na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9600 posts, RR: 10 Posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2266 times:
Is it true that the tailfin of the A310 is slightly lower than on the A300, roughly 50 cms? The only source about it I found is wikipedia, and photo comparisons seem to confirm it, as do the factory figures for the whole plane heights.
Its interesting that the shorter plane has a lower tailfin, on the A330-200 vs A330-300 its the opposite.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9600 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2166 times:
Thank you. I only wonder why should wikipedia say that the tailfin of the A310 was shortened in comparison to the A310 if there is no reason behind it?
The A310 has a height of 15,80 m vs. 16,53/16,62 of the A300. I know the fuselage isnt even when the ac are standing, but could this really account to a height difference of almost 80cms?
zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7721 posts, RR: 73 Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2144 times:
Quoting na (Reply 2): I only wonder why should wikipedia say that the tailfin of the A310 was shortened in comparison to the A310 if there is no reason behind it?
You are confusing two things here, wiki says "Smaller horizontal tail surface", not vertical. The horizontal stabiliser on the A300 is 16.94 m wide, and the A310 16.26 m wide. The vertical stabiliser is 8.4m
Quoting na (Reply 2): The A310 has a height of 15,80 m vs. 16,53/16,62 of the A300. I know the fuselage isnt even when the ac are standing, but could this really account to a height difference of almost 80cms?
Yes. also the A300 is longer.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9600 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7721 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
