Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Position Of Engines  
User currently offlineF.pier From Italy, joined Aug 2000, 1525 posts, RR: 9
Posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4602 times:

The emergency landing of an Austrian Fokker 70 showed that the rear mounted engines are much safer in case of an emergency belly landing.

Why the most of new airliners have wing mounted engines?

Which are advantaged and disadvantages of the solution "rear mounted" and "wing mounted"?

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTraveler_7 From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4469 times:


It was discussed a couple of times
for example here

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1270363/4/

some time ago I posted a question but it did not attract much attention  Crying

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/765412/6/

In spite of all advantages of wing engened aircrafts listed in the recent discussion I still think (hope ) that there is still place for rear engened aircraft.
Perhaps one with deeper knowledge of aerodynamics and aircraft engineering could list all advantages of rear engend construction.





User currently offlineTrident From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 484 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4396 times:

Rear engines have some advantages but not that many.

Advantages -

Quieter cabin for passengers.
A clean and, theoretically, a more aerodynamic and efficient wing.

Disadvantages -
Access is more difficult for maintenance.
A fin mounted T-Tail arrangement is usually required which which needs a stronger (and heavier) tailfin.
More danger of foreign body ingestion from debris being thrown up from mainwheels.
Although the wing is "clean", it also needs to be stiffer (therfore heavier) to counteract upward bending in flight. Wing mounted engines are used to help prevent this wing bending tendency without the need for stiff, heavier wing spars.



User currently offlineSovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2648 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4342 times:

I believe less FOD danger is actually and advantage of tail mounted engines.

User currently offlineSlamclick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 4, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4340 times:

All designs are a bundle of compromises.

I've seen video of the nosewheels throwing spray (and presumably small debris) right into the wing-mounted engines.

I have also known of shredded tire caps winding up in the intakes on tail-mounted engines. The 727 had to have the No.2 VHF antenna anti-iced with bleed air because of its position in relation to the No. 2 engine intake.

I've seen uncontained disk ruptures so violent that they would have taken the wing off if the engines had been buried in the wing like the Comet.

One consideration (can't really call it a disadvantage - not enough info) for tail mounted engines is that the fuel lines must be routed through the fuselage (if not actually within the pressure vessel) from wing tanks to the engines. Likewise, hot bleed air for wing anti-ice purposes.

A bundle of compromises.





Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4328 times:

Yeah, there are a bunch of compromises. I just wanted to mention that wing-mounted engines help cancel some of the bending moment created by lift, and this can help the wing structurally, allowing more aerodynamically efficient wings, i.e. higher aspect ratio.

User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4260 times:

I e, the fuselage of the aircraft is essentially standing on the wings in flight. Take a metal tube, suspend it in the middle. Now, how much structural weight do you have to add to allow you to mount two heavy engines in one end of the tube? It is better to have the weight suspended where the lift is generated. That way, the load transfer paths are shorter.

Add plumbing to get fuel to the engines and the risk of disturbed airflow and ice off the wings to the other points mentioned.

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlinePaulc From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4227 times:

Don't forget the deep stall - a potential problem of any t-tail / rear mounted engine aircraft regardless of manufacturer


English First, British Second, european Never!
User currently offlineKGAI From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4166 times:

Seems easier to service wing mounted engines too.

User currently offlinePositive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4123 times:

Don't forget the deep stall - a potential problem of any t-tail / rear mounted engine aircraft regardless of manufacturer

That's really not that big a problem since all T-tailed jets are equipped with stick pushers. Seriously how many T-tailed jets have been sestroyed by deep stalls recently? The answer is none.
I believe the advantages of rear-mounted engines outweigh the disadvantages.
*quieter cabin
*more aerodynamically efficeint wing
*less chance of Foreign object ingestion by the engines
*ability to do powered pushbacks safely
*plus it looks way cooler Smile


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (10 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4091 times:

Weight, efficiency, weight, weight, efficiency, weight.

BTW, having underslung pylons don't significantly detract from the efficiency of the wing. Junk on top of the wing is bad, junk under it doesn't matter nearly as much.

Is the cabin quieter with rear-mounted engines? Perhaps if you are sitting up front...

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineKay From France, joined Mar 2002, 1884 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3913 times:

One thing seems rather sure. Rear mounted engines are safer.

However, people will buy tickets even if planes have wing-mounted engines. If people were afraid to buy tickets because of this or because of the bi-monthly or so crashes that occur around the world, then the whole industry would have been revamped for a higher level of safety. Unfortunately, people don't need more and are happy with it the way it is (since they are still buying, and they are satisfied by the statistics, compared to other things they do, like riding a motorcycle or driving a car), therefore no investment will be made for improvement.

The wide use of wing mounted engines over tail engines is another demonstration of this phenomena (at least it explains it partially).

Rentability over technology/safety.


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3913 times:

Well, looking at the cases where fatalities have been caused by having the engines rear-mounted (ice ingestion etc) vs those where the cause has been wing-mounted engines (Ethiopian ditching), especially in the light of the flight hour produced by either design, I'm not so sure that rear-mounted is safer at all.

Perhaps in a controlled crash... but it is always better to avoid the crash as you're basically screwed anyway once you're aimed for that piece of terrain, statistically speaking.

And, like it or not, safety and economy do have something to do with each other. How much more are people willing to pay for any perceived safety benefits?

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineKay From France, joined Mar 2002, 1884 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3919 times:

Rear mounted engines are safer only (or mostly) when crash landing. If crash landings don't have a significant contribution to the statistics (them being in most cases doomed, or constitute a small percentage of accidents), then I guess rear-engined planes aren't safer in the absolute sense.

But the rest of my post still stands, as, I guess, you've agreed.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Position Of Engines
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 Aircraft Use 2 Different Types Of Engines? posted Sun Apr 17 2005 09:57:47 by 9V-SVC
Position Of Swept Wings Relative To C Of G posted Sat Mar 26 2005 23:30:47 by Kukkudrill
In Flight Reversing Of Engines? posted Mon May 10 2004 16:40:29 by Captjetblast
What Type Of Engines Did National 757s Use? posted Sun Mar 21 2004 19:55:41 by Jfk747
Position Of Passenger Windows? posted Wed Mar 17 2004 07:43:49 by Concord977
Windmilling Of Engines While Aircraft Parked posted Mon Jan 19 2004 13:25:07 by HAWK21M
Different Brands Of Engines posted Sat Feb 23 2002 18:22:01 by Ivo21
Emergency Jettison Of Engines posted Wed Jun 13 2001 09:49:12 by Mac
Duration Of Engines posted Sun Oct 29 2000 18:55:21 by F.pier
Other Uses Of Airplane Engines? posted Sat Nov 18 2006 10:01:00 by DIJKKIJK
Lateral Position Of A Wing Mounted Engine posted Sun Mar 28 2010 10:32:39 by airbuske
Thermal Efficiency Of Engines posted Thu Oct 15 2009 01:28:10 by Jetmech
Required Number Of Engines For Widebodies posted Wed Oct 22 2008 13:03:05 by Alasdair1982
Least Number Of Engines Can A B777/B767 Fly On? posted Fri Feb 8 2008 17:06:57 by B773A346
New Breed Of Engines Needed? posted Wed Nov 7 2007 15:17:14 by Flipdewaf
Stowed Position Of 747 Body Gear? posted Sun Mar 25 2007 21:36:06 by PC12Fan
Can An Aircraft Use 2 Different Types Of Engines? posted Sun Apr 17 2005 09:57:47 by 9V-SVC
New Breed Of Engines Needed? posted Wed Nov 7 2007 15:17:14 by Flipdewaf
Stowed Position Of 747 Body Gear? posted Sun Mar 25 2007 21:36:06 by PC12Fan
Position Of Swept Wings Relative To C Of G posted Sat Mar 26 2005 23:30:47 by Kukkudrill
Can An Aircraft Use 2 Different Types Of Engines? posted Sun Apr 17 2005 09:57:47 by 9V-SVC
Position Of Swept Wings Relative To C Of G posted Sat Mar 26 2005 23:30:47 by Kukkudrill
In Flight Reversing Of Engines? posted Mon May 10 2004 16:40:29 by Captjetblast
In Flight Reversing Of Engines? posted Mon May 10 2004 16:40:29 by Captjetblast

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format