Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Honda Jet Pics From Nbaa  
User currently offlineUnited757 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 103 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5592 times:

Hello! I just got back from the NBAA convention, and it was great! Every aircraft they had there was spectacular. I got a few pics of the Honda Jet, their only of the exterior though because the mock-up of the interior they had was extremely crowded and I wasn't able to get a picture. Enjoy!

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p40/united757/DSCN0998.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p40/united757/DSCN0997.jpg

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFLALEFTY From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 468 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5527 times:

I know that short responses are frowned on on Anet, but your pictures of the HondaJet are very, very cool. Thanks for posting them!

User currently offlineZRHnerd From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days ago) and read 5515 times:

I second that! It sure is an interesting looking plane, i like the way the attached the engines Big grin

User currently offlineUnited757 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days ago) and read 5498 times:

Thanks Flalefty!
filler
filler
filler


User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days ago) and read 5421 times:

Quoting United757 (Thread starter):

Is this the actual Jet or a mockup? Either way, cool pics!



Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineUnited757 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5345 times:

I'm pretty sure it's the actual jet. They had a second one that was to display the interior which was definatley a mock-up.

User currently offline727200er From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5321 times:

The way the nose is and the engine mounting....
It's kinda funny looking. Not bad but odd.



"they who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only at night" - Edgar Allen Poe
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5293 times:

Why not a conventional engine mount to the back of the plane? Those pylons look like they add alot of unneeded drag.

User currently offlineBobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5252 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 7):
Why not a conventional engine mount to the back of the plane?

Because the fuel is in the wing. I guess it's a compromise.


User currently offlineGh123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5188 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 7):
Why not a conventional engine mount to the back of the plane? Those pylons look like they add alot of unneeded drag

Because it was a small plane, by mounting the engines on the wing they therefore maximized the size of the cabin. I'm no technician but I when the engines are conventionally mounted there must be a fair but of framework inside of the fuselage to support all of that power from the engines.

I'm sorry that my terminology is not that technical, I don't get everything right but I know that this was the reason why. Good idea, methinks!

G


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5118 times:

Quoting Gh123 (Reply 9):
Because it was a small plane, by mounting the engines on the wing they therefore maximized the size of the cabin.

Well, if it makes the plane roomier than the Eclipse then I guess it's worth it. But then again, a Geo Metro is roomier than the Eclipse...


User currently offlineGh123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5112 times:

I don't know so much about those aircraft but what you say makes sense!

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21620 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4885 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 10):
Well, if it makes the plane roomier than the Eclipse then I guess it's worth it.

The Honda is a lot roomier than the Eclipse. The Honda has space for five in the cabin, as well as a small bar and a bathroom - you won't find that on the Eclipse, which is basically a car with wings - the Honda is really more of a light jet than a VLJ.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6176 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4694 times:

Quoting 727200er (Reply 6):
It's kinda funny looking. Not bad but odd.

The nose shape was determined by CFD programs and wind tunnel testing so as to maintain laminar flow which reduces drag significantly.

Quoting Gh123 (Reply 9):
Because it was a small plane, by mounting the engines on the wing they therefore maximized the size of the cabin. I'm no technician but I when the engines are conventionally mounted there must be a fair but of framework inside of the fuselage to support all of that power from the engines.

You are correct but the increased cabin space is just part of the equation. Mounting the engines on the wing also provide several other, more significant benefits. There was a very good post by Lightsabre on this a short while back that you could search for if you would like some details.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4576 times:

Don't they have a model that flies yet?

I wish I could have gone to the NBAA convention again this year. I really enjoyed it last year as I got to go aboard just about every aircraft except for the Miami Dolphins BBJ.


User currently offlineJdl1527 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 52 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4554 times:

the plane in the picture does fly, i have seen it at Oshkosh the last 2 years

User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 835 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4529 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 7):
Why not a conventional engine mount to the back of the plane? Those pylons look like they add alot of unneeded drag.

Piggybacking on Gh123's response, this is from the Honda website:
"Conventional wisdom has long held that mounting jet engines over the wing of an aircraft creates unfavorable aerodynamic interference. But through extensive experimentation and testing, Honda engineers discovered an optimal over-the-wing engine mount configuration that actually achieves lower drag than the standard rear-fuselage engine mount design. And because thee are no fuselage-mounted engine supports, interior cabin space is maximized."



"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6176 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4489 times:

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 16):
Piggybacking on Gh123's response, this is from the Honda website:

Piggybacking on your response, this is from an excellent HondaJet article in AOPA Magazine...

The most unusual design feature of the HondaJet is the over-the-wing engine mount (OTWEM in Honda parlance). Fujino estimates he spent two to three years working on this one concept alone, bucking traditional wisdom that said putting anything on the trailing edge of the wing would induce unacceptable drag, never mind the heavy structure necessary to support an engine and its vibration and thrust loads. But after years of study, computer modeling, and wind-tunnel testing, Fujino found an optimal placement for the engine pylons that not only doesn't increase drag, it actually decreases drag relative to an airplane with empennage-mounted engines.

http://www.aopa.org/pilot/features/2005/feat0508.html

Quoting Jdl1527 (Reply 15):
the plane in the picture does fly, i have seen it at Oshkosh the last 2 years

Yes. There are several video clips at the HondaJet website...

http://world.honda.com/jet/



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4457 times:

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 17):
The most unusual design feature of the HondaJet is the over-the-wing engine mount (OTWEM in Honda parlance). Fujino estimates he spent two to three years working on this one concept alone, bucking traditional wisdom that said putting anything on the trailing edge of the wing would induce unacceptable drag, never mind the heavy structure necessary to support an engine and its vibration and thrust loads. But after years of study, computer modeling, and wind-tunnel testing, Fujino found an optimal placement for the engine pylons that not only doesn't increase drag, it actually decreases drag relative to an airplane with empennage-mounted engines.

Unusual, yes. Innovative, no.




When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4435 times:

How did they get it to Orange County Convention Center? Did they fly it in to MCO, then disassemble it and truck it to the Center, or did they just truck it right from wherever they keep it?

User currently offlineComeAndGo From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1041 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 19 hours ago) and read 4277 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 10):
But then again, a Geo Metro is roomier than the Eclipse...

People in Europe don't know what a Geo Metro is. GM sells under Opel and Ford under Ford. You might compare it to a Ford Fiesta, Opel Corsa or a Mini Morris.


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 19 hours ago) and read 4274 times:

Quoting ComeAndGo (Reply 20):
People in Europe don't know what a Geo Metro is. GM sells under Opel and Ford under Ford. You might compare it to a Ford Fiesta, Opel Corsa or a Mini Morris.

Either way, you won't find me on it unless I'm up front.


User currently offlineFlybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1801 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 19 hours ago) and read 4239 times:

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13):
You are correct but the increased cabin space is just part of the equation. Mounting the engines on the wing also provide several other, more significant benefits. There was a very good post by Lightsabre on this a short while back that you could search for if you would like some details.

I suppose one of these benefits included reduction of cabin noise and vibration as well.

If the Eclipse and Honda Jet were in a beauty contest I think I would go for the Eclipse... because I tend to be a little conservative when it comes to aircraft design convention.



"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13109 posts, RR: 100
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 17 hours ago) and read 4186 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 7):
Why not a conventional engine mount to the back of the plane? Those pylons look like they add alot of unneeded drag.

Let's see if I can remember all of my reasons.

1. Engines on the wing reduce the moment on the wing root. Thus allowing for lighter structure.

2. Vibration. There tends to be an inheret incompatibility of the vibration transmission between an engine, pylon, and the wing. Why engines on the body are notorious for transmitting vibration and reducing airframe fatigue life.

3. Aerodynamics. Engines on the body get a dirty inlet profile due to the boundry layer on the aircraft body. This reduces thrust and thus increases fuel burn.

4. Aerodynamics part II: Engines on the tail acheive best cruise fuel efficiency with the exhaust angles slightly in toward the aircraft centerline. This is a non-optimal thrust vector.

5. Most of the drag is the wings, why have all of that structure to transfer the thrust from the tail forward to the wingbox and then out to the wing? Again, weight savings. Pylons are very aerodynamic and not that heavy... If it adds a cabin benifit, that's even better. But we aerospace engineers tend to think about weight. Always. (But then you find yourself adding ballast to fix balance. Oh, that hurts!)

Now, putting the engines above the wing allows for very short (read light and cheap) landing gear. Also, notice the engines are near the airframe centerline. Thus thrust changes will not induce pitch variation. Although there will be some yaw in an engine out scenario. Much more than with tail mounted engines.

Its late here, so I'm sure I forgot something.

Quoting Flybyguy (Reply 22):
I suppose one of these benefits included reduction of cabin noise and vibration as well.

 checkmark 

Quoting Flybyguy (Reply 22):
I tend to be a little conservative when it comes to aircraft design convention.

That's ok, but the engines over the wing truely save quite a bit of weight and provide aerodynamic advantages. Thus, I think the design will sell. Its not like its an unproven concept...

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13):
There was a very good post by Lightsabre

Is that the French spelling of my username?  Wink

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineFLALEFTY From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 468 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 9 hours ago) and read 4056 times:

http://world.honda.com/HondaJet/

They have an excellent website with a nice, multi-media presentation of the new jet.

With a nice-big cabin, an 1,180 nm IFR range and 420 Kt. speed, this is going to be a winner!


25 Post contains links and images Corey07850 : The HondaJet was cool, but meeting Burt Rutan while checking out the HondaJet was even cooler Talking to all the aircraft manufacturers, they fly them
26 NASCARAirforce : NBAA is done now, so did it fly out of MCO/ORL or did it get trucked out?
27 Corey07850 : I don't know... We had our booth packed up and gone before they started breaking down the aircraft... The HondaJet flew into MCO, so I assume that's
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...
THY Retjo Jet Retires From The Fleet posted Sun Nov 12 2006 11:39:36 by Wing
Corp. Airliner Photos From Nbaa posted Thu Nov 2 2006 04:15:16 by L1011dal
Honda Jet To Start Taking Orders In Oct posted Tue Jul 25 2006 22:16:46 by Lowecur
Awesome Bird's Eye View Pics From Some US Airports posted Tue Jan 24 2006 23:59:01 by AMSSpotter
Helios 737 Pics From F-16 - Are They Fake? posted Wed Aug 17 2005 14:56:17 by Bells
Honda Jet Makes First Public Flight posted Sat Jul 30 2005 00:14:54 by Beauing
Latest A380 Pics From Airbus: The Factory posted Fri Dec 3 2004 00:39:27 by Eg777er
New YYZ And AC Pics From YYZNews posted Tue Nov 30 2004 21:53:02 by KrisYYZ
What's The Honda Jet Status? posted Sun Oct 31 2004 02:23:22 by KDTWFlyer
EU Jet Loads From MAN posted Mon Oct 18 2004 17:53:30 by Trident2e