How slow is it? Slower than the ATR-72?
Speed is only one of many, many aspects. For instance the Q400 is very fast, but there's always a price to pay for that. It consumes more fuel and has engines that are twice more powerful (5000 hp), while seating roughly the same amount of pax as the ATR-72
Wouldn't say 2500m is that short unless you are high up. The Il-62 is still a long-haul plane, and a fairly old one at that. Most modern airliners with comparable range require more than 2,500 m at MTOW. I agree. 2500 m is perfectly fine for a mid range twin, but for an older cargo quad at the high...Jump to post
And Russia being such a large country where millions do fly... An-225 isn't Russian. It's Ukrainian. Built By Antonov in Ukraine. Operated by Antonov Airlines, Ukraine. Registered on Ukrainian aircraft register as UR-82060. For a brief period of time, when it was a shuttle carrier, and later while ...Jump to post
How much fuel do the changing blade angels of a turboprop save on a 300nm trip? That would be difficult to answer (about blade angles impact), but here are a couple of articles about turboprop vs jet things: http://www.spsairbuz.com/story/?id=417 http://theflyingengineer.com/aircraft/proud-to-fly-a...Jump to post
The Antonov An-70 entered service in 2015 for the Ukrainian armed forces. Whether it's faster than the A400M depends on which source you find. (One article says it can go up to Mach 0.8.) Unfortunately there's only one of them, and they can't build more until Ukraine either settles its differences ...Jump to post
I think Embraer has witnessed that if you go head to head with Airbus or Boeing you better have a lot of time, political back-up and money. https://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/Turbolineraircraftturboprop-1.jpg?t=1208899184 keesje So far Embraer has been smart enough to stay away th...Jump to post
Sokes wrote:What are landing speeds of turboprops compared to jets?
To get to one fleet type, although I do agree that a sub-fleet of DH8Ds is necessary for intra-Baltic travel , as the BCS3 is just too much plane. That said, I do see unbuilt frames being deferred. I think at some point (but I'm pretty skeptical due to modern "economics") there will be a ...Jump to post
That doesn't sound good. Should education be paid by government if people can just leave after receiving it? I think free education is a better idea than decades of debt payments to become a doctor / pilot / lawyer etc. To make it more "fair" for the country who paid for your education, t...Jump to post
Unlikely, loads of Western (A and B) planes, well tested, well supported and available. Soviet designs suffer from poor after market support and the Russians have n’t grasped the problem. what the Russian airplanes lack are a western distributor and service center network the Russians can build air...Jump to post
I think part of the problem are sanctions and the fact that SSJ's engine is a joint venture between France and Russia. OK, it does make this jet look more "western", I get it, but I heard there were some logistics problems because of that too. Perhaps they need to focus on further PD-14 de...Jump to post
smi0006 wrote:Was 2-5-2 ever adopted outside the US?
Or they could just do the sensible thing if they wanted those benefits, which would be to add just a little bit more extra width and go 2-3-2, which would generate essentially all the benefits (same number of aisle seats!) with minimal fuel penalty and significant efficiency gain. Well, a 767-400X ...Jump to post
Stretching narrow-body with Extremely long fuselage doesn't make sense either. Those tired old 3-3 configurations are efficient and good enough to be stretched to 50m. Past that point, small widebody would work better in terms of comfort or efficiency. I think slightly wider aisle and smart placeme...Jump to post
Trying to create a large long range narrowbody which would effectively be a cleansheet 757 would be a very bad idea. It could never be as efficient as the 737MAX on the vast majority of flights. It could be a "narrowbody" aircraft with multiple fuselage lengths and 2 different wings, opti...Jump to post
No one in their right mind would want 300 passengers on a narrowbody. I'd say 300 passengers indeed looks a bit too much for a NB, however, the term "narrowbody" is getting a bit vague at this point. There's already 1 example (although it's not flying with passengers yet) with slightly wi...Jump to post
I think we (I mean aerodynamic engineers) do fully understand how planes fly and how wings generate its lift. It's just that there are few ways to explain it, and it might create some confusion.Jump to post
A single 3+3 cross section with two different wings and engine thrust capacities could work because we saw it happen with the 737 (Classic) and 757. :) I just wonder if the shorter (40m and less) variants would be too heavy with a fuselage wide enough to offer a ~30 inch aisle compared to a ~20 inc...Jump to post
From a production point of view it would be very interesting if Boeing can incorperate 2 significantly different wings in 1 production line. Then they would be able to introduce one family for the 737-8 to 757-300 market, similar fuselage but with different wings depending on the lenght of the vers...Jump to post
I won't be surprised if it's going to be a 757/A321 class aircraft, maybe with slightly wider cabin (I hope so) and 2 different sets of wings. Assuming that MTOW will be in the region of 115-120 tonnes for an ER/XLR version (whatever they will call it), how far can you stretch CFM Leap? Looking at B...Jump to post
This is sort of related to the NMA and cross section discussions. How did the 767 end up designed as 7 abreast? It was designed in the late 70's with the oil crisis issues. Fuel efficiency was a key goal of the design. How did they end up with 7 abreast, which, in the context of the NMA discussion,...Jump to post
Why widebody? Why not simply design a brand new family of A321 / B757 class of aircraft, with cabin size similar to MC-21 (slightly wider than A320) and 2 sets of wings for medium and long haul, covering anything from 180 to 250-260 pax segmet. If A321LR is able to cover 4k+ miles, brand new composi...Jump to post
The only trijet with decent range is MD-11. But they came late to the party. I think the biggest issue with MD-11 was the fact that it was an upgraded DC-10. I would say that with Trent engines, newer and bigger wings, longer fuselage and FBW - it would probably enjoy a lot of success up until 777-...Jump to post
IMO, if the MD-11 would have come out few years earlier, with the latest wing, FBW and composite technologies avaialble - it would be a nice, competitive aircraft. Yes, very powerfull GE-90 is a game changer, but these extremely powerfull long range twins came into play later.Jump to post
Everyone questioning if Boeing checked the weather forecasts must not live in the pacific northwest. That's what usually happens when kids post from parents basement. I think Boeing management needs to learn what is Metar and TAF and then think about PR stuff Man, you should educate yourself on wea...Jump to post
I think Boeing management needs to learn what is Metar and TAF and then think about PR stuffJump to post
I mean did not they check weather?Jump to post
Saw one a few days ago in Auckland. By far the best looking aircraft around. Surprising they operated those gas guzzlers for so long. Also surprising that they are flying 787-9 and not A350-900. The A340-300 is not a gas guzzler. I agree. I think it was Zeke who posted some comparison data. AFAIK, ...Jump to post
The Let 410 used to have Water M601 engines. It basically was a Soviet reverse-engineered PT6. It worked quite well and, crucially for the generally poorer operators who flew them around the World, was relatively cheap to buy and service. Ironically, the design has now been bought by GE and is now ...Jump to post
Part of the effort by Russia to become self-supplying again - keeping the LET410 in production, resurrecting the LET610 and IL114 and producing the SSJ and the MC21-300, resulting in homegrown aircraft seating 19-200 passengers. Later followed by the CR929 widebody. LET isn't homegrown, it's Hungar...Jump to post
It is indeed surprising, especially in the light of resurrecting IL-114 and the brand new IL-112. But at the same time, the L-610 is smaller than both of them and really resembles ATR-42. I guess for Russian North East regions IL-114 might be too big. IL-114 is pretty much like the ATR-72Jump to post
BrianDromey wrote:Isn’t the ATR 72 tricky to land due to the position of its wheels and stretched fuselage? Especially in crosswinds?
UAC has presented today the first pax. cabin for the MC-21, it looks pretty amazing and with lots of room, good riddance for the sardine cans of Boeing and Airbus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY1Wr8-SJAU I know I'm like a broken record at this point - but this is pretty much what Boeing should ...Jump to post
I think Boeing simply needs to start a clean sheet A321 / 757 type of aircraft, covering everything from the capacity of the biggest Embraer to the theoretical A322 (stretched A321 with something like 250 seats in the single class). It's time to move forward from the 737. With new engines and compos...Jump to post
Climate change, as it's currently presented (warming), is a total BS and I suspect the CO2 emissions as well (at least very exaggerated). Just plant more trees. You know, human bodies also produce CO2 (which is necessary for health), so let's stop reproducing ourselves. Problem solved. Earth is saved.Jump to post
airbazar wrote:AleksW wrote:Folks, how many seats are in the long haul configured A321?
The Internet says 171: 16J,48Y+, 107Y
Regarding flight times, how much longer will an A321LR take compared with an A330/787 on a 3000nm-4000nm route? Will it be significant enough to become a problem? (Especially if 2 airlines operate the same route - one with an A321LR and the other with an A330/787) Afaik, the A320 family cruises at ...Jump to post
Folks, how many seats are in the long haul configured A321?Jump to post
Era of duopoly will come to an end at some point. In the next 1-2 decades, who knows, there will be Russia and China, maybe someone else. You mess once, you are out of the game and produce pencils and not planes.Jump to post
Not gonna happen. 2 737 MAX just recently decided by themselves to hit the planet Earth. Technologies are not there and not gonna be there soon.
What we have now? Robot vacuum cleaner and some japanese robot-dog who can do what? I hear it can simply run and jump? Are you serious?
Speaking of claustrophobia: how all these millionaires are flying their small biz jets ???Jump to post
Folks, if you don't like a narrow body long haul airplane..... well, pretend that you are flying on the upper deck of a 747 )))))Jump to post
1. Stop drone production completely, except for verified construction / map / goverment companies etc, under very strict rules and licensing. For most people is just a toy and there are already enough toys out there.
2. Introduce very high fines (including imprisonment) for violators.
bring back 757 MAX SUPER LR as a mid term solution and start clean sheet ASAP.Jump to post
What do you guys mean there's no business case? A320 / 737 class of aircraft is the most popular and widely used type. But I guess for bean counters it's better to invent a telescopic landing gear.Jump to post
Because contrary to popular belief not every airline needs the 787. Hard to believe isn't it? Remember: according to a.net, every single airline in the world needs the 787, regardless of their current fleet & network or their future fleet needs & network. The 787 is, according to those same...Jump to post