Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2358 times:
Quoting F.pier (Thread starter): Now do you think RR, GE, PW (or EA) can build a so powerful engine?
Total installed thrust on an A380 is about 280,000 lbs. Since it's a quad, that means the airplane actually needs 210,000 lbs of thrust to operate safely. That means you'd need a pair of 210,000 thrust engines if you wanted to make it a twin, or almost double the largest engine we've got today.
It's probably technically possible to do such a thing, but I'm pretty sure that nobody would want to. The investment would be enormous.
Quoting Jutes85 (Reply 1): I think that the aircraft was designed with 4 engines, meaning the wing might have to be re-designed, as well as CofG. I could be wrong though....
I'm not sure about CG (depends where you put the struts) but it would definitely require a new wing, new fuel system, new vertical stabilizer, new flight control software, and new landing gear (much larger fan = more ground clearance required).
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, RR: 66 Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2300 times:
Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 2): It's probably technically possible to do such a thing, but I'm pretty sure that nobody would want to. The investment would be enormous.
Indeed. Couple that with a very small market and your profit margins are non-existent.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2276 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3): Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 2):
It's probably technically possible to do such a thing, but I'm pretty sure that nobody would want to. The investment would be enormous.
Indeed. Couple that with a very small market and your profit margins are non-existent.
Couple that with afterburners, however, and the coolness factor would be off the charts.
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2252 times:
Quoting 2H4 (Reply 4):
Couple that with afterburners, however, and the coolness factor would be off the charts.
That would be fantastic. Put a big red button on the panel for an engine-out condition to kick in the reheat, blow the windows out of the houses around the airfield...sweet.
The fire marshals at Boeing and Airbus are already having heart attacks just thinking about it...
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19717 posts, RR: 56 Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2232 times:
A twin-engined airplane the size of the 380, yes (though not with today's engine technology), but the 380 is and always will be a quad. Far too much modification to deal with in order to fit two engines, and that's assuming they'd actually fit under the wings.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
WingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2025 posts, RR: 56 Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2222 times:
Quoting F.pier (Thread starter): A380 has 4 engines because at the time it was designed available engines weren't enough powerful to make a twin A380 possible.
It is becoming clear that the A380 was designed with 4 engines not just for the reason you mention, but also to share engines with a smaller twin-engine plane, thus benefiting engine makers (bigger production runs to amortize the development), customers (fleet commonality and interchangeability across twins and quads), and Airbus (commonality as a selling point). At least that's my read of the tea leaves, come 2015 or so
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62 Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2210 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 8): BTW is this your new thing now, 2H4? One sentence posts and outta there?
Well hell, unless I've got a photo of a Tasmanian Aerospace TA-3 Machthrasher 9000 (mk.IV), I'm really not good for much beyond the odd one-liner.
2H4
P.S. - Yes, I'm aware of the irony of this post being one sentence long...
737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 466 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2164 times:
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, RR: 58 Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2018 times:
Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 2): Total installed thrust on an A380 is about 280,000 lbs. Since it's a quad, that means the airplane actually needs 210,000 lbs of thrust to operate safely
Could you explain the calculation Involved.
Trent 900 or GP-7200 would def be used for other Type Aircraft in the future.This would help in reducing Airline operator stores inventory in the long run.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, RR: 66 Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2009 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 11): Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 2):
Total installed thrust on an A380 is about 280,000 lbs. Since it's a quad, that means the airplane actually needs 210,000 lbs of thrust to operate safely
Could you explain the calculation Involved.
- A380-800 has 4 engines at 70k lb each = 280k lb total.
- Engine out requirements dictates that the aircraft shall be able to proceed with an engine failure at the worst possible moment (V1). There are other requirements but that's the big one. With one engine out available thrust is 3 x 70k lb = 210 k lb. In other words, the aircraft "needs" 210 k and has 70 k (one engine) as a "reserve".
- An engine failure on a twin leaves you with one engine, so that engine alone needs to propel the aircraft from an engine failure at V1. Since the theoretical aircraft ("twin 380-800) is the same, the thrust required is the same. So that one engine needs to produce 210 k lb. As before, one engine is the "reserve".
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1988 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 11): Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 2):
Total installed thrust on an A380 is about 280,000 lbs. Since it's a quad, that means the airplane actually needs 210,000 lbs of thrust to operate safely
Could you explain the calculation Involved.
Exactly what Starlionblue said. Only he did it more eloquently, thanks!
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1638 times:
Quoting Speedbird2263 (Reply 14):
So by that calculation if the 77W were to be modified as a quad it would require each engine to have a thrust of 38,333 lbs. Interesting scratchchin
I.e 115,000lbs / 3 in an Engine Out assuming a quad design.
Sponsor Message: 
From Italy, joined Aug 2000, 1517 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Jamaica, joined Jul 2006, 454 posts, 
This of course explains the 342/343.
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
