walter747
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:49 am

3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:41 am

Does anybody think that either boring or airbus will build a 3 engine jet again?

A Dc-10 or 727 like jet.


I loved the design and hate to see them disappear.
Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
 
jamesbuk
Posts: 3712
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 11:52 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:03 am

Nope, aircraft are a hell of alot more efficient now with 2 engines, look at the 777 etc to see this, they have longer range also. Never is a strong word but im certain we'll never see another 3 engine passenger commercial jet. Privates not so surre, may see a few.

Rgds --James--
You cant have your cake and eat it... What the hells the point in having it then!!!
 
MEACEDAR
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:57 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:03 am

No, I don't think there is any reason for Airbus or Boeing to do this. It is just my opinion.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:15 am

Probably not from Airbus and Boeing, however, Business Jets are another story. The Dassault Falcon 7X is the newst Falcon, and it has 3 engines, as does the Falcon 900.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:17 am

For a commercial airliner, I believe performance improvements in engine power have pretty much negated the need for three engines - at least for sub-sonic cruising.
 
LuvAIr
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:52 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:21 am

As I understand it the main reason for 3-engined jets "back in the days" was the capability to fly longer routes over water.

Since for example the 777 was granted 180 min ETOPS on initial certification I don't see a reason for future twins from the large manufacturers not to be certified for extended routes over water from the beginning.

Plus, twins are much more fuel-efficient.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:30 am

No, we probably wont see a 3 engine pax jet ever again.

In fact, it is possible the A380 and 748 could be the last 4 engined pax jets. Unless the need for a super-mega whalejet ever arrives. Which IMO is unlikely.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
flyf15
Posts: 6633
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:10 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:41 am

The Blended Wing Body is proposed to have three 777 class engines. But, thats a long way off (if it ever happens).

 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2382
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:42 am

Quoting Walter747 (Thread starter):
Does anybody think that either boring or airbus

I don't think either A or B are "boring" Big grin.....anyway, nice typo....
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11828
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:00 am

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 7):
The Blended Wing Body is proposed to have three 777 class engines. But, thats a long way off (if it ever happens).

The 550 to 800 seat BWB's are in a category where 3 engines actually make the most sense. What I don't understand is the 215 BWB discussed in the previous days with 3... There it makes zero sense. Why would you replace a 787 with an aircraft with higher MX costs?  no  The cost of an engine overhaul can be roughly estimated to be identical *per engine* for that small of a size difference. Ok, if you're talking large fans, there is a diameter above which 3 engines can be more economical than two (assumption: 3 engines at a smaller diameter). However that diameter grows in fits and starts every couple of years.

There is a "step increase" for engine production and MX where above a certain diameter costs just shoot up. But this diameter goes up in fits and starts. The diameter I was taught is already out of date...

In rough terms, a 3 engine plane costs about $250,000+ more a year to operate than a 2 engine equivalent. However, the GE-90 has engines of diameter greater than the "step function increase" I talk about. Even then, its still not a large enough diameter to justify 3 engines on the 777...  scratchchin  What is the point? Currently 150K is my best estimate. But maybe someone has figured out a trick to move the thrust limit up further that I do not know about...  scratchchin 

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:57 am

As long as Dassault is around with their Falcon jets, you will have three engine jets. The Falcon 7X is still waiting certification I believe.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:05 am

Quoting LuvAir (Reply 5):
As I understand it the main reason for 3-engined jets "back in the days" was the capability to fly longer routes over water.

Another reason often touted is that a triplet allowed the DC-10 and L-1011 to fly transcon from LGAs short runways (a requirement from the airlines). A quad would have required too much wingspan to fit at the gates.

The tail engine is a big pain in the ass (haha) for aerodynamic and structural reasons, not to mention maintenance. If we see a triplet again in a commercial jet, it will be, as stated above, on a BWB or similar.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
walter747
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:49 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:05 am

Quoting Walter747 (Thread starter):
boring

Boeing. opps haha.
Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:13 am

I´m personally hoping for a 5-engine jet, but that even more distant... Wink
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11828
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:46 am

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 10):
As long as Dassault is around with their Falcon jets, you will have three engine jets.

 checkmark  The 7X is a beauty. They must have done somthing right with Netjets ordering two dozen:
http://www.falconjet.com/whatsnew/prelease_details.jsp?DOCNUM=50521

Does anyone know what fraction of their sales are the two engine Falcon 2000?

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 11):
The tail engine is a big pain in the ass (haha) for aerodynamic and structural reasons, not to mention maintenance. If we see a triplet again in a commercial jet, it will be, as stated above, on a BWB or similar.

 rotfl 

Quoting Alessandro (Reply 13):
I´m personally hoping for a 5-engine jet, but that even more distant...

Nothing like that 8 engine B-52...  spin 

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
warreng24
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:38 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:32 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 14):
Nothing like that 8 engine B-52...

I don't want to thread-jack, but you have to bring up the "dreaded 7 engine emergency approach."  Smile
 
Propulsion
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:39 am

NO. The mighty Boeing 777 has assured us of that.

Unfortunately you should enjoy the tri-jets while you can. They will almost certainly be a thing of the past. Something in history that will not be experienced again. How sad, especially since MD-11's are so beautiful.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
DC10extender
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 6:09 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:44 am

I don't think that they will make a 3 engine jet ever again, and that saddens me. This January, NW will retire their DC-10's and become the last major US airline to do so. I just wish the MD-11's sold more and more were being used in the U.S. I also think that instead of sending them to the Mojave, they should give me a DC-10.  biggrin 
Did you ever read on your birth certificate that life is fair? Thats cause its not there.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:58 am

How about frankenstein-ing MD-11s into a twin? Would it be too expensive? Hehe

PS: I love the MD-11!
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Garri767
Posts: 2207
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:00 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:17 am

sadly i doubt there will ever be a DC-10/727 style three holer ever in production again  Sad the three holers were always my favorite a/c , especially the L-1011  airplane 




Garri767
Two wrongs may not make a right, but three lefts do!
 
ABpositive
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:36 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:25 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 9):
The 550 to 800 seat BWB's are in a category where 3 engines actually make the most sense.

I agree. It would be interesting seeing 747 or 380 with three engines.

In fact 747 had 3 engines at one stage, but only in design proposal, right?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11828
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:34 am

Quoting ABpositive (Reply 20):
In fact 747 had 3 engines at one stage, but only in design proposal, right?

It was actually a proposal for the 747SP post 747-100. However the costs of that extensive of a redesign killed the idea.

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 15):
I don't want to thread-jack, but you have to bring up the "dreaded 7 engine emergency approach."

 rotfl 

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
scoliodon
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:15 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:41 am

It's indeed a pity to see the trijet widebodies go. The Tristar, DC-10, MD11s are such beauties.

Why don't A or B build one just for heck's sake? Big grin
JFK-LGA-EWR-DTW-IND-PHX-CLE-SFO-LAS-SEA-ORD-MCO-MIA-DFW-ATL-CDG-FRA-BOM-MAA-DEL-TRZ-DXB-CLT-CVG-DEN-MSP
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:42 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 18):
How about frankenstein-ing MD-11s into a twin?

Both the L-1011 and DC-10 had 2 engine variants proposed.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 21):
Quoting ABpositive (Reply 20):
In fact 747 had 3 engines at one stage, but only in design proposal, right?

It was actually a proposal for the 747SP post 747-100. However the costs of that extensive of a redesign killed the idea.

Here's a pic:

http://www.rosboch.net/aviationmedia/B747-300_Concept_with_three_engines.jpg
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
N231YE
Posts: 2620
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:09 pm

If I recall, Eastern Airlines requested that the Boeing 727 have two engines for efficiency. However, United wanted it to have 4, to enable it to operate out of high-altitude DEN. So Boeing did a compromise, and came up with a three-engined jet.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:50 pm

It is really a mess that Boeing killed the MD11x-Program shortly after take-over of MDD.

That MD11-stretch version would have been a huge success and also a big thread for the B777 and B744.

Boeing was very wise to cancel that project.
 
TrijetsRMissed
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:15 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:41 pm

Quoting Walter747 (Thread starter):
Does anybody think that either boring or airbus will build a 3 engine jet again?

A Dc-10 or 727 like jet.


I loved the design and hate to see them disappear.

I feel your pain! But thats a given from my username  Smile

Because Airbus and Boeing have an oligopoly on the industry we will probably never see another trijet. Boeing canned the 727 a long time ago and Airbus has never produced a trijet. Both go with the more basic twin jet design that is more fuel efficient and cost effective. Besides the A380 what complex designs have these manufacturer's come up with in the last 20 years? The A340? Come on!

But in all seriousness, a modern day trijet would only be conceivable as a wide-body, which McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed were the innovators in that concept. It took Douglas 4 or 5 years to solve the MD-11 range problems. The ERs weren't built until near the end and by then it was too late. Remember the later MD-11s had better range than the first 777s. Had Douglas got it right the first time maybe the aircraft could have succeeded. Afterall, there were a lot of customers at one time. Problem is not many bought more than 5-10 aircraft.

IMO, the A300 was the beginning of the end for the trijet and the 767-300 put the nail in the coffin. I guess us trijet lovers are SOL.  Sad
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
 
User avatar
BreninTW
Posts: 1538
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:31 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:46 pm

Doesn't BA fly 3-engined jets from time to time? Big grin
 
TrijetsRMissed
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:15 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:57 pm

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 27):
Doesn't BA fly 3-engined jets from time to time?

I wish... The last DC10-30 was sold to Centurion Air Cargo in 2002. The last Tristar 500 was retired in 1999. It has since been scrapped.
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:44 pm

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 27):
Doesn't BA fly 3-engined jets from time to time?

Excellent. Saving fuel from LAX to the U.K.

I hope to be recalled to fly on the three-holers. I just hope the Tristar is still around when that time comes. Otherwise, the DC-10s will have to be the bird for me.

M
 
User avatar
BreninTW
Posts: 1538
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:31 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:09 pm

Quoting ChiGB1973 (Reply 29):
Quoting Brenintw (Reply 27):
Doesn't BA fly 3-engined jets from time to time?

Excellent. Saving fuel from LAX to the U.K.

Not sure the FAA would approve of them doing it again Big grin Especially if they do it the way they did it last year (?) in a 744.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:26 pm

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 26):

Because Airbus and Boeing have an oligopoly on the industry we will probably never see another trijet

That's not really the reason. If a trijet was a feasible solution, it would be implemented.

Quoting ChiGB1973 (Reply 29):
Quoting Brenintw (Reply 27):
Doesn't BA fly 3-engined jets from time to time?

Excellent. Saving fuel from LAX to the U.K.

Flying on three doesn't really save fuel.

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 30):

Not sure the FAA would approve of them doing it again Big grin Especially if they do it the way they did it last year (?) in a 744.

What they did was in no way illegal or unsafe. The FAA had a hard time making a case, and in fact was not able to bring any sanctions to bear.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
MeanGreen
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 8:34 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:51 am

I have a question, why didn't Airbus make the A340 a trijet back whennit was designed? That way they could offer a plane that wasn'tnrestricted by ETOPS, and would cost less to operate than their currentnoffering? They would have had to use different engine types than they originally went with but weren't there engines available that could have worked?
 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 23):
Both the L-1011 and DC-10 had 2 engine variants proposed.

So did the 727. The 757 became what was supposed to be the 727-300. One version of the 727-300 was supposed to be a really long 727, while the other version looked similar to a 757. I also believed that there was a 727 version that was supposed to have the pusher fans (forgot what the technology was called, but it was a big thing in the 1980s to make these jet planes with the pusher props that were supposed to fly as fast as jets) The 727 version only had two pusher props in the rear.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 28):
The last Tristar 500 was retired in 1999. It has since been scrapped.

I remember when Kalitta got some of the BA Tristars. I saw a couple BA ones parked at YIP around 1998 or so, then they went to Kitty Hawk International before that folded. Kalitta took some of the 747s back but I have no idea what happened to those L1011s
 
dambuster
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:49 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:50 am

To resume and make it simple, there are 2 main reasons why there won't be any 3 engined jets for a while: 1. Maintenance costs 2. Nowadays with GE90s and RR Trent 1000s I don't think there's need for more trust, if there was, they would for sure know what to do!
 
akelley728
Posts: 1965
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 1999 12:35 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 33):
I also believed that there was a 727 version that was supposed to have the pusher fans (forgot what the technology was called, but it was a big thing in the 1980s to make these jet planes with the pusher props that were supposed to fly as fast as jets) The 727 version only had two pusher props in the rear.

You're thinking of the 7J7, which was supposed to be the 150 seat successor to the 727. It was to be powered by two rear-mounted General Electric GE-36 contra-rotating unducted fan (UDF) engines.

More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_7J7

It's interesting to note that a 727 was used as a testbed for the UDF engine:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon


A MD-81 was also used in testing the UDF:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon

 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:11 am

Yeah the 7J7, I was thinking it was an updated 727 since it looks a lot like one with just two engines.

On a side note, weren't there other 7()7 aircraft like the 7N7 and the 7X7? I thought that there was an aircraft that never got further than the drawing board called the 7-7, which was about 150 seats with wing mounted engines, but looked a little more like a short bodied 757 - like a 757-100, rather than the 737.
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:22 am

I think it would be neat to see another 717-sized aircraft with 3 engines. Every 9 out of 10 aircraft anymore have wing-mounted engines. I am a big fan of the T-tailed aircraft, although I also like widebodied aircraft. My favorite aircraft of the Ttails is the 727. It would be neat to see a trijet 717 seating some 110-120 people, but there are the 737-600 and the A318 for this I believe. I think it would give boeing another option for their aircraft and an alternative to the 736, but I have heard that wing mounted engines are less of a pain for maintenance, less noisey, more fuel efficient b/c they're typically larger engines; larger air intake, more thrust er something... I dunno, it's a shame they couldn't accomplish this with a tail-mounted T-tail aircraft prototype...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:32 am

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 33):
So did the 727. The 757 became what was supposed to be the 727-300. One version of the 727-300 was supposed to be a really long 727, while the other version looked similar to a 757. I

You mean this guy?  Wink

"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
trintocan
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:35 am

Sadly, the era of the 3-engined jets is fading rapidly. The extra costs of purchasing, maintaining and operating a 3rd engine on a plane are too high nowadays. In addition to the range thing, the 727, TriStar and DC-10 had 3 engines simply because engines in those days were not as powerful as they are now and so 3 were needed to ensure adequate performance. With massive engines such as the various 777 and A330 plants available now 2 engines are usually adequate - and if not, then the simple option is to go for 4. The structural design issues raised by having a third engine, which would invariably be buried in the fuselage, are also pertinent here.

As for the 747 flying from LAX to LHR on 3 engines, in fact the plane is less efficient flying on 3 engines than 4 and that is reflected by the fact it could not go beyond MAN.

TrinToCan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:40 am

Quoting Trintocan (Reply 39):
As for the 747 flying from LAX to LHR on 3 engines, in fact the plane is less efficient flying on 3 engines than 4 and that is reflected by the fact it could not go beyond MAN.

The plane is in fact less efficient. But it would have easily reached LHR . However due to a completely separate problem the crew had inaccurate fuel data and landed early as a precaution.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:48 am

Quoting Trintocan (Reply 39):
having a third engine, which would invariably be buried in the fuselage

The DC-10 and MD-11 engines were not buried in the fuselage at all. And I think it looks neater (albeit a pig to maintain) than the massive L-1011 tailsection and that SP trijet above.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18974
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:10 am

Quoting MeanGreen (Reply 32):
I have a question, why didn't Airbus make the A340 a trijet back when it was designed?

The original A330-300 and A340-200/300 which were launched simultaneously were always intended to be virtually identical aircraft apart from the number of engines, and the slightly shorter A340-200 fuselage. The 333 and 343 have the same fuselage and wing apart from minor differences related to the engine mountings and related systems. A 3-engine design would have been a significantly different aircraft and drastically increased development costs vs. building both types from a common design. And it would almost certainly not have permitted pilots to operate both the A330 and A340 which is common today for carriers operating both types.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:10 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 42):
Quoting MeanGreen (Reply 32):
I have a question, why didn't Airbus make the A340 a trijet back when it was designed?

The original A330-300 and A340-200/300 which were launched simultaneously were always intended to be virtually identical aircraft apart from the number of engines, and the slightly shorter A340-200 fuselage. The 333 and 343 have the same fuselage and wing apart from minor differences related to the engine mountings and related systems. A 3-engine design would have been a significantly different aircraft and drastically increased development costs vs. building both types from a common design. And it would almost certainly not have permitted pilots to operate both the A330 and A340 which is common today for carriers operating both types.

Indeed. Even if the 340 were not part of the 330/340 family, four engines were a much neater solution since there was no significant gate space restriction. The outboard engines also help alleviate wing bending moment.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
747400sp
Posts: 3845
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:37 am

Maybe as a SST or a super jumbo with lower operating cost.
 
ptugarin
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:09 am

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 12:07 pm

I am surprised no one mentioned the Russian beauties - Tu154, Yak40 and Yak42 in this thread. Any possibility of another Yak-42 coming off assembly in Saratov?
 
TrijetsRMissed
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:15 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:21 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 31):
Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 26):

Because Airbus and Boeing have an oligopoly on the industry we will probably never see another trijet

That's not really the reason. If a trijet was a feasible solution, it would be implemented.

Read my whole post, that point was well covered. But lets not be ignorant to the fact that Airbus has never created a trijet and Boeing has not designed a model in 40 years.
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17084
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:32 pm

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 46):
Read my whole post, that point was well covered. But lets not be ignorant to the fact that Airbus has never created a trijet and Boeing has not designed a model in 40 years.

Fair point!
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
trintocan
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: 3 Engine Jet? Ever Again?

Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:17 am

I stand corrected about engine burial in the fuselage - the DC-10 and MD11 did not feature that. All the same, the structural and maintenance issues remained significant.

TrinToCan.
Hop to it, fly for life!