Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Do Russian Airliners Have  
User currently offlineDeltaRNOmd-80 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2186 times:

Why do most Russian airliners have their wings on top of the fuselage? It looks strange and it seems to put more stress on the wings because they look like they are sagging....

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Paul J. Hooper



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Colin K. Work



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Brian Wilkes



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Tomislav Muic



Any info appreciated, thanks!

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5484 posts, RR: 28
Reply 1, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2043 times:

The high-wing Russian aircarft you showed are derivatives of military transport designs; high-wing aircraft are much more well-suited to operations from unimproved/underimproved fields (such as military ops might be), because:

1. Engines less likely to ingest foreign objects;
2. Wings further away from FO's, as well as being above more ground-based obstructions, like small trees, vehicles, pesky civilians;
3. Landing gear narrower track from fuselage, narrower runway/strip requirements;

I know I'm missing a lot, but analogize to C-141; C-5A; C-17



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineSamurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2458 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2034 times:

A lot of those are generally used for cargo, both military and civilian, but I've read that the Il-76 has been converted partially for passenger use. It is shown in the last photo in DeltaRNOmd-80's topic post. The same goes for the An-72/74 (they're very similar in appearance - and that is shown in the 2nd photo of DeltaRNOmd-80's topic posting).

User currently offlineRobin27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2017 times:

The wings are not sagging, but have what is known as Anhedral. Western civil aircraft have dihedral, which is when the wings seem to point upwards along their span. This is an inherently stable design and I will illustrate this in a moment.

The previous posts have already mentioned the military aspect of Russian aircraft design, in particular civil airliners. Illushyn 62's, Tupolev 104, 124, 134 and 154 are all civil airliners with anhedral. Western military aircraft also have anhedral, so why?

A military aircraft must have rapid response to the controls for maximum manouverabiity in a conflict situation, therefore an unstable design will assist in this respect.

The best way to illustrate the differences between anhedral and dihedral is to imagine a small ball cut in half. One half has the open side uppermost and the other the open side down.

The half with the open side up we will call dihedral. Now imagine placing a pea in this half. The result is that the pea finds it's way to the bottom and remains stable.

Now with the open side down half which we will call anhedral, placing the pea on the top of the ball will require skill to prevent it falling to one side or the other. It reasons therefore that the slightest movement will cause the pea to roll rapidly, where as the stable pea in the dihedral half will require a much more determined movement to make it move. Also this pea is easily returned to a stable condition, where the anhedral pea is not.

The Boeing 747 with low wing dihedral and underslung engines was designed for civil use from paved runways, but the Lockheed C5A Galaxy with a high mounted anhedral wing was designed for military use.

Going back to the Russian designs, I can only assume that their civil airliners were designed with massive troop transport in mind during the Cold War years.

I hope that explains it well enough, just think of the pea as an aircraft fuselage.


User currently offlineTanguy From Australia, joined Sep 1999, 154 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2010 times:

The Russians were so often 'accused' of copying the designs from the west as 'evidenced' by the IL62 (VC10ski), TU 144 (Concordski), the TU154 copied directly from the B727 and Trident, etc, etc. Now the "west" has realised its revenge with the BAe 146/RJ series which were so obviously copied directly from the Russians!!!!
( Okay it's been a long day at my end and I needed to say something silly. Cheers and g'night!)


User currently offlineRobin27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2002 times:

Good point Tanguy,

Maybe it's so they can squeeze the 146 into tiny airports where no other jet dares to go!


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29786 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1969 times:

Robin27 did a really good job of explaining how anhedral and dihedral works.

I do want to add that the reason these military aircraft use it is because, in the case of the C-5 and the C-17, the aircraft is designed to haul around a 70 ton tank that has it's center of gravity much lower then the wing.

This makes the aircraft want to behave like a top and return to straight and level. Since so much weight is so low on the airplane. By having a wing with considerable anhedral the wing can counter some of the aircraft tendecy to retun to level flight in a turn.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinePH-BZA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1963 times:

How did they come up with the nicknames "VC-10ski" and "Concordski"?

User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1946 times:

THREE OF THE FOUR PICTURES YOU POSTED WERE NOT OF RUSSIAN AIRPLANES!!!!!!!!!! IF YOU ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING AT LEAST HAVE SOME IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.........


"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineJmbyulac From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1946 times:

You should watch your tone Slawko, they may be operated by ohter countries, but it does not mean they are not Russian built!
Maybe it's you who should watch what you are saying...


User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1942 times:

I was not talking about who operates them..... THE FIRST THREE PICTURES ARE NOT OF RUSSIAN BUILT PLANES!!!!!!

Again don't talk if you don't know what you are saying!





"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineBen88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1936 times:

Ok so they're Ukrainian. We still understood what he was trying to ask. No need in screaming.

User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1934 times:

I consider Antonov as a Russian manufacturer. Where else should it come from ?

User currently offlineBen88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1928 times:

Antonov is based in Kyiv, Ukraine.

User currently offlineBrissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1931 times:

Slawko....

You are wrong in one regard.

Antonov is a Ukrainian manufacturer....not Russian (You got this right).

The Il-76 is manufactured by the Tashkent Aviation Production Association.....and as such is, technically, not Russian, but Uzbek.....even though Ilyushin is a Russian company.



User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1925 times:

Ok well I'm sorry that I capitalized my post, but You have to understand it from my point of view, you would think that after ten years people would be a bit mor open minded and informed...It's is almost like a personal insult to hear RUSSIAN applied to me, and where I am from....


"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1923 times:

You are right, and I was not sure about Illushyn, but I had a feeling...non the less I was not sure so I didn't want to say anything...only about what I was sure of...


"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineRobin27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1913 times:

Slawko,

When we say Russian built it is a generic term for aircraft coming from the area formerly known as the USSR.

When we say Western built, it does not mean aircraft built in the USA, Airbus are also Western built. They are generic terms, and nothing more.


User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1910 times:

Generic term would be "Soviet" the country was called the Soviet Union not RUssia, infact russia was not really a nation from 1921 to 1991, nor was Ukraine or Belorus, or any other former soviet country, so using a generic term for those airplanes is and should be soviet built, no RUssia.....

I know this may seem like something stupid to most of you out there, but to those who have been "generalized" injustly for so many years it is an important topic..regardless of the medium....



"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineBrissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1910 times:

I agree totally with you there mate. Calling Antonov a Russian aircraft, is like calling the Canadair RJ an American aircraft.

For many years people in the *West* (what does a country need to do to be defined as 'in the West', as I live in Australia and as far as I am concerned I don't live in the West), have gotten it completely wrong when referring to the sovereign republics as Russia.

In fact, even within the Russian Federation, there are many republics where people hate being referred to as Russian.

For example, the Mi-8/Mi-17 is built in Kazan in the Republic of Tatarstan, and as such are Tatar helicopters...not Russian.

As I mentioned b4 about the Il-76, the Il-114 is also built in Tashkent by TAPO (which explains why Uzbekistan Airways is the most important customer to date).

Technically the only airliners I can think of which are Russian are the Tu-204, which are built at the Aviastar factory in Ulyanovsk.


User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1904 times:

Thank you very much Brissie_Lions, I am glad that at least someone agrees with me.....

It is not easy trying to get your point accross if you are the only one who is trying....

thanks again......maybe we got the point accross to at least a few people....



"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineRobin27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1900 times:

It's a shame Slawko chose to take this off topic in such a loud manner, so we read Soviet for Russian. It still means the same to many people.

All the same, thanks for the history lesson.  


User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (14 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1888 times:

I also compleatly agree with Slawko, it's just I don't mention it anymore because people tend to be very ignorant about it.




Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why No Russian Airliners In North America? posted Wed May 24 2006 20:54:14 by Rob878
Why Do Pax Airplanes Have Windows? posted Fri Aug 19 2005 20:29:40 by Vfw614
Why Do Some Planes Have A/C Type On Fuselage? posted Mon Aug 23 2004 18:28:35 by SafetyDude
AA 757 - Why Do They Still Have The Old Seats? posted Sat Jul 26 2003 19:40:13 by Macmac76
Why Do Taiwan's Airlines Have "B" Reg Numbers? posted Sat Oct 13 2001 15:25:34 by Bobcat
Do Russian Aircraft Have Fbw? posted Mon Jun 4 2001 05:01:15 by MaxPowers
Why Do 747 Combis Have Windows Along Cargo Section posted Sun May 27 2001 16:02:13 by Hkg_clk
Why Do Some Airline Have Both A340s & 777s? posted Wed Apr 4 2001 10:56:29 by G-KIRAN
Why Do 767-300s Have Different Exits? posted Mon Feb 26 2001 10:27:48 by Lewis
Why Do 32X Still Have 1st Generation Engines? posted Sun Sep 24 2000 20:41:54 by Chieftain