ERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4187 times:
Could there ever or was there ever a plan to build an updated Shorts Brothers 360? I always loved seeing them in my city flying ILM-RDU. Only body i know of that was desined to create lift with the wing.
Legoguy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3301 posts, RR: 44 Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4087 times:
Yes I loved seeing this aircraft as well! Even though the square fuselage does create alot of lift, I'm sure it also creates alot of drag, although I could be wrong. Also I'm not sure if Short's would be up to building a NG version.
Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4056 times:
It is a box with wings on it. Build a S-360NG? The only question in my mind is.........WHY?
Imapilotaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3939 times:
In the ABQ Airport Administration Offices there is a wood model of a new version of the Shorts 360 designed only for cargo hauling. The aircraft has the same props as on the Q400. It's a sharp looking model. Im trying to remember for the life of me the company that was planning on building them, but they were located somewhere in New Mexico.
TIMEAIR From Canada, joined May 2005, 436 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3922 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 5): The S360 is possibly the ugliest mass produced airliner the world has ever seen
It may be ugly. but very reliable and practically MTC free due no pressuriztion/bulkheads to limit it life cycle. Granted it is somewhat "abnormal" with a square fuselage,but, keep in mind, the Shorts brothers were very ingenious by developing this aircraft with the fuselage that provides 40-50% of the lift capability. SMART!
MMEPHX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3912 times:
Quoting ERAUgrad02 (Thread starter): Only body i know of that was desined to create lift with the wing.
learn something everyday, I always wondered why it was a square shape with relatively small wings. Probably a neat idea in theory but I guess it must have a lot of other drawbacks as no-one else adopted the idea.
TIMEAIR From Canada, joined May 2005, 436 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3897 times:
Quoting MMEPHX (Reply 8): no-one else adopted the idea.
No one wanted to re-tool their plant from a round fuselage to a square fuselage for a limited number of aircraft, as this "square" is good to a maximum of 10,000 ft, as above that you need pressurization, and you can't pressurize a square box.
Honestlly, the Shorts is a perfect aircraft for short, high frequency markets. I.E. YVR-YYJ/YCD (15min), and provides amazing views with those large windows. I have heard many people comment on how amazing it was to be able to see so much because of the oversized windows.
Yeah it is ugly, but no pressurization isn't a benefit for pax. For the plane perhaps, but it is nice to fly over most of the low-altitude weather.
Hello S360 and *hello* inconvenient flight.
The reason that the square thing never caught on is (besides being ugly as sin) even short-haul turboprops need to have pressurized cabin.
The Dash-8, the Saab 2000, the F50, the ATR series, etc.
Shorts isn't ingenious. It is decades behind in technology. It is reliable, but it is simple. It is ingenious design for what it does, but it isn't comfortable to fly in for more than 30 minutes at a time anyway.
I've flown those things frequently through the years. Being ugly is probably the best thing I have to say for them. I look forward to seeing them completely phased out.
Yak97 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3762 times:
New start-up airlines had the option of using the SD3-60 as a cheap way of proving services. As was stated above the Vomit Comet was ideal for short hops where ground transportation was not an option (inter island for example).
With the gradual demise of SD3-60 (36-39 seats) what options would new start-up airlines have. The SF340? Complex aircraft with expensive engines. The J41? Limited production. EMB120? Possible. A small Dash8? Heavy for passenger numbers. Something from Russia?
But as all of these aircraft are out of production what is going to happen in the future? The smallest aircraft still in production (as far as I am aware) is the ATR42 - 48 seats, which is a little on the large size. The costs of regional jets of the 35-50 seat very poor for start-up airlines.
Go down a size and look at options for the smaller commuter airlines (18 seats). J31/32 - the vast numbers parked in the desert are now probably beyond hope as regards getting them back into the air. EMB110 - limited numbers & non-pressurised. Beech 1900 - possible option but price a problem. Let410 - loads made but unpressurised (Certification issues?). DHC6 - limited numbers and only really suitable for specialist operations (ski, STOL airports etc). And again all of these aircraft are long out of production.
So which manufacturer is going to be brave enough to get back into these markets - 18 & 30 seats?
It is probably a similar situation to the late 50's where the DC3 was the aircraft of choice but people were looking to the future.
Floridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1985 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3756 times:
Quoting TIMEAIR (Reply 4): Quoting EI321 (Reply 3):
Its a shipping container with wings
Yes in which DeHavilland Twin Otter was shipped in!....
I love it. Best thing I've heard on here all week.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3745 times:
I love the 360 - nice big windows, nice high ceiling, no fuss no muss - only few on them a few times, in Australia and the Seychelles, but they're cool.
Art From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2937 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3549 times:
Quoting Yak97 (Reply 11): So which manufacturer is going to be brave enough to get back into these markets - 18 & 30 seats?
How large would the market be over 25 years? What would the development costs be for a simple utilitarian aircraft?
If Shorts and the other manufacturers have left the market, might this sector not give some non-aviation manufacturing country the chance to establish a small manufacturing industry? Just a thought.
Legoguy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3301 posts, RR: 44 Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3444 times:
Quoting Olympus69 (Reply 15): Shorts is owned by Bombardier are they not?
Indeed they are. I believe the shorts factory in Belfast manufactures parts for the Bombardier CRJ aircraft.
I really miss these birds now that most of them have retired!I can see how people find the Shorts 330 ugly however the Shorts 360 is beautiful especially in the following liveries...
I once worked for shorts for a few months in the late 80's, was in Zweibruecken USAF base, we used the 360's for the transport of spar military aircraftparts between all the airforce bases in Europe. Unfortunately for me the cold war ended and so did my job after only 2 months.
I dont know exactly were Shorts is at the moment, they used to and maybe still have a military division, which used to develope hand held ground to air missile launchers.
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5929 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3315 times:
Well, it seems to have found a niche role up here in the Pacific NW USA...as a smokejumper aircraft. I was talking to the pilots of one, and most of their aircraft are retired Sherpas (C-23? Trying to remember the US Army designation). The Army Reserve still has a few of them, too, I followed one once doing the localizer back course approach at SLE.
When I worked at LRU in the early 1990's, Mesa Airlines had taken over regional flying for whoever was doing United Express out west, and a bunch of Shorts 360's in United Express colors were parked at LRU for desert storage. I'm not sure what happened to all those birds, but they're no longer there.
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12701 posts, RR: 80 Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3292 times:
Bombardier have owned the air framing part of Shorts since 1989, making over the years major assemblies-usually fuselages, of their RJ's, Biz Jets, as well as Lear jets after Bombardier brought out that range of aircraft.
The missile division remained separate, now a part of the pan European MDBA group. Their principal product being the Mach 4 Starstreak range of close in air defence missiles.
Rubbishing the Shorts commuter-liners from today's context, is like rubbishing a DC-3 in the 1960's, what no pressurisation? Piston engines? What's with the taildragger configuration?
These boxy aircraft from Belfast, were the entry level of many commuter/local operations. They were simple and economic enough, for embryonic airline commuter services, that we now take for granted on pressurised props or even RJ's.
There was nothing really like them 30 years ago, if they were so bad, then Shorts fooled a lot of people, since the SD-330 and 360 sold steadily but well.
But by the late 80's, their time had passed.
Shorts wanted to move to the FJX, a low wing RJ with wing mounted turbofans, however, being in the UK, good luck getting finance for a manufacturing project. In 1989, the UK govt sold off it's remaining shares in Shorts, so Bombardier made them an offer, neatly stopping a potential competitor to their planned line of Challanger Biz Jet based CRJ's at birth.
Shorts had experience since the 1960's with the Skyvan, a rugged light transport, with mostly military sales. But some civil ones too and even a pax version-Olympic used these on local inter Agean Island services for example.
Easy to mock this odd looking range of Shorts commuter aircraft, they were in fact, pioneers in the regional airline world.
EI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3264 times:
Quoting BFS2007 (Reply 18): I dont know exactly were Shorts is at the moment, they used to and maybe still have a military division, which used to develope hand held ground to air missile launchers.
The Hellfire missile from the Apache is a shorts product.
Aeronut From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 136 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3236 times:
Quoting GDB (Reply 21): Bombardier have owned the air framing part of Shorts since 1989, making over the years major assemblies-usually fuselages, of their RJ's, Biz Jets, as well as Lear jets after Bombardier brought out that range of aircraft.
The missile division remained separate, now a part of the pan European MDBA group. Their principal product being the Mach 4 Starstreak range of close in air defence missiles.
Rubbishing the Shorts commuter-liners from today's context, is like rubbishing a DC-3 in the 1960's, what no pressurisation? Piston engines? What's with the taildragger configuration?
These boxy aircraft from Belfast, were the entry level of many commuter/local operations. They were simple and economic enough, for embryonic airline commuter services, that we now take for granted on pressurised props or even RJ's.
There was nothing really like them 30 years ago, if they were so bad, then Shorts fooled a lot of people, since the SD-330 and 360 sold steadily but well.
But by the late 80's, their time had passed.
Shorts wanted to move to the FJX, a low wing RJ with wing mounted turbofans, however, being in the UK, good luck getting finance for a manufacturing project. In 1989, the UK govt sold off it's remaining shares in Shorts, so Bombardier made them an offer, neatly stopping a potential competitor to their planned line of Challanger Biz Jet based CRJ's at birth.
Shorts had experience since the 1960's with the Skyvan, a rugged light transport, with mostly military sales. But some civil ones too and even a pax version-Olympic used these on local inter Agean Island services for example.
Easy to mock this odd looking range of Shorts commuter aircraft, they were in fact, pioneers in the regional airline world.
RIGHT YOU ARE. And now SHORTS is delegated to the role of component manufacturer. They have no capacity to design a complete airframe anymore. In fact with further moves of manufacturing base to Mexico, I hvae some serious doubts on the their long term viability
25 GDB: To be fair EI321, the Hellfire missile is a US product. However, the version much modified for use from fast jets, now entering RAF service as the Bri
27 BHMBAGLOCK: It seems like somebody's always "planning" to put some of these back in production but realistically the Twotter may actually make it. No, it's a Loc
28 EI321: I just remember seeing an apache documentary that said it uses Shorts Hellfire Missiles, what was it refering to?
29 BHMBAGLOCK: Besides poor journalism, probably the Brimstone derivative as GDB mentioned.
30 757MDE: I have the chance to see the civil one at one of my local Airports. I actually don't dislike it that much!
31 2H4: There is no such thing as an ugly aircraft. Only a misunderstood aircraft. 2H4
32 Access-Air: I love the Shorts 330 s and 360s and I mess seeing them. The first time I saw a Shorts 330 was a Mississippi Valley Airlines brid in Clinton, Iowa in
34 Rp: Our favorite punch line for the Shorts 330......"Punching square holes in round clouds"
35 DHHornet: The Shed ok it’s ugly. But I am a sucker for different looking aircraft. They all look the same in this day and age. I have never flown in one sadly
36 Lincoln: Westair Commuter Airlines... my first ever flight FAT-SAN Superbowl weekend 1989 -- at the tender age of four -- was on a Westair Shorts 360. On one
37 Srbmod: Actually, that's not Shorts who is building said a/c. It's a company called Utilicraft Aerospace who is based at LZU but are building the plant at Do
38 KC135TopBoom: Isn't the company called "NM Trucking"? [quote=Stirling,reply=26]Followed closely by this little Frankenstein: Nooooo, the B-747-SP is one of the mos
41 Avt007: I worked on 360s for a number of years. The best thing is they are built like tanks, and with PT-6s, the dispatch reliability rate was 99.6%, a very h
42 Milesrich: If the weather was good, the Shorts was fun to fly in, a throw back to the DC-3. And compared to the Beech 99's they replaced at MVA, they were an imp
43 AeroWeanie: The 330s/360s are not dead. A lot of them were bought by the US Army and turned into C-23s. They are in heavy, daily use in Iraq. The US Army has publ
44 2H4: I wish I was better with Photoshop. It would be fun to whip up an example of a Shorts 360 JET, a la the Do-328.... 2H4
47 DEVILFISH: The Do-328 mentioned above was doing relatively well before the advent of the 328Jet and the demise of Fairchild Dornier. View Large View MediumPhoto
48 2H4: Ha, I love it! The winglets are a great touch....as though induced drag is a concern..... 2H4
49 A388: Correct. We still have passenger flights with the Shorts 360!!! So if you want to fly one come over to CUR via AUA!! See my photos below: View Large
50 DEVILFISH: As indeed it does..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...estarts-twin-otter-production.html Quote: "The heritage de Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter i
51 757MDE: The L-410 is also quite common here in Colombia and more seem to be coming as time passes by, production must be active.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3301 posts, 
From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, 
From Canada, joined May 2005, 436 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1933 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2937 posts, 
especially in the following liveries...
From Ireland, joined Feb 2007, 16 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
