Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 33 Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 1592 times:
I remember they had a race between a sports car and an F-16 on Ripley's once. The car was winning eventually, but once the F-16 picked up some speed, the car was toast.
Corey07850 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2519 posts, RR: 5 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 1580 times:
Essentially all you would need to do is compare the power to weight ratio of each of the aircraft. To be fair, make sure you either use the Max or Min weight of each plane.
I would tend to lean toward the Embraer, but that's just a complete guess.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15873 posts, RR: 66 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months ago) and read 1539 times:
Quoting Corey07850 (Reply 5): Essentially all you would need to do is compare the power to weight ratio of each of the aircraft.
This would give a very rough approximation, since the standstill thrust of various engines differs greatly from what they get with air screaming into the engine. At standstill, props probably have an engine.
Another factor is if the aircraft has engines at idle or full blast when you start measuring. If they are at idle, the faster spoolup of the prop would give it another edge.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Aogdesk From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 933 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1508 times:
I'll put $100 on the Embraer. Anyone want to jump in on that action?
Wing From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1552 posts, RR: 25 Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1474 times:
If any of you not picking the A-310 is not knowing enough of the power of that beast.That plane is just ridiculisly overpowered which none of the pilots world wide can complain but unfortunately menagements does.
Mastropiero From Spain, joined Dec 2005, 121 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1360 times:
Is interesting you mention the fact that the 757 couldn´t be kept on the ground. I don´t get it, does it mean that it´s wings would generate so much lift at the speed it would reach that it would start to rotate without any input from the pilot? Even on a clean wing configuration? If so, why is it only for the 757 and not the rest of the planes?
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15873 posts, RR: 66 Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1336 times:
Quoting Mastropiero (Reply 12): Is interesting you mention the fact that the 757 couldn´t be kept on the ground. I don´t get it, does it mean that it´s wings would generate so much lift at the speed it would reach that it would start to rotate without any input from the pilot? Even on a clean wing configuration? If so, why is it only for the 757 and not the rest of the planes?
Yes the plane would lift off. But it would not rotate unless it was badly trimmed. And this would be a problem for the SAAB 340 way before the 757.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
The first three would be very close with the 747 and DC-10 not far behind. The 727 is a disappointing 6th, with the A340 not surprisingly last.
I'm going to disqualify the "SAAB 300" on the grounds that (a) it doesn't exist and (b) the maths for turboprops is not so easy. Anyway, although props feel sportier, they lose thrust with forward speed faster than jets so couldn't really compete. Also it would have the hardest time staying on the ground.
I'm surprised by how low the 727 comes, but not by the 757 winning. Not only the highest thrust to weight ratio, but also one of the slipperiest in drag terms too.
Interestingly, if the 777-200LR were to enter it might just beat the 757 (thrust to weight ratio 0.6875, but more drag).
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2045 posts, 
From France, joined Oct 2001, 3196 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15873 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 3968 posts, 
From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1552 posts, 
From Spain, joined Dec 2005, 121 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
