victrola
Topic Author
Posts: 716
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Constellation Design

Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:40 pm

My favorite airplane of all time has to be the Lockheed Constellation. I was curious about the design. While most airliner fuselages are in the shape of a tube, was their any tecnical reasons Lockheed chose to go for a its unique fuselage design, or did they just want to build something that looked cool? Also, what is the advantage of 3 tails?
 
113312
Posts: 580
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:09 am

RE: Constellation Design

Fri Feb 15, 2013 3:23 pm

There are many books covering the Constellation series. Some claim that the triple tail was to keep the overall tail height low to utilize existing hangars at various airports.

The shape of the fuselage is certainly not because it's "cool". It's much more costly and challenging to construct something that is not a constant diameter tube. Most writers attribute the shape to the need to keep the tail low, limit nose gear length and maintain prop clearance. Some also claim that the shape made a small contribution to overall lift.

There certainly were no standard cargo containers, luggage containers or similar considerations back when the type was designed. The main goals were speed, economy, and passenger comfort and inflight experience.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Constellation Design

Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:14 pm

I don't know about contributing to lift, but I suspect the continuously varying cross-section reduced drag, compared to a straight tube. Howard Hughes had a big influence on the design and he was keen maximum speed as a competitive factor (as with the Convair 880 and 990). The triple tail is said to be to reduce height to be able to use existing hangars.

Whatever the reason the result is a uniquely beautiful dolphin-like shape.

[Edited 2013-02-15 09:32:26]
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
timz
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Constellation Design

Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:12 pm

Next question: did Hughes specify a high-drag wing? One way or another Super Constellations were slower than DC-7s with the same engines. Maybe just because they were heavier, but in any case it's hard to show Constellations were less draggy overall.

Quoting 113312 (Reply 1):
The shape of the fuselage is certainly not because it's "cool".

No reason to rule it out. The customers like cool airplanes.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17055
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Constellation Design

Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:01 am

The fuselage is area ruled. The most efficient aerodynamic shape is pretty much a cigar shape, constantly tapering. However as 113312 points out it costs much more to build a constantly changing cross section than a tube. Today's designs use flap track and wing-fuselage fairings to achieve the same effect.

Quoting timz (Reply 3):

Quoting 113312 (Reply 1):
The shape of the fuselage is certainly not because it's "cool".

No reason to rule it out. The customers like cool airplanes.

Customers don't pay the fuel bill. If an aircraft looks cool, it is a secondary consideration compared to operational and construction cost.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
timz
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Constellation Design

Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:40 am

Depends what you mean by "customers". Lockheed's customers were the airlines.

No reason to think Constellations burned less fuel per ton-mile than Douglases.

(An area-ruled fuselage would be narrower at the wing than elsewhere.)
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17055
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Constellation Design

Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:03 am

Quoting timz (Reply 5):
Depends what you mean by "customers". Lockheed's customers were the airlines.

No reason to think Constellations burned less fuel per ton-mile than Douglases.

(An area-ruled fuselage would be narrower at the wing than elsewhere.)

Fair enough. Sorry just woke up. However if you took the wings off it would be area ruled. 
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6409
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Constellation Design

Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:24 am

Quoting victrola (Thread starter):
Also, what is the advantage of 3 tails?

The reason for three vertical fins was to make it fit into some smaller hangars of that time. A single fin would have been much higher.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Constellation Design

Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:39 am

Quoting victrola (Thread starter):
Also, what is the advantage of 3 tails?

None, but as was said the airplane needed to fit into existing hangars, and thus it had to have three shorter tails instead of one larger one.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Fabo
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:30 am

RE: Constellation Design

Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:27 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 7):
The reason for three vertical fins was to make it fit into some smaller hangars of that time. A single fin would have been much higher.

Case in point is the B377 that had a folding tail.
The light at the end of tunnel turn out to be a lighted sing saying NO EXIT
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18838
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Constellation Design

Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:10 am

Quoting Fabo (Reply 9):
Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 7):
The reason for three vertical fins was to make it fit into some smaller hangars of that time. A single fin would have been much higher.

Case in point is the B377 that had a folding tail.

Photo with tail folded.

http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k593/pilot852/hangar.jpg

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests