Airbus 3 engine patent awarded
 

Airbus received a patent Tuesday for a new take on an old idea, the trijet aircraft.

In the patent document, filed in 2005, Airbus noted why trijets went out of fashion in the first place: They created a lot of noise for both passengers and airport neighbors. Engine improvements also allowed planes to do a lot more with just two engines.

Airbus new idea is a raised third engine in a channel created by two vertical tails, shielding noise. Having a third engine would allow the other two engines to be smaller and, therefore, quieter.


http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/...rbustrijet.jpg

Looks like a maintenance nightmare to me, no, thanks.

Strong APU I guess....

Sioux City II

Don't hold your breath
 

I suppose it's nice to have another patent locked away, but the Airbus I know isn't that stupid.

Looks like a project done by a German apprentice during lunchtime.

it takes 20 years to forget how bad things were...another example.

How is the ground crew supposed to check for ice on the upper engine..

Patent documents are usually pretty vague on purpose, but a wad of gum to mount the rear engine...

From the upper hatch, in front of engine :D

more detail

no german involved:)

franzl

Hmmm, this is really odd.
Normally Airbus is not stupid at all.
But the reasoning behind this patent given in the description is really strange. They want to reduce thrust and size of the under wing engines. And hope to compensate most of the additional weight of the third engine by this reduction in size.
That leaves still somewhat more weight and less efficient smaller engines.
So: Where is the benefit?

Is it an approach to be able to use very high bypass ratio engines with relatively low thrust for a given diameter ? Geared Turbo Fans / Propfans ?

I can see one possibility.

Use three for maximum power and then two for cruise. Supply enough to the third to carry it's own weight (roughly 10%) and extend ETOPS?

Further thought, use it as or instead of an APU?

Just thinking back to what the five engined Trident might have become.

Sound alleviation sounds (sorry) like a bit of a red herring. Very hard to get high aspect ratio fins to be in the right place most of the time.

what about the MD-11?

just add a split fin

or a patent jump on NASA...

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice//image...14132853-1.jpg

"SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The purpose of the present invention is to overcome the disadvantages of former tri-jet aircraft such as the Lockheed L1011, and the McDonnell Douglas DC-10, or MD-11.
In particular, said opening formed in the lower part of the fuselage is obturated by a hatch, articulated on the structure of said fuselage and defining, when it is lowered, an access stairway to the inside of the fuselage. The opening of the hatch or its withdrawal from the fuselage if it is detachable then allows the lowering (or raising) of the tail engine via said shaft."

well, there you have it...


http://blog.flightstory.net/wp-conte...bus-trijet.gif

I guess its much different (no doubt) to disconnect the engine, and lower it through the tube, than to just take it off the top...

Will this help Boeing with the low clearance underwing, they can lift the engine up through the wing instead of dropping it down? or perhaps its better to invert the aircraft and have full access?

good thing they got the patent...

A `V` tail would be better....

One advantage would be elimination of some of the ETOPS requirements. Would help all those limited on some of the more obscure ETOPS legs.

Perhaps strategic? Perhaps a rumor of another builder researching in that direction and thus an attempt to block them?

it looks like this is an addition to the other 3 engine patents, this one specifically references dropping the engine down through the fuselage to remove it...