Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pictures Of Airbus A30X Design Studies In GMF 2009  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 48345 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.

52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTropical From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 97 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 48299 times:

Sexy! Especially the last one  Smile

User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1471 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 48205 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.



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31431 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 48181 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

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]

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 48107 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]

User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1920 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 48091 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.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1471 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 47998 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.


From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1920 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 47812 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.


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 47553 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.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 47144 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.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12897 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 47059 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



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.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineKeta From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 45859 times:

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


Where there's a will, there's a way
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20355 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 45769 times:



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

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


User currently offlineFWI747 From France, joined Jul 2007, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 45434 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


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20355 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 43877 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 


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31431 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 43806 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

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

User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 43565 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?


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20355 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 43324 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.


User currently offlineLGW340 From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 42726 times:

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


Live life from the window seat...
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 42562 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.



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 42464 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



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineS.p.a.s. From Liechtenstein, joined Mar 2001, 967 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 42107 times:

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


"ad astra per aspera"
User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 41934 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.


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 41697 times:

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


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineKeta From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 41416 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 



Where there's a will, there's a way
25 DocLightning : OMG, the pilots would LOVE that!
26 Manfredj : Efficient yes, but how about performance? Compared to a modern A320, the 727 enjoys a shorter takeoff length, higher max speed, higher service ceilin
27 Shany : 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
28 Post contains links Rampart : I'm not the only one thinking Sonic Cruiser, no offense to Stitch. Long established aerodynamic benefits. http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es..._Tec
29 Birdbrainz : 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 ap
30 Stitch : 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 t
31 Keta : 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 t
32 Osetka : They all look ridiculous. Not nice at all........
33 Stitch : NASA has done studies (the X-29 program) so the data should be publicly available.
34 Q120 : 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
35 Birdbrainz : 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 mainte
36 Stitch : This is why I am rather skeptical that Prop-Fans will be a popular form of propulsion for airliners, even "smaller" ones (100+ seats).
37 Viscount724 : 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 take
38 Manfredj : 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
39 Keta : Yes, that's the mentality behind great inventions I however have the feeling that prop-fans have a chance...
40 Post contains links and images Keesje : The wings & propulsion changed (NACRE '08).. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ugh-2008-reshaping-the-future.html Regarding open rotor concepts,
41 Tdscanuck : 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. Yes, but th
42 Birdbrainz : 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
43 FrmrCAPCADET : It probably is always more fuel efficient to use the whole runway to take off. Hot dogging always cost money.
44 Stitch : I'd say they did do it for the 727 with the 757 which has a similar cruising speed of around Mach .80.
45 Hloutweg : I thought exactly the same. It seems to be an aerodynamicly ideal wing for rear mounted engined aircraft.
46 Post contains links and images Keesje : 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
47 Stitch : Pretty, as are most of his designs. Drop the undercarriage fairings, though.
48 R2rho : 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
49 EBJ1248650 : I thought the same thing. Even the nose has a similarity to the 727.
50 Parapente : 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
51 David L : 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 ne
52 Rampart : 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 th
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...
Pictures Of QF A380 MSN 014 In XFW posted Wed Feb 6 2008 04:27:01 by N14AZ
Pictures Of Aircraft You Have Flown In. posted Tue May 7 2002 05:51:55 by Archie
Eads In Talks To Sell Part Of Airbus posted Thu Nov 16 2006 07:41:00 by N1786b
Eads In Talks To Sell Part Of Airbus posted Thu Nov 16 2006 07:39:44 by N1786b
First Pictures Of Copa In Maracaibo, Venezuela posted Fri Aug 4 2006 21:13:57 by Luisde8cd
BAe In Talks To Sell Out Of Airbus posted Tue Mar 21 2006 15:20:47 by NAV20
China To Take Part In Airbus A350 Design And Mfg posted Mon Feb 20 2006 01:57:51 by Lumberton
First Pictures Of The A380 Landing In MDE Colombia posted Tue Jan 10 2006 23:00:04 by Hagic
BMW To Design Parts Of Airbus A350 Model posted Fri Jan 6 2006 01:34:41 by SFORunner
First Take-off Of Airbus A380 Due In 8 Days; 20th posted Wed Apr 13 2005 00:59:01 by Squirrel83