Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Can Any Airliner Takeoff Vertically Like Harriers?  
User currently offlineRootsAir From Costa Rica, joined Feb 2005, 4186 posts, RR: 40
Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4367 times:

Has there ever been any prototype of an airliner that can take off without needing to speed up on a runway such as the Harrier. I remeber boeing releasing some sort of model but I think its rather some private jet and haven't heard from it in a very long while.

Would it be possible to have some airliner take off in such a manner. Imagin, even the smalles small airports could hnandle big planes!

[Edited 2005-05-07 18:44:35]


A man without the knowledge of his past history,culture and origins is like a tree without roots
32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBirdwatching From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 3822 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

Do you know how much fuel that would cost? Look at them Harriers, they're expensive as hell to operate.

(although I don't know exactly how expensive hell is)  Smile



All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
User currently offlineKomododx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4312 times:

I'll try to do a search on google later, but I know there was a Brasilian business a/c (turboprop) that I saw in a Brasilian av magazine about 8yrs ago.

Stefano  wave 


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6921 posts, RR: 63
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4246 times:

In the 1970s Hawker Siddeley (aaah...) designed (OK "designed" = made a model of) the HS 141 which was a VTOL airliner designed to carry, I dunno, 100 or so, guessing by the photo I still have (unfortunately, not within 5,000 miles of where I sit).

Needless to say, it got no further than an idea...


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4245 times:

This is the closest thing currently in development:

http://www.bellagusta.com/air_ba_main.cfm

This a/c is aimed more towards the business aviation market than the airline market, but I wouldn't be surprised if a small commercial air taxi service uses them in a few years down the road (The a/c is expected to be certified in 2007).


User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4239 times:

You have to admit, though...Harrier style passenger airplanes would revolutionize the travel world and solve a whole lot of problems...

No more worrying about neighbors on the approach and take-off path.

No more worrying about runway length. In fact, the old runways could be taken out and used for more passenger and cargo facilities.

No worries about potential for growth. Even SAN would be adequate to handle any growth.

No more massive delays due to crowded runways - at ORD, four or five RJ's could leave within minutes of each other.

Or maybe I've just seen one too many Enterprise shuttlecraft landings on Star Trek...  eyepopping 



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineKomododx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4238 times:

Srbmod,

THAT's what it was. IIRC it has been in development for years. I just thought it was Brasilian b/c I saw it in a Brasilian mag.

Stefano  wave 


User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4205 times:

The BA609 is the closest to becoming reality.
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRErstfl/FR03Erst/PRBA609.htm

[Edited 2005-05-07 20:13:07]

User currently offlineMikeTheActuary From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 69 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4093 times:

I thought that most aircraft operating out of SNA had to just about be Harrier-like to deal with noise abatement there.  Smile

User currently offlineCORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4070 times:

I hope this doesn't become something EVERYONE does. I am sure you all agree with me on the fact that take-offs and landings are the funnest about flights. Especially the take-off. Taking off vertically would take that thrill away. If you want a vertical take-off, ride on a helicopter.

User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 835 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4053 times:

Not an airliner, but the Dornier Do.31 was intended to be a VTOL transport.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Robert Roggeman
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Marlene Leutgeb




"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3983 times:

Just flew on an AA MD-80....those planes come pretty close to a "vertical lift offs"....  biggrin 


"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3944 times:

Quoting RootsAir (Thread starter):
Has there ever been any prototype of an airliner that can take off without needing to speed up on a runway such as the Harrier.

It's already been done....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Derek Ferguson



User currently offlineAeroVodochody From Czech Republic, joined Feb 2005, 540 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3932 times:

The only ones I could think of were the chinook and the Osprey.


Try not to be jealous, we can't all be Czech.
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1609 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3929 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The Armstrong Whitworth 681 was designed to be a four-engined VTOL military transport, capable of transonic cruise speeds. A lot of work was done on it in the early 1960s, but it never made it to flight.



User currently offlineOzLAME From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 338 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3908 times:

Ansett operated a couple:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Grimes
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Canciani



 Smile



Monty Python's Flying Circus has nothing to do with aviation, except perhaps for Management personnel.
User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2556 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3897 times:

The Fairey Rotodyne was a British autogyro prototype designed for city centre to city centre passenger transport. It could take off vertically because the main rotor could be powered by tip jets. For forward flight it had stub wings with turboprop engines.

It would have been great except (a) the British government at the time was trying to kill off the aviation industry and (b) the noise from the tip jets was ear splittingly painful, ruling out the city centre heliport concept.



http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/fairey_rotodyne-r.html



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineJHSfan From Denmark, joined Apr 2004, 469 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3834 times:

Hindenburg didn't work very well, but that was not due to the blimp design. They just used the wrong gas.
But so far no one has been able to make a blimp that can substitute an airliner or helicopter in a pax context.

- JHSfan



Look at me, I´m riding high, I´m the airbornmaster of the sky...
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21468 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3810 times:

JHSfan: Hindenburg didn't work very well, but that was not due to the blimp design.

Zeppelins are not blimps; A Zeppelin has a rigid skeleton with internal gas cells, not a soft "balloon" that´s blown up to stabilize it like a blimp.


JHSfan: They just used the wrong gas.

Due to political maneuvering, not out of preference. They weren´t allowed to get helium from US sources, so they substituted hydrogen instead (again for political reasons, of course - the responsible thing to do would have been to just stop flying without a safe medium). The Lakehurst disaster was a relatively direct result of politics.


JHSfan: But so far no one has been able to make a blimp that can substitute an airliner or helicopter in a pax context.

That time is over... But not entirely:
http://www.zeppelinflug.de/pages/E/haupt.htm


User currently offlineJHSfan From Denmark, joined Apr 2004, 469 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3770 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
Zeppelins are not blimps;

I'm not an expert into what the term blimp means, sorry.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
They weren´t allowed to get helium from US sources

I know that they had no alternatives to hydrogen, if they wanted the Zeppelin to fly. I don't think that the Nazi-government would accept such a propaganda defeat (Hindenburg not flying that is). Unfortunately some people had to pay the price to that decision.  Sad

- JHSfan



Look at me, I´m riding high, I´m the airbornmaster of the sky...
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21468 posts, RR: 53
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3760 times:

JHSfan: I'm not an expert into what the term blimp means, sorry.

No problem... it´s a rather specific and somewhat obscure piece of information...  Smile


JHSfan: I don't think that the Nazi-government would accept such a propaganda defeat (Hindenburg not flying that is).

Yes, that was the ultimate problem.

JHSfan: Unfortunately some people had to pay the price to that decision.

As always. Sad


User currently offlineOzLAME From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 338 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3672 times:

Quoting JHSfan (Reply 19):
I'm not an expert into what the term blimp means, sorry.

At the risk of being accused of being irrelevant 'blimp' is an old British Military acronym for Balloon, Limp.



Monty Python's Flying Circus has nothing to do with aviation, except perhaps for Management personnel.
User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3664 times:

Quoting JHSfan (Reply 19):
I know that they had no alternatives to hydrogen, if they wanted the Zeppelin to fly. I don't think that the Nazi-government would accept such a propaganda defeat (Hindenburg not flying that is). Unfortunately some people had to pay the price to that decision.

Essentially, yes. The shame of it all was that the Hindenburg was designed for Helium from the start, and Dr. Eckner knew and feared that Hydrogen on the ship might lead to exactly the disaster that happened.

Shame too, such a beautiful machine.



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineDeskPilot From Australia, joined Apr 2004, 767 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
Zeppelins are not blimps; A Zeppelin has a rigid skeleton with internal gas cells, not a soft "balloon" that´s blown up to stabilize it like a blimp.

Zeppelins were duralumin-internal-framed dirigibles. Derigables are steerable self-propelled airships.



By the way, is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?
User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2556 posts, RR: 24
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3559 times:

Quoting OzLAME (Reply 21):
At the risk of being accused of being irrelevant 'blimp' is an old British Military acronym for Balloon, Limp.

Unlikely as Limp is hardly a military style word. It's also mixed up with the "real" wrong derivation (USN Airship Type B, Limp). Type B airships existed, but only after the term Blimp first appeared in written English. The term "blimp" is generally thought to be onomatopoeic, the sound the airship makes when you tap the balloon envelope. No-one knows for sure, but it's the most likely.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
25 B744F : Why couldn't the Nazis get helium from the US? They got oil from them (mainly the Rockafellers)
26 Lemurs : The US saw helium as a strategic resource at the time. They didn't want to share the technology to produce it on mass scales, and they didn't want to
27 Post contains links and images Sonic67 : The Zeppelin tried making a come back in Europe but the project keeps running out of gas. View Large View MediumPhoto © Andreas Barowski HAHA
28 Post contains links and images LNSEK : What about this, the russians could really build them , hehe: View Large View MediumPhoto © Flavien Breitenmoser View Large View MediumPhoto &cop
29 Post contains images Lehpron : Are you kidding? The thrust & the noise from a VSTOL approach would be directed downwards to keep it up as it slowed from wing flight, it would be lo
30 Post contains links and images Q330 : It is a reality! View Large View MediumPhoto © Joe Statz -Q
31 Sanjet : Wouldn't this be a problem for certification since it would enter the airline category? What happens if you have an engine failure?... You're supposed
32 LeanOfPeak : Sanjet, the B609's engines are cross-shafted so that either engine can power both props/rotors. I haven't done an analysis, so I can't say for sure wh
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Can Any Airliner Takeoff Vertically Like Harriers?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can An Airliner Stop By Only Using Reverse Thrust? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 18:13:39 by Tarantine
Can An Airliner Land On Water? posted Wed Dec 31 2003 21:04:46 by Jutes85
Any Airliner LHR "QC2" Certified? posted Tue Dec 2 2003 17:42:24 by RayChuang
Can Any Aircraft Catch Concorde? posted Sat Sep 14 2002 01:02:29 by Rickb
What's The Biggest Jet Can Takeoff In 2700m Runway posted Thu Mar 9 2006 20:28:29 by AirA380
Any A340 Pilots Out There That Can Answer This? posted Fri Sep 16 2005 03:03:58 by Slarty
The Nuclear/Solar Airliner, Can It Be Done? posted Wed Jul 6 2005 23:23:25 by UAL747
Can A LearJet Land And Takeoff On A 2500 Foot Runway posted Wed Feb 16 2005 05:37:35 by AirWillie6475
Can A "normal" Airliner Go At Supersonic Speed posted Sat Nov 16 2002 13:39:57 by F.pier
Can Someone Explain All The V Speeds Like... posted Tue Apr 30 2002 13:37:26 by Gullfaxi

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format