Videns From Argentina, joined Mar 2004, 133 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3846 times:
How easy or difficult is it to engineer a follow-up variant of an aircraft?
Examples would be A318 thru A321, B757-200 to B757-300, A330-200 to A330-300, etc...
I'm not asking about differences between A342/3 and A345/6, and other designs that are way more radical...
Travel? Why would i travel if I can watch it on TV?
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
It's understandably difficult to measure exactly how 'hard' or 'easy' engineering a stretch/shrink design is, but at least in relation to designing a completely new aircraft, stretches and shrinks are relatively easy (not that the word 'easy' even remotely applies). This is due mostly to the fact that the wing design and most of the systems and flight controls are usually pretty much the same. Again, this 'easiness' is only relative!
Justplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1857 times:
The wing on the 767 could be said to have been "oversized" for the initial 767-200 model. When United ordered 30 in 1978, they were looking at an airplane for use on one-stop transcontinental service. However, the wing was designed to work for an intercontinental jet using three engines of the type used on the 757. Clearly, the wing had a lot of growth available, and although the tri-jet (to be called 777) never went ahead, the 767 became the plane for that market as the 767-300ER.