal air. An aircraft wheel has to live in sub-zero (at 40,000ft) and blistering hot (IIRC about 500deg C will trigger hot brakes warning). A gas with a low expansion rate cf temp is desirable. This trait has been put to good use by unscrupulous 'performance auto shops' which claim better handling with nitrogen in the tyres...







share|improve this answer











$endgroup$











  • 4




    $begingroup$
    How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 8:54






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    May 24 at 13:21






  • 9




    $begingroup$
    It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
    $endgroup$
    – bogl
    May 24 at 13:25






  • 11




    $begingroup$
    I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    May 24 at 13:30






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 13:48



















11












$begingroup$

There is some truth in the claim about inerting. Mostly, blowouts are as a result of high temperatures weakening the rim and tyre and increasing gas pressure within it, rather than being the result of chemical explosions. However, overheated tyres can decompose to produce gaseous products that can explode in air at high pressure and temperature and there have been airworthiness directives related to this (see, e.g., FAA Advisory Circular 20-97B).



Also, having oxygen in the tyres will oxidize the rubber to some extent, weakening it. Of course, the outside of the tyre is bathed in oxygen anyway, but at much lower pressure, so there's much less of it around.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$























    11












    $begingroup$

    In addition to what the current answers mention, it should be noted that the danger is not merely theoretical, though blowouts on touchdown aren't necessarily the primary concern.



    Mexicana flight 940 was the deadliest 727 accident as well as the deadliest accident on Mexican soil with 167 deaths. Accident investigators found that a tire had been serviced with regular air instead of pure Nitrogen. A brake malfunctioned and overheated during the takeoff run. This caused the tire to heat up to the point that the oxygen in the tire chemically reacted with the tire itself to the point that the tire exploded fifteen minutes after takeoff. This severed hydraulic, fuel, and electrical lines, which then resulted in an in-flight fire at cruising altitude. The pilots declared an emergency and tried to return to Mexico City, but ultimately lost control and crashed into a mountain before they could get back to MEX, killing everyone on board.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$















    • $begingroup$
      This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
      $endgroup$
      – Brian Drummond
      May 25 at 14:37














    Your Answer








    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%2f64682%2fdoes-nitrogen-inside-commercial-airliner-wheels-prevent-blowouts-on-touchdown%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









    22












    $begingroup$

    Apart from the paragraph you quoted, here are a few more reasons.




    1. Dry nitrogen is specified for aircraft use. I believe the rules say that any gas used cannot exceed 5% oxygen content. Because its dry it reduces corrosion.


    2. Nitrogen moleculeas are slightly larger than oxygen and takes longer to escape.. hence tyres stay inflated longer.


    3. But more importantly, nitrogen has a lower rate of expansion/contraction than normal air. An aircraft wheel has to live in sub-zero (at 40,000ft) and blistering hot (IIRC about 500deg C will trigger hot brakes warning). A gas with a low expansion rate cf temp is desirable. This trait has been put to good use by unscrupulous 'performance auto shops' which claim better handling with nitrogen in the tyres...







    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$











    • 4




      $begingroup$
      How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 8:54






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      May 24 at 13:21






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
      $endgroup$
      – bogl
      May 24 at 13:25






    • 11




      $begingroup$
      I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      May 24 at 13:30






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 13:48
















    22












    $begingroup$

    Apart from the paragraph you quoted, here are a few more reasons.




    1. Dry nitrogen is specified for aircraft use. I believe the rules say that any gas used cannot exceed 5% oxygen content. Because its dry it reduces corrosion.


    2. Nitrogen moleculeas are slightly larger than oxygen and takes longer to escape.. hence tyres stay inflated longer.


    3. But more importantly, nitrogen has a lower rate of expansion/contraction than normal air. An aircraft wheel has to live in sub-zero (at 40,000ft) and blistering hot (IIRC about 500deg C will trigger hot brakes warning). A gas with a low expansion rate cf temp is desirable. This trait has been put to good use by unscrupulous 'performance auto shops' which claim better handling with nitrogen in the tyres...







    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$











    • 4




      $begingroup$
      How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 8:54






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      May 24 at 13:21






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
      $endgroup$
      – bogl
      May 24 at 13:25






    • 11




      $begingroup$
      I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      May 24 at 13:30






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 13:48














    22












    22








    22





    $begingroup$

    Apart from the paragraph you quoted, here are a few more reasons.




    1. Dry nitrogen is specified for aircraft use. I believe the rules say that any gas used cannot exceed 5% oxygen content. Because its dry it reduces corrosion.


    2. Nitrogen moleculeas are slightly larger than oxygen and takes longer to escape.. hence tyres stay inflated longer.


    3. But more importantly, nitrogen has a lower rate of expansion/contraction than normal air. An aircraft wheel has to live in sub-zero (at 40,000ft) and blistering hot (IIRC about 500deg C will trigger hot brakes warning). A gas with a low expansion rate cf temp is desirable. This trait has been put to good use by unscrupulous 'performance auto shops' which claim better handling with nitrogen in the tyres...







    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Apart from the paragraph you quoted, here are a few more reasons.




    1. Dry nitrogen is specified for aircraft use. I believe the rules say that any gas used cannot exceed 5% oxygen content. Because its dry it reduces corrosion.


    2. Nitrogen moleculeas are slightly larger than oxygen and takes longer to escape.. hence tyres stay inflated longer.


    3. But more importantly, nitrogen has a lower rate of expansion/contraction than normal air. An aircraft wheel has to live in sub-zero (at 40,000ft) and blistering hot (IIRC about 500deg C will trigger hot brakes warning). A gas with a low expansion rate cf temp is desirable. This trait has been put to good use by unscrupulous 'performance auto shops' which claim better handling with nitrogen in the tyres...








    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited May 24 at 13:27









    Bianfable

    4,67118 silver badges40 bronze badges




    4,67118 silver badges40 bronze badges










    answered May 24 at 6:08









    AnilvAnilv

    4,00312 silver badges15 bronze badges




    4,00312 silver badges15 bronze badges











    • 4




      $begingroup$
      How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 8:54






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      May 24 at 13:21






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
      $endgroup$
      – bogl
      May 24 at 13:25






    • 11




      $begingroup$
      I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      May 24 at 13:30






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 13:48














    • 4




      $begingroup$
      How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 8:54






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      May 24 at 13:21






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
      $endgroup$
      – bogl
      May 24 at 13:25






    • 11




      $begingroup$
      I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      May 24 at 13:30






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
      $endgroup$
      – DeltaLima
      May 24 at 13:48








    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 8:54




    $begingroup$
    How does 3) work? Doesn't nitrogen behave according to the ideal gas law?
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 8:54




    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    May 24 at 13:21




    $begingroup$
    @DeltaLima The ideal gas law is an approximation that assumes molecules have zero volume. The level of approximation you get will be different for different gases, so it's not impossible that something like this could be true. Wikipedia mentions the water content of compressed air vs nitrogen being a significant issue here, though surely one could dehydrate the air if that was the only issue.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    May 24 at 13:21




    9




    9




    $begingroup$
    It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
    $endgroup$
    – bogl
    May 24 at 13:25




    $begingroup$
    It should be noted that air contains almost 80% nitrogen. Nobody is filling tires with pure oxygen. The characteristics of air are in between those of its constituents.
    $endgroup$
    – bogl
    May 24 at 13:25




    11




    11




    $begingroup$
    I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    May 24 at 13:30




    $begingroup$
    I was with you until #3. The ideal gas constant for air is 287 and for nitrogen it's 296. A difference of 3%.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    May 24 at 13:30




    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 13:48




    $begingroup$
    @DavidRicherby I agree on the water being the issue. At lower temperature/ higher pressures, there will be condensation. But when comparing dry air to nitrogen, there is no difference in expansion vs temperature.
    $endgroup$
    – DeltaLima
    May 24 at 13:48













    11












    $begingroup$

    There is some truth in the claim about inerting. Mostly, blowouts are as a result of high temperatures weakening the rim and tyre and increasing gas pressure within it, rather than being the result of chemical explosions. However, overheated tyres can decompose to produce gaseous products that can explode in air at high pressure and temperature and there have been airworthiness directives related to this (see, e.g., FAA Advisory Circular 20-97B).



    Also, having oxygen in the tyres will oxidize the rubber to some extent, weakening it. Of course, the outside of the tyre is bathed in oxygen anyway, but at much lower pressure, so there's much less of it around.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$




















      11












      $begingroup$

      There is some truth in the claim about inerting. Mostly, blowouts are as a result of high temperatures weakening the rim and tyre and increasing gas pressure within it, rather than being the result of chemical explosions. However, overheated tyres can decompose to produce gaseous products that can explode in air at high pressure and temperature and there have been airworthiness directives related to this (see, e.g., FAA Advisory Circular 20-97B).



      Also, having oxygen in the tyres will oxidize the rubber to some extent, weakening it. Of course, the outside of the tyre is bathed in oxygen anyway, but at much lower pressure, so there's much less of it around.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        11












        11








        11





        $begingroup$

        There is some truth in the claim about inerting. Mostly, blowouts are as a result of high temperatures weakening the rim and tyre and increasing gas pressure within it, rather than being the result of chemical explosions. However, overheated tyres can decompose to produce gaseous products that can explode in air at high pressure and temperature and there have been airworthiness directives related to this (see, e.g., FAA Advisory Circular 20-97B).



        Also, having oxygen in the tyres will oxidize the rubber to some extent, weakening it. Of course, the outside of the tyre is bathed in oxygen anyway, but at much lower pressure, so there's much less of it around.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        There is some truth in the claim about inerting. Mostly, blowouts are as a result of high temperatures weakening the rim and tyre and increasing gas pressure within it, rather than being the result of chemical explosions. However, overheated tyres can decompose to produce gaseous products that can explode in air at high pressure and temperature and there have been airworthiness directives related to this (see, e.g., FAA Advisory Circular 20-97B).



        Also, having oxygen in the tyres will oxidize the rubber to some extent, weakening it. Of course, the outside of the tyre is bathed in oxygen anyway, but at much lower pressure, so there's much less of it around.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered May 24 at 13:20









        David RicherbyDavid Richerby

        11k3 gold badges37 silver badges83 bronze badges




        11k3 gold badges37 silver badges83 bronze badges


























            11












            $begingroup$

            In addition to what the current answers mention, it should be noted that the danger is not merely theoretical, though blowouts on touchdown aren't necessarily the primary concern.



            Mexicana flight 940 was the deadliest 727 accident as well as the deadliest accident on Mexican soil with 167 deaths. Accident investigators found that a tire had been serviced with regular air instead of pure Nitrogen. A brake malfunctioned and overheated during the takeoff run. This caused the tire to heat up to the point that the oxygen in the tire chemically reacted with the tire itself to the point that the tire exploded fifteen minutes after takeoff. This severed hydraulic, fuel, and electrical lines, which then resulted in an in-flight fire at cruising altitude. The pilots declared an emergency and tried to return to Mexico City, but ultimately lost control and crashed into a mountain before they could get back to MEX, killing everyone on board.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$















            • $begingroup$
              This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
              $endgroup$
              – Brian Drummond
              May 25 at 14:37
















            11












            $begingroup$

            In addition to what the current answers mention, it should be noted that the danger is not merely theoretical, though blowouts on touchdown aren't necessarily the primary concern.



            Mexicana flight 940 was the deadliest 727 accident as well as the deadliest accident on Mexican soil with 167 deaths. Accident investigators found that a tire had been serviced with regular air instead of pure Nitrogen. A brake malfunctioned and overheated during the takeoff run. This caused the tire to heat up to the point that the oxygen in the tire chemically reacted with the tire itself to the point that the tire exploded fifteen minutes after takeoff. This severed hydraulic, fuel, and electrical lines, which then resulted in an in-flight fire at cruising altitude. The pilots declared an emergency and tried to return to Mexico City, but ultimately lost control and crashed into a mountain before they could get back to MEX, killing everyone on board.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$















            • $begingroup$
              This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
              $endgroup$
              – Brian Drummond
              May 25 at 14:37














            11












            11








            11





            $begingroup$

            In addition to what the current answers mention, it should be noted that the danger is not merely theoretical, though blowouts on touchdown aren't necessarily the primary concern.



            Mexicana flight 940 was the deadliest 727 accident as well as the deadliest accident on Mexican soil with 167 deaths. Accident investigators found that a tire had been serviced with regular air instead of pure Nitrogen. A brake malfunctioned and overheated during the takeoff run. This caused the tire to heat up to the point that the oxygen in the tire chemically reacted with the tire itself to the point that the tire exploded fifteen minutes after takeoff. This severed hydraulic, fuel, and electrical lines, which then resulted in an in-flight fire at cruising altitude. The pilots declared an emergency and tried to return to Mexico City, but ultimately lost control and crashed into a mountain before they could get back to MEX, killing everyone on board.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            In addition to what the current answers mention, it should be noted that the danger is not merely theoretical, though blowouts on touchdown aren't necessarily the primary concern.



            Mexicana flight 940 was the deadliest 727 accident as well as the deadliest accident on Mexican soil with 167 deaths. Accident investigators found that a tire had been serviced with regular air instead of pure Nitrogen. A brake malfunctioned and overheated during the takeoff run. This caused the tire to heat up to the point that the oxygen in the tire chemically reacted with the tire itself to the point that the tire exploded fifteen minutes after takeoff. This severed hydraulic, fuel, and electrical lines, which then resulted in an in-flight fire at cruising altitude. The pilots declared an emergency and tried to return to Mexico City, but ultimately lost control and crashed into a mountain before they could get back to MEX, killing everyone on board.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered May 24 at 19:18









            reirabreirab

            15.4k1 gold badge44 silver badges117 bronze badges




            15.4k1 gold badge44 silver badges117 bronze badges















            • $begingroup$
              This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
              $endgroup$
              – Brian Drummond
              May 25 at 14:37


















            • $begingroup$
              This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
              $endgroup$
              – Brian Drummond
              May 25 at 14:37
















            $begingroup$
            This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
            $endgroup$
            – Brian Drummond
            May 25 at 14:37




            $begingroup$
            This incidentally answers the second part of the question : if it was required on the 727, it probably pre-dates the 747.
            $endgroup$
            – Brian Drummond
            May 25 at 14:37


















            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%2f64682%2fdoes-nitrogen-inside-commercial-airliner-wheels-prevent-blowouts-on-touchdown%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

            Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

            What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

            Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029