Thrust vs. weigth
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thrust vs. weigth
Hi guys
Maybe a silly question, but could you please explain to me the difference between thrust and weigth of the airplane?
For example a B737 has engines with 20k of thrust each which is about 2000 kgs of thrust in kilograms. So we have 4000 kgs of total thrust available. But the T/O weigth of the airplane may be more than 60 000 kgs. How is it possible that 4k kgs thrust engines can move 60k kgs plane and even hold it in the air? As I have said, it is a silly question but Iwould like to understand it.
Thanks for help
QuEsT147
Maybe a silly question, but could you please explain to me the difference between thrust and weigth of the airplane?
For example a B737 has engines with 20k of thrust each which is about 2000 kgs of thrust in kilograms. So we have 4000 kgs of total thrust available. But the T/O weigth of the airplane may be more than 60 000 kgs. How is it possible that 4k kgs thrust engines can move 60k kgs plane and even hold it in the air? As I have said, it is a silly question but Iwould like to understand it.
Thanks for help
QuEsT147
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This really is Aero101! There are four basic forces acting on your a/c - thrust and drag in fore/aft plane, and, lift and weight in vertical plane. The lift opposes the weight - so your 60 tonnes is opposed by the lift of the wing so the a/c goes up. You don't the lift free - there is an associated drag force that is opposed by the thrust - your engine thrust of 2 tonnes. As the L/D is about 10 - 20 you can see why the thrust is only a portion of the weight (lift). Of course you need quite a large thrust to accelrate your 60 tonnes up to flight speed so its a bit larger than the cruuise thrust needed.
This is really day 1/page 1 stuff and its whole lot more complicated when you get down to the details. I only you're not a pilot or we're all doomed
This is really day 1/page 1 stuff and its whole lot more complicated when you get down to the details. I only you're not a pilot or we're all doomed
Thrust only needs to equal weight if you wish to achieve vertical take-off. For a fixed wing aircraft, thrust only needs to overcome drag (air resistance) when travelling at flying speed. The lift (which of course must still equal the weight) is generated by the wings as they move through the air.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for answer... You are right, I am not a pilot, just interested in planes and all around that. I even understand the four forces that you have mentioned but I simply did not realize the relationship between them. There are things which I understand and some that I do not, that is why I am asking the pros Tank again for your answer.
Any other comments?
Any other comments?
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For example a B737 has engines with 20k of thrust each which is about 2000 kgs of thrust in kilograms.
20 k of what ? I presume lbs, right ?
So that's 20,000 lbs of thrust, equivalent to some 9,000 kg, but more correctly, as thrust is a force, 88,200 N or 88.2 kN.
Then, total installed thrust, MSL / Standard conditions : 176.4 kN.
So, quite a lot more than you thought.
Anyone who has been slightly patronising in their answer to QuEsT should be made to write a short essay on why the coefficient of lift is not exactly equal to 1 for any wing design. In aerodynamics nothing is as obvious as it seems. Someone who claims to fully understand it is probably fooling themself.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank guys for your replies.
I do not think any of these answers are patronising although sometimes it may seem so. For me, information given there are more important, that is why I am asking here.
Once again, thanks for answers.
I do not think any of these answers are patronising although sometimes it may seem so. For me, information given there are more important, that is why I am asking here.
Once again, thanks for answers.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..er you lost me there
G' Day Don't hang up
Do you include flaps for example in your lift generating components? If so you will find that CL can be made to exceed 1 by quite a large margin? So it must pass through one when increasing and one again when decreasing.
I'm all ears
Do you include flaps for example in your lift generating components? If so you will find that CL can be made to exceed 1 by quite a large margin? So it must pass through one when increasing and one again when decreasing.
I'm all ears
Okay, so in my rush to be flippant I got my terminology wrong. I shall write a thousand times "I shall not try to be clever on Prune again."
The actual point I was trying to make was actually to do with induced drag. It is not as immediately obvious as one might think as to why the drag induced by the wing as it generates lift is only a fraction of the lift obtained. At first glance it appears one is getting something for nothing. And hence QuEsT's question is definitely very pertinent.
Yes I do understand it does not really work out that way, but, as I said, nothing is as obvious as it seems in aerodynamics.
The actual point I was trying to make was actually to do with induced drag. It is not as immediately obvious as one might think as to why the drag induced by the wing as it generates lift is only a fraction of the lift obtained. At first glance it appears one is getting something for nothing. And hence QuEsT's question is definitely very pertinent.
Yes I do understand it does not really work out that way, but, as I said, nothing is as obvious as it seems in aerodynamics.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe a silly question, but could you please explain
Guided Tours of the BGA