If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The first A400 transport aircraft from Airbus rolled out of the jigs earlier this month. Msn 001 will be fitted with test equipment in another hanger prior to testing.
It don't look too bad, still a long way to go though.
Question, what makes it necessary for large military transports to be high-winged?
I'm guessing the ability to land on less than awesome runways. Keeps the engines away from the ground. Maybe for ease of loading as well. If the wing is on the bottom you have to raise the height of the plane to avoid dragging the engines, which makes loading it much more difficult.
Question, what makes it necessary for large military transports to be high-winged?
Loading and unloading without the need for ground support equiptment. Having a low wing would mean the engines would get too close to the ground without a high landing gear. Havind the engines on top of the wing, like the VFW614 is undesirable for a lot of reasons, including difficult removal and being unable to gravity feed.
I'm guessing the ability to land on less than awesome runways. Keeps the engines away from the ground. Maybe for ease of loading as well. If the wing is on the bottom you have to raise the height of the plane to avoid dragging the engines, which makes loading it much more difficult.
So that makes me assume passenger aircraft have (mostly) low wings for ease of evacuation?
So that makes me assume passenger aircraft have (mostly) low wings for ease of evacuation?
Evacuation can be done with inflatable slides. To unload and offload (cargo) this way would be unpractical. A low wing does generally have a lower drag, where a high wing tends to produce more lift.
Business/regional jets generally have tail mounted engines for the same reason (no ground support equipment needed). On large aircraft this is not practical due to the long fuel lines needed and the structural penalty of having the engine weight far from the wing, where the lift to carry them is generated.
So that makes me assume passenger aircraft have (mostly) low wings for ease of evacuation?
Possibly. But then if you had high wings you could have the plane be much closer to the ground and maybe you wouldn't need slides. Certainly plausible thoughl
The first A400 transport aircraft from Airbus rolled out of the jigs earlier this month. Msn 001 will be fitted with test equipment in another hanger prior to testing.
It don't look too bad, still a long way to go though.
I'm wondering if the wingdesign of this A400 wouldn't have advantages if they decided equipping it with winglets ala C-17-like winglets.
Will the design not wear winglets ?
From the front it does resemble like AN-70 but other than that the A400M has a T-tail config and the AN-70 has a low horizontal stabs config, (disregarding the special contra-rotating props.)
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment