chornedsnorkack
9th Oct 2006, 10:53
See
http://www.royfc.com/acft_news_old_sep4.html#28sep
Although I have seen different numbers for Be-2500 wingspan, namely 156 m.
The Caspian Sea Monster is different.
The biggest Caspian Sea Monster had 106 m fuselage length, 540 ton MTOW - and only 44 m wingspan.
Whereas Be-2500 has pretty conventionally shaped wing - 156 m span and 3400 square metres wing reference area compared to 79,8 m span and 845 square metres area of Airbus 380 show Be-2500 has about twice the span, 4 times the area and roughly the same aspect ratio as the Airbus 380 wing. The wing loading is also similar. Be-2500 is perfectly capable of flying as a conventional, free-air plane.
http://www.royfc.com/acft_news_old_sep4.html#28sep
Although I have seen different numbers for Be-2500 wingspan, namely 156 m.
The Caspian Sea Monster is different.
The biggest Caspian Sea Monster had 106 m fuselage length, 540 ton MTOW - and only 44 m wingspan.
Whereas Be-2500 has pretty conventionally shaped wing - 156 m span and 3400 square metres wing reference area compared to 79,8 m span and 845 square metres area of Airbus 380 show Be-2500 has about twice the span, 4 times the area and roughly the same aspect ratio as the Airbus 380 wing. The wing loading is also similar. Be-2500 is perfectly capable of flying as a conventional, free-air plane.