Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4553296/

Topic: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-09-17 15:37:24 and read 48083 times.

In the Global Market Forecast 2009-2028 http://www.airbus.com/en/gmf2009/ shows some Airbus A30X concepts on page 82. Some are more recent, some older. They show various configurations.

A "conventional" airframe / longer sleeker wing with high pass turbofans on top of the aft body. ACARE configurations that surfaced yrs ago :


Forward swept wings, canards and counter rotating open rotors on top.


A more unconventional configuration, wider body & engines lower.


The U tail seems popular anyway.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Tropical
Posted 2009-09-17 15:47:19 and read 48037 times.

Sexy! Especially the last one  Smile

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2009-09-17 16:00:00 and read 47943 times.

First study has me questioning the interference between engines and horisontal stabiliser, whilst the second one looks like it could suffer from negative consequences of propwash over same. It also raises the issue of having an inherently unstable aircraft performing commercial passenger service, in reference to the forward swept wings.

Third study, if wide enough, might incorporate lifting-body elements, and that would be interesting. Not sure about the engine placement though. And the windows will of course be replaced with a bog standard 6-piece kit.

In all three cases - nothing really new or particulary inventive. Neither are they, I suppose, looking anything like the next generation short- medium-haul Airbus.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-17 16:06:29 and read 47919 times.

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
The U tail seems popular anyway.

More like mandated by the engine placement.  

Plus you want a lot of space between your control surfaces and the blades of a turbine or prop-fan incase it throws one.

Welp, only fifteen years to see which way Airbus goes based on JL's comments today.  Smile

[Edited 2009-09-17 16:06:59]

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-09-17 16:18:47 and read 47845 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Welp, only fifteen years to see which way Airbus goes based on JL's comments today.

I would not put to much weight in that. In 2007 he said 2020, last year he said 2015, earlier this yr 2020 and now 2024. Maybe next yr when oil hits $100 a barrel and Bombardier sold 500 CSeries he says 2017.

Maybe he's simply protecting the A320 backlog / sales position and the Airbus bank account. Developping the A380, A400M and A350XWB within 10 yrs doesn't have the board room cheer out when a new mega project $urface$. If it's neccessary it will be done but the later the better.

[Edited 2009-09-17 16:20:01]

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Breiz
Posted 2009-09-17 16:22:33 and read 47829 times.



Quoting B777LRF (Reply 2):
It also raises the issue of having an inherently unstable aircraft performing commercial passenger service

This did prevent the HFB320 Hansa to fly safely:
http://www.hansajet.de/indexeng.htm
And the Hansa did not use the canard surfaces.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2009-09-17 16:49:46 and read 47736 times.

The HansaJet wasn't an unstable design. Presumeably, a 21st century jet would incorporate forward swept wing technology because it promises reduce drag, but only if the design is unstable. Probably the reason they put canards on the thing.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Breiz
Posted 2009-09-17 17:59:43 and read 47550 times.



Quoting Breiz (Reply 5):
This did prevent the HFB320 Hansa to fly safely:

I have to correct myself, I was meant to write:
This did NOT prevent the HFB320 to fly safely.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 6):
but only if the design is unstable

You are right, but this is already known territory. Relaxed stability is in use on fly-by-wire planes.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2009-09-17 20:19:47 and read 47291 times.



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):

Forward swept wings, canards and counter rotating open rotors on top.

That's going to be one honker of a nose gear. The wing is so far back (expected for an open rotor) that there's no way to conventionally mount the main gear and still keep most of the load on the main gear. A significantly load-bearing & braking nose-gear would be an interesting design concept.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 2):
It also raises the issue of having an inherently unstable aircraft performing commercial passenger service, in reference to the forward swept wings.

I'm not positive about this, but I can't see any particular reason a forward sweep is inherently unstable (although it certainly can be).

Quoting Breiz (Reply 7):
You are right, but this is already known territory. Relaxed stability is in use on fly-by-wire planes.

Relaxed stability is not instability...there are no unstable commercial jets in service at the moment that I'm aware of.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-09-18 00:58:41 and read 46882 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
The U tail seems popular anyway.

More like mandated by the engine placement.

Well various options are possible. The first one has apparently been studied a lot over the years. Look for ACARE (a european research program) and it pops up.



A few yrs ago I suggested Boeing and Embraer might partner to cover the lower segment of the narrowbody market with a joint development with such similar configuration, 5 abreast up to 160 seats:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...Boeing_Embraer_Y1_narrow_bod-1.jpg
Graphics by Henry Lam (www.kaktusdigital.com>)

Still not a bad idea IMO.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2009-09-18 01:11:55 and read 46797 times.



Quoting Keesje (Reply 4):
Maybe next yr when oil hits $100 a barrel and Bombardier sold 500 CSeries he says 2017.

The first of those is a possibility, the second is far-fetched in the extreme IMHO.

I know you're a fan of the C-Series, but it's not exactly setting the World on fire is it? I don't think either Airbus or Boeing is that concerned given the low proportion of sales they have in the sub-150 seat market.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keta
Posted 2009-09-18 04:04:56 and read 45597 times.

Forward swept wings? And what is the supposed benefit of this?

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2009-09-18 04:11:49 and read 45507 times.



Quoting Tropical (Reply 1):
Sexy! Especially the last one Smile

If you think the A380 was delay-prone...

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: FWI747
Posted 2009-09-18 04:36:04 and read 45172 times.



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
Quoting Tropical (Reply 1):
Sexy! Especially the last one Smile

If you think the A380 was delay-prone...

Did you say Sonic cruiser ...  Smile

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2009-09-18 06:34:57 and read 43615 times.



Quoting FWI747 (Reply 13):

Did you say Sonic cruiser ... Smile

They do look awfully similar, do they not?

If getting a conventionally-shaped, but all-electric/CFRP plane into the air was a 3 year delay, imagine what happens when they completely change the geometry of an airliner!

 duck 

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-18 06:39:21 and read 43544 times.

Having worked on the Sonic Cruiser program, I don't see any great similarity. *shrug*

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Babybus
Posted 2009-09-18 06:55:43 and read 43303 times.

Shame these manufacturers can't go more retro than futuristic. New technology should be able to breathe new life into old models.

A VC10 or a Tristar was vastly more comfortable than some of the airframes we are crammed into nowadays.

All new aircraft come out looking like an A320 or an A330. Remember the sharks fin tail for the 787?

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2009-09-18 07:09:38 and read 43062 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 16):

A VC10 or a Tristar was vastly more comfortable than some of the airframes we are crammed into nowadays.

Flying was still new back then and not everyone got to do it. Also, comfort depends on the carrier, not the airframe.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: LGW340
Posted 2009-09-18 07:46:10 and read 42464 times.

The second one has no proper window seat! Darn! Lol  banghead 

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Manfredj
Posted 2009-09-18 07:56:22 and read 42300 times.

Why were the 727 and 747 such fast aircraft, yet pretty fuel efficient for their time? Couldn't you take those same designs and incorporate more fuel thrifty engines?

Sorry if I sound stupid, I'm not well educated on the design of aircraft, but it makes sense from a layman's point of view. I do recall something special about the design of the 727's wing which made it stand out from the norm.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: EA772LR
Posted 2009-09-18 08:02:44 and read 42202 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 16):
A VC10 or a Tristar was vastly more comfortable than some of the airframes we are crammed into nowadays.

True. I remember flying DL's L1011s a lot as a kid when we lived in ATL. But those older designs were phased out for what we have now, because for the time being, what we have currently with aircraft designs are the most efficient ways to make planes at current tech levels. Although the tri-jets and 150 seat quads were cool, they are far less efficient than what is currently filling that role. But we can dream right... Smile

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: S.p.a.s.
Posted 2009-09-18 08:24:27 and read 41845 times.

Is it me, or the wing on Keejse's post upper view looks strinklingly similar to a B727 wing?

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: NorCal
Posted 2009-09-18 08:34:35 and read 41672 times.

Airbus likes the A-10 look  Smile

Maybe add a gatling gun for bird strike protection?


The last one looks cool but the engines underneath seems like a poor design, way to vulnerable to FOD being kicked up by the wheels.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Columba
Posted 2009-09-18 08:50:03 and read 41435 times.

I like the last one best, the other two look like various parts glued together.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keta
Posted 2009-09-18 09:10:45 and read 41154 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 19):
Why were the 727 and 747 such fast aircraft, yet pretty fuel efficient for their time? Couldn't you take those same designs and incorporate more fuel thrifty engines?

Rest assured, that modern wings are far more efficient than those of the 727.  yes 

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2009-09-18 09:13:49 and read 41112 times.



Quoting NorCal (Reply 22):

Maybe add a gatling gun for bird strike protection?

OMG, the pilots would LOVE that!

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Manfredj
Posted 2009-09-18 09:43:52 and read 41319 times.



Quoting Keta (Reply 24):
Rest assured, that modern wings are far more efficient than those of the 727.

Efficient yes, but how about performance? Compared to a modern A320, the 727 enjoys a shorter takeoff length, higher max speed, higher service ceiling altitude as well as a lower minimum landing distance.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Shany
Posted 2009-09-18 10:04:09 and read 40994 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 26):
Efficient yes, but how about performance? Compared to a modern A320, the 727 enjoys a shorter takeoff length, higher max speed, higher service ceiling altitude as well as a lower minimum landing distance.

I would assume, that the short take off capability of the B727 are more attributed to the flap system than to the wing itself.

Shany

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Rampart
Posted 2009-09-18 10:29:17 and read 40671 times.



Quoting Tropical (Reply 1):
Sexy! Especially the last one

I'm not the only one thinking Sonic Cruiser, no offense to Stitch.

Quoting Keta (Reply 11):
Forward swept wings? And what is the supposed benefit of this?

Long established aerodynamic benefits.

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es..._Technology/foward_sweep/Tech9.htm
http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedaero/potential3d/fsw.html

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 8):
That's going to be one honker of a nose gear. The wing is so far back (expected for an open rotor) that there's no way to conventionally mount the main gear and still keep most of the load on the main gear. A significantly load-bearing & braking nose-gear would be an interesting design concept.

I'm wondering what the flare for landing would be. Something like Concord, with the nose at an ungainly high position at touchdown?

-Rampart

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Birdbrainz
Posted 2009-09-18 11:07:03 and read 40120 times.

Looking at the first two, I'd really wonder about the drawbacks of placing the engines so high up. Namely, the pitch-down moment when more power is applied. That's not good. Also, how hard would it be to maintain/inspect the engines?

I also would be concerned about foreign object ingestion from the runway on the third design.

Face it: boring or not, the modern twin jet has everything in all the right places, except maybe if you're an overtired ramp worker who didn't notice that the engine was still running. (...and I don't say that because I think it's funny. Bless the souls who've met their fate that way.)

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-18 11:19:11 and read 39966 times.



Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
Looking at the first two, I'd really wonder about the drawbacks of placing the engines so high up.

For a prop-fan, you arguably have little choice but to put them up there for noise and damage-reduction reasons. A large horizontal stabilizer with tall and wide vertical stabilizers can help serve as "baffles" to reduce the noise footprint during departure and approach. It would also help capture a thrown blade (though you will want additional "armor" around control lines and on control surfaces). Propfans also need a good bit of clearance for the fan so that means tall struts so mounting them in back on top will allow that.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keta
Posted 2009-09-18 11:21:30 and read 39926 times.



Quoting Rampart (Reply 28):
Long established aerodynamic benefits.

I'd love to see some actual figures of aerodynamic improvement of forward-swept wings over back-swept wings (not being ironic, I really want to see them), but one of the main problems I see with forward sweep is the reduced divergence-speed, for which the structure has to be made stronger.

My bet: really neat picture, but we won't see forward-swept airliners in the (at least near) future  Smile

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Osetka
Posted 2009-09-18 11:24:33 and read 39888 times.

They all look ridiculous. Not nice at all........

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-18 11:34:34 and read 39775 times.



Quoting Keta (Reply 31):
I'd love to see some actual figures of aerodynamic improvement of forward-swept wings over back-swept wings...

NASA has done studies (the X-29 program) so the data should be publicly available.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Q120
Posted 2009-09-18 11:49:23 and read 39614 times.

I think they are some of the nicest designs out there, a little radical but I really like it.
I hope something like this gets constructed in the near future.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Birdbrainz
Posted 2009-09-18 12:03:52 and read 39440 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
For a prop-fan, you arguably have little choice but to put them up there for noise and damage-reduction reasons. A large horizontal stabilizer with tall and wide vertical stabilizers can help serve as "baffles" to reduce the noise footprint during departure and approach. It would also help capture a thrown blade (though you will want additional "armor" around control lines and on control surfaces). Propfans also need a good bit of clearance for the fan so that means tall struts so mounting them in back on top will allow that.

Yes. I understand the motivation for putting them up there, but it comes at a high cost: unwanted pitch down as power is increased, as well as maintenance issues.

If it were such a great idea, somebody would have already done it.

This reminds me of the whole recumbent bike thing: like it or not, the conventional upright bicycle is a great design. (And yes, I've owned two recumbents.)

Btw, the X-29 was more about making a nimble aircraft than an efficient one.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-18 12:31:23 and read 39082 times.



Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 35):
Yes. I understand the motivation for putting them up there, but it comes at a high cost: unwanted pitch down as power is increased, as well as maintenance issues.

 yes 

This is why I am rather skeptical that Prop-Fans will be a popular form of propulsion for airliners, even "smaller" ones (100+ seats).

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2009-09-18 12:49:27 and read 38905 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 26):
Quoting Keta (Reply 24):
Rest assured, that modern wings are far more efficient than those of the 727.

Efficient yes, but how about performance? Compared to a modern A320, the 727 enjoys a shorter takeoff length, higher max speed, higher service ceiling altitude as well as a lower minimum landing distance.

Not sure how many 727s you have flown on, but at heavy weights on sectors of 1,500 miles or more, the 727-200 in particular did not have a short takeoff length. In fact they often seemed very sluggish. Climb rate in such conditions also seemed very slow.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Manfredj
Posted 2009-09-18 12:57:54 and read 38795 times.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 37):
Not sure how many 727s you have flown on, but at heavy weights on sectors of 1,500 miles or more, the 727-200 in particular did not have a short takeoff length. In fact they often seemed very sluggish. Climb rate in such conditions also seemed very slow.

Yes, I've watched many 727's with that rather long takeoff as a child. I didn't know as a child it was probably due to heavy fuel load. I've flown my fair share (CO, USAir, DELTA) and it was one of my favorite airplanes to fly, next to the 747-200 or course.  Smile

I'm just going off raw numbers, however. I wonder which would have the shortest takeoff roll if the 727 and 320 had like pax numbers and same amount of fuel.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keta
Posted 2009-09-18 13:16:13 and read 38511 times.



Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 35):
If it were such a great idea, somebody would have already done it.

Yes, that's the mentality behind great inventions  Wink

I however have the feeling that prop-fans have a chance...

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-09-18 13:56:17 and read 38158 times.

The wings & propulsion changed (NACRE '08)..


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ugh-2008-reshaping-the-future.html

Regarding open rotor concepts, progress has been made on noise and vibration with the help of CFD optimalizations, according to Rolls Royce. Blade containment considerations could lead to more conventional configurations..


http://www.nlr.nl/smartsite.dws?ch=def&id=12618&l=en

This '09 NLR concept also has laminair wings with reduced wing sweep and cruise speed. Counter Rotating Open Rotors have complications but are significantly more fuel efficient then similar technology turbofans, that's why R&D goes on.

[Edited 2009-09-18 13:59:42]

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2009-09-18 17:21:50 and read 36921 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 16):
Shame these manufacturers can't go more retro than futuristic. New technology should be able to breathe new life into old models.

Don't blame the manufacturers...they build what the airlines want to buy. If the airlines wanted that, that's what the OEM's would build.

Quoting Babybus (Reply 16):
A VC10 or a Tristar was vastly more comfortable than some of the airframes we are crammed into nowadays.

Yes, but that has nothing to do with the aircraft itself and everything to do with the interior. Business class on a BA 747 is way (way way way) more comfortable than a typical VC10 or Tristar. The airlines started shoehorning tighter seating into the same aircraft as flying expanded to a greater market.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 19):
Why were the 727 and 747 such fast aircraft, yet pretty fuel efficient for their time? Couldn't you take those same designs and incorporate more fuel thrifty engines?

Yes, you can. When you do it to a 747 it's called a 747-8. Nobody did it to a 727 because, by the time the idea came up, fuel cost was more important than speed. There's no reason you can't build a modern aircraft that flies like a 727 but uses less fuel...but if you build it like a 757 it will use even less fuel, and that's that the customers want.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 26):
Compared to a modern A320, the 727 enjoys a shorter takeoff length, higher max speed, higher service ceiling altitude as well as a lower minimum landing distance.

The takeoff/landing distances are driven, almost entirely, by the design requirement for the 727 to in and out of La Guardia on a hot day. As a direct result, it's got a big wing (high service ceiling).

Quoting Rampart (Reply 28):
I'm wondering what the flare for landing would be. Something like Concord, with the nose at an ungainly high position at touchdown?

I don't think that would be necessary...Concorde had to go high to get enough lift out of the delta wing. This critter, with a conventional wing, should have normal approach attitude. *But*...you'd have to have "over heavy" rear landing gear because they'd have to absorb all the landing shock but you'd still have to carry a lot of weight on the nose because of where the CG would be.

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
Looking at the first two, I'd really wonder about the drawbacks of placing the engines so high up. Namely, the pitch-down moment when more power is applied. That's not good.

It's not good, but it's manageable. Especially if you assume an advanced control system, which is pretty much standard on new designs now.

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
Also, how hard would it be to maintain/inspect the engines?

Better than a DC-10...

Tom.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Birdbrainz
Posted 2009-09-18 17:42:34 and read 36854 times.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 37):
Not sure how many 727s you have flown on, but at heavy weights on sectors of 1,500 miles or more, the 727-200 in particular did not have a short takeoff length. In fact they often seemed very sluggish. Climb rate in such conditions also seemed very slow.

Depends on which one: the 727-200 was a dog, although the 727-100 and -222A wasn't bad. I'll agree, though, it wasn't a rocket. My dad thought there were ok, but I think he still really liked the 737-200.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 41):
Better than a DC-10...

Is that because there are two engines up there instead of just one?  Smile

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: FrmrCAPCADET
Posted 2009-09-18 17:58:50 and read 36814 times.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 37):
Not sure how many 727s you have flown on, but at heavy weights on sectors of 1,500 miles or more, the 727-200 in particular did not have a short takeoff length. In fact they often seemed very sluggish. Climb rate in such conditions also seemed very slow.

It probably is always more fuel efficient to use the whole runway to take off. Hot dogging always cost money.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-18 23:02:38 and read 36597 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 19):
Why were the 727 and 747 such fast aircraft, yet pretty fuel efficient for their time? Couldn't you take those same designs and incorporate more fuel thrifty engines?



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 41):
Yes, you can. When you do it to a 747 it's called a 747-8. Nobody did it to a 727 because, by the time the idea came up, fuel cost was more important than speed.

I'd say they did do it for the 727 with the 757 which has a similar cruising speed of around Mach .80.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Hloutweg
Posted 2009-09-19 01:53:56 and read 36368 times.



Quoting S.p.a.s. (Reply 21):



Quoting S.p.a.s. (Reply 21):

Is it me, or the wing on Keejse's post upper view looks strinklingly similar to a B727 wing?


"ad astra per aspera"

I thought exactly the same. It seems to be an aerodynamicly ideal wing for rear mounted engined aircraft.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-09-21 06:53:47 and read 35615 times.

I think this (great) artist impression VIDEO by Henry Lam (kaktus digital) for the RAS comes pretty close to concept 2.

Video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84SVvHo5w08

http://www.kaktusdigital.com/images/RS002_Hero.jpg

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-09-21 08:50:55 and read 35320 times.



Quoting Keesje (Reply 46):
I think this (great) artist impression VIDEO by Henry Lam (kaktus digital) for the RAS comes pretty close to concept 2.

Pretty, as are most of his designs.

Drop the undercarriage fairings, though.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: R2rho
Posted 2009-09-21 14:23:59 and read 33091 times.

We should expect something like number 1, or the NLR concept, or the RAS concept. They have the best trade-off between new technology and too radical design. I doubt we'll be seeing swept forward wings in the next airliner generation. But we should expect some very advanced wing designs. And it looks like Airbus is aiming for open rotors and is willing to wait until the technology matures. In any case, they are all a welcome change from the boring current aircraft configurations.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: EBJ1248650
Posted 2009-09-22 05:35:26 and read 30865 times.



Quoting S.p.a.s. (Reply 21):
Is it me, or the wing on Keejse's post upper view looks strinklingly similar to a B727 wing?

I thought the same thing. Even the nose has a similarity to the 727.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Parapente
Posted 2009-09-22 09:32:22 and read 30304 times.

Having spent my whole life looking at planes that are carbon (no punn) copies of each other it will be exciting to see where they come out on this. I wonder if the Americans will use "DC" testbed again for open rotor as I feel sure that thisis where it will end up - particularly as they have put the dates back again. I also note the words in the CO2/aviation conference going on in the UK today.

They just "have" to reduce them - and by a large amount.

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: David L
Posted 2009-09-22 11:17:11 and read 30063 times.



Quoting Parapente (Reply 50):
Having spent my whole life looking at planes that are carbon (no punn) copies of each other it will be exciting to see where they come out on this

I've spent a similar number of years drooling over the next generation design concepts... which always seem to remain as the "next" generation and never materialise as the current generation.

I think aircraft designers have always had radical designs on the back burner... just in case the industry and financiers suddenly decide to throw caution to the wind. I'm still waiting...
 grumpy 

Topic: RE: Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009
Username: Rampart
Posted 2009-09-22 14:38:28 and read 29750 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 47):
Drop the undercarriage fairings, though.

Literally. The wheel pants have to come off so that the gear can retract into the fuselage. Fairings parachute down to be recovered and reused for the next flight. Saves weight.

 silly 

Cool looking plane apart from that, however.

-Rampart


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/