docmtl wrote:Embraer is proposing the E3 TP as a versatîe platform for different engine designs. For those with aeronautical engineering background:
Would the wings’ design be as efficient regardless of the choice of engines on the back: turboprop, hybrid-electric, hydrogen, even jet turbines ?
Just in case Embraer would offer a scope-compliant plane with a choice of jet engines on the back
It would be a smart move: Do you want a TP? Got it. Would you rather have a scope compliant jet ? Sure, we’ve got it, too.
I asked the question in the Civil Aviation Forum, but maybe this is the right place to find the answer.
I'm not an aeronautical engineer. I work for a large oil company and have been following Embraer very closely for at least 25 years.
Modern aircraft must respond to strict safety requirements while meeting immense pressure for low costs.
To begin with I must say that I am very skeptical about the alternatives of electric or hydrogen powered aircraft. It seems to me to be a flawed bet both in economy and in flight safety.
Ill-advised rulers are taking steps that can easily double energy costs. I think that stagnant economy, high inflation and high energy bills will at some point bring these elegant people back into the real world.
Returning to Embraer's dilemma, I don't believe that they change the engine, proposing a turbofan aircraft with a lower cruising speed, taking advantage of the same wings. I don't see this light yet efficient turbofan, it would be an acknowledgment that they made a wrong bet and possibly their finances would be badly shaken.
It's noticeable that the E3 project is gaining traction, certainly because potential and important customers are approving, the technology seems mature enough and the production costs make sense.
If the project is successful, I hope that Embraer will continue its long-held dream of competing in the single-aisle aircraft segment. Imagine an E3 on a larger scale, with 5 rows of seats and equipped with CFM RISE? Is it dreaming too much?
