PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - New 110-160 seat narrowbody -20% fuel design; what do you think
Old 3rd October 2007 | 20:51
  #17 (permalink)  
keesje
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 782
Likes: 21
From: netherlands
Hello folks thanx for the comments ! I already knew the wing is to far forward, it should move to back a few meters.. If possible I will ask Henry if he can find time for an "upgrade".

However the tail design isn't that wild. The reason to do it like this iso a conventional tail is stiffness / weight and more importantly: noise. The tail area deflects a lot of noise above populated areas, probably allowing airlines to fly more to noise restricted airports. Airbus and Boeing have both been experimenting with it for years.. Aircraft like the A10, YF-23 and An225 have similar tail configurations..






On lateral stability I think aircraft like the F117 are basicly unstable and still fly. New technology to solve the instability by computer power have been operational for more then 25 yrs & research institutes didn't sit on their hands. All control surfaces and new ones can be used to create the required stability.

I doubt the use of blended wing bodies for passengers for the foreseeable future. Pressurizing a flat body, forces / structure weight / evacuation become a night mare. Maybe for cargo / tanker duties..

The engines on above's design may seem heavier then they are. Sized like CFM's they are high BPR optimized for lower speeds / low fuel consumption. On short flight the minutes aren't that critical, props are popular again, ATR is reengining the ATR's. I think the undected fans won't become popular because of noise. So I "put a (scraffed) casing around it" http://ec.europa.eu/research/transpo...ent02_6691.jpg

On the wings : I think the balance between earodynamic optimal and operation optimal has moved. Wings are getting longer (787 won't fit many 767 gates). Longer thinner wings is better for almost any distance and the disadvantages of it have IMO become more acceptable with oil prices going north of $80/barrel.

I think the conventional configuration (engine under wing or T tail/engines is not what we are going see see for a next generation of 100-200 seat aircraft.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...t&channel=comm
keesje is offline  
Reply