Daleaholic
Topic Author
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 9:38 am

Cargo On Top?

Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:24 am

Are we likely to see, or has it ever been tried to have cargo above the passengers? I can imagine a problem would be the fuel tank area and like roofing strength above the passengers. If anybody could enlighten me more on the problems or maybe even advantages of this would be that would be great!

Thanks
Daleaholic
Religion is an illusion of childhood... Outgrown under proper education.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:19 am

It already happens, judging by the huge bags some people try and stuff into the overhead luggage bins  Smile

There's not actually a lot of empty space above the passenger cabin, except perhaps on the 777, 747 and A380. You might be able to stow small items in the "loft space", but loading and unloading would be a nightmare. Some airlines use the space for crew rest bunks, etc.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:45 pm

Wouldn't that make the Cabin Cramped.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
Matt72033
Posts: 1589
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 10:03 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:08 pm

Quoting Daleaholic (Thread starter):
Are we likely to see, or has it ever been tried to have cargo above the passengers? I can imagine a problem would be the fuel tank area and like roofing strength above the passengers. If anybody could enlighten me more on the problems or maybe even advantages of this would be that would be great!

are you suggesting seating pax in the cargo bay and having cargo on the main deck as it were?
i cant see any real reason why it couldnt happen, loading would be .....err different i imagine! lol

Also the centre fuel tank would decrease the amount of pax space!

Cargo bays are very low ceiling'ed, pax would be cramped unless the ceilings were made higher
 
Daleaholic
Topic Author
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Cargo On Top?

Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:24 am

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 3):
are you suggesting seating pax in the cargo bay and having cargo on the main deck as it were?

Yes, however I was thinking to raise the roof of the cargo hold to accomodate passengers comfortably. And about the fuel tanks, why not have them in the rear of the plane on top. I'm being a bit crazy here I think but I just got curious! Thanks for everybodies input!
Religion is an illusion of childhood... Outgrown under proper education.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:54 am

I thought you were referring to using the empty space above the passengers in a widebody like the 777. Effectively you are arguing for a complete inversion of fuselage design. Unless you want to split the pax cabin into two halves that would mean having a high mounted wing, this would also help counteract the very much higher vertical CG.

All the airport cargo loading equipment would have to be modified to lift the heavy containers even higher.

Having done all that, what would be the advantages. Having fuel and cargo above the pax could be more dangerous in the event of an accident, although pax evacuation would be easier. Effectively you have now created some empty space beneath the pax floor, so what would you put there? Fuel? Cargo? We're back where we started  Smile
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
Matt72033
Posts: 1589
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 10:03 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:57 am

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 5):
although pax evacuation would be easier

would it?
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:40 am

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 6):
Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 5):
although pax evacuation would be easier

would it?

Well, they would be nearer the ground, so slides would be shorter. Thinking about it, it's not a big difference. I was trying to come up with an advantage to offset the obvious disadvantages  Smile
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:38 am

Can you flip containers upside-down ? If yes, you could place LD3-46 containers (used on the A32S) above the pax cabin of a 777 or partly, of a 747.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Cargo On Top?

Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:32 am

Quoting Daleaholic (Reply 4):
And about the fuel tanks, why not have them in the rear of the plane on top

Well some aircraft have fuel tanks in the vertical tail plane, but not nuch more in the cabin.
If you were to have the fuel in the rear fuselage instead of in the centre tank, you'd have a very far aft CG and your aircraft would probably fall backwards every time you refuel!
And you would need the centre wingbox (assuming a low wing and not a high wing) to attach the wings to! And then your landing gear bay would be in the way too (this goes for high and low wing unless you have the gear in 'pods' like military transport aircraft - which increases drag).
 
FredT
Posts: 2166
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 9:51 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:14 am

Quoting Daleaholic (Reply 4):
And about the fuel tanks, why not have them in the rear of the plane on top.

You want the fuel to be near the CoG of the aircraft to avoid having CoG shifts as you burn off fuel. Such shifts curtail your weight envelope and reduce the loadability of the aircraft severely.

Fuel in the stabilizer has been used (B744, Concorde to give two examples off the top of my head), but it is either as part of going all-out to squeeze fuel in after running out of volume or as a method of controlling the CoG of the aircraft in flight.

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 5):
I thought you were referring to using the empty space above the passengers in a widebody like the 777. Effectively you are arguing for a complete inversion of fuselage design.

It has been suggested lately (Flight International last year) to use the crown space above the cabin for sleeper accomodation for crew and/or passengers on long-haul flights.

Cheers,
Fred
I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Cargo On Top?

Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:25 pm

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 6):
Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 5):
although pax evacuation would be easier

would it?

What about a belly landing  Smile
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jake87 and 13 guests