Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 6019
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:00 pm

Clearly with the new orders, they are showing the distinctive nose and shark tail. I hope this puts to rest all of you pundits who think those features are dead.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
Guest

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:26 pm

I hope Boeing wake up and make this plane look normal. I mean if your going to wipe out the 757 and the 767 you better make this thing look damn good.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 6019
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:28 pm

That's definitely a matter of opinion. I like the look. Anyhow, we know you're an Airbus fan, so you're going to react negatively no matter what.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:30 pm

Anyhow, we know you're an Airbus fan, so you're going to react negatively no matter what.

Watch yourself, Roberta is a venomate 757 fan

Clearly with the new orders, they are showing the distinctive nose and shark tail. I hope this puts to rest all of you pundits who think those features are dead.

I think it is still too early to say that. Wait until design freeze people, it's not that far away!
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
Guest

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:33 pm

we know you're an Airbus fan

Just cause i like to see my EU tax going towards something useful doesnt mean i dislike Boeing. And I cannot help but notice i just complimented the 757 and the 767.

Sorry if i prefer planes to flying dolphins. I can assure you if Airbus came out with a flying dolphin or a whale or a walrus or a badger i would still react very negatively.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:36 pm

According to the designers at Teague, with whom we spoke last week so I'm assuming it's not a trade secret, the nose is pretty well set. There are some questions yet to be resolved about the final shape of the tail, but they intend to keep it as distinctive as possible. This will be a really pretty airplane, and one that the average traveller will recognize when they see it as well as when they board. It should not be a surprise when travellers begin to request this aircraft.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
na
Posts: 9812
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:49 pm

I hope that the 7E7 won´t change its appearence much from the prototype-models. Its the first twinjet that really looks different from the boring 737/757/767/777/A300/A320/TU-204 etc-configuration. As the more attractive quads are only found in the upper market its time the twinjet-design gets a boost!
 
DIA
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 2:24 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:53 pm

Flying dolphins might be a nice change though, Roberta. . . . . .it would be like watching paint dry in the sky if a/c didn't change their aerodynamics and designs somehow. IE: Concorde, Caravelle, 747, DC-10, Dornier328, *7E7*. . .doesn't that Caravelle still look odd to this day?! The front, the tail with a boomerang through it, and those windows. . .aaahhhh! They're rectangles! Okay, I joke. . .

Besides, I think that the Japanese carriers' Disney, Pokemon, etc.-themed colors would look like they're at home on the 7E7. *Perfect*  Big grin

Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14123
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:24 am

why should the tail surfaces be curved ?

more expensive and probably extra weight

neglectable earodynamic advantages

the PR period is over

time to get down to business

a practicle affordable tail


"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Guest

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:28 am

DIA, if i wanted to see a flying dolphin i would take a trip to SeaWorld and start lobbing some dolphins around.

Although i've kind of got used to the nose now but i'll never accept the tail.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 6019
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:30 am

Keesje, do you have a degree in aerodynamics? I don't, but I'm guessing you don't either. Do you have any proof to back your asserations?
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:35 am

I want a dolphin, personally.

N
 
DIA
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 2:24 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:37 am

"DIA, if i wanted to see a flying dolphin i would take a trip to SeaWorld and start lobbing some dolphins around.

Although i've kind of got used to the nose now but i'll never accept the tail."


LOL.
Well, I think you might be in luck. . .because I would guess that Boeing is keeping the nose and nixing the curved tail.


P.S. Those Seaworld dolphins can get pretty high up in the air themselves. . .
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19536
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:40 am

The fin in that rendition looks pretty conventional to me. The arse-end looks rounded rather than the current Boeing 'screwdriver' one though.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
BCAInfoSys
Posts: 2617
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:09 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:10 am

OK guys.. here's the scoop. Like Ian said, the nose is pretty much here to stay. The curved tail will stay as well, though the curved control surfaces on the tail may have to be straightened out somewhat. It looks like engineering is having problems with the curved control surfaces, but the tail itself should be just fine.
Militant Agnostic - I don't know and you don't either.
 
kalakaua
Posts: 1430
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:23 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:27 am

I don't like the tail cone. I want something more like the 777.

Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion.
 
transswede
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:20 am

Does anyone have a link to Boeing's LATEST 7E7 images?
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5025
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:58 am

Roberta:
If A or B came out with a badger model......I´ll go to sleep for a looong time! *lmao*

Mike Big grin
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
cancidas
Posts: 3985
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 7:34 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:05 am

man i really don't understand why you're all complaining. it's a really cool design and i can't wait to see it flying.
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:35 am

Does anyone have a link to Boeing's LATEST 7E7 images?

Right here, released today-

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/photorelease/q3/040707g2.jpg

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/photorelease/q3/040707g1.jpg

why should the tail surfaces be curved ?

Why should it not? The reasons you described were probablys and we are not privy to the information to say otherwise.

Edit- Furthermore, in one of the greatest aerodynamic ironies, the 737NG winglets started out as an aesthetic improvement as well. The winglet package was only to be installed on the BBJ as a way to differentiate the elite version from the commercial version. When the first aerodynamic reports came in, Aviation Partners quickly realized the possible benefit and tweaked the winglet to take full advantage of winglet properties.

Boeing didn't swallow the claimed benefits until they performed their own independent testing. Once Boeing confirmed what Aviation Partners had claimed, Boeing marketed them as the greatest thing since sliced bread and made them available on both the 73G and 738. This is one of the reasons early 737NG customers retrofitted their fleets at a later date rather than obtaining them at delivery.


[Edited 2004-07-08 02:44:31]
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
QantasA332
Posts: 1473
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 5:47 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:55 am

Furthermore, in one of the greatest aerodynamic ironies, the 737NG winglets started out as an aesthetic improvement as well. The winglet package was only to be installed on the BBJ as a way to differentiate the elite version from the commercial version. When the first aerodynamic reports came in, Aviation Partners quickly realized the possible benefit and tweaked the winglet to take full advantage of winglet properties.

Well, sort of. The winglets themselves didn't start out just as an aesthetic improvement - it is, of course, known fact that winglets reduce drag considerably and thus increase an aircraft's overall efficiency - but rather, the particular design of those winglets did. That is, they obviously didn't add the winglets simply to look good, but the particular 'blended' design of those winglets was originally adopted for aesthetic reasons. As it turns out, of course, blended winglets can be a more effective "style" of winglet.

I'm sure the above is what you meant anyway, DFW.  Big thumbs up

As for the tail design, I really dunno. At the moment it seems that the sharkfin tail is, like the blended winglets were, purely aesthetic; referring to their hopes of keeping the curved tail design, many Boeing engineers don't mention anything efficiency related - rather, they say the tail design gives the 7E7 the unique and distinguishable look that they want (which, undeniably, it does). Whether there are any aerodynamical benefits I don't know (and I can't seem to find out), so it remains to be seen whether the sharkfin is really necessary.

Cheers,
QantasA332
 
7E7Fan
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 4:44 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:52 pm

I for one really hope that they keep the shark-tail!!! That's one of the most prominent things that make this plane so awesome looking! If they go back to a conventional tail, they could have just kept on building the 767 and updated the avionics... why new if it is not really new?

/Mike
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:45 pm

>If they go back to a conventional tail, they could have just kept on building the 767 and updated the avionics... why new if it is not really new?

Are you serious? Do you really think the tail shape is the only difference between the 7E7 and the 767? I won't even begin to list the improvements.
 
DeskPilot
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 8:02 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:06 pm

""....This will be a really pretty airplane, and one that the average traveler will recognize when they see it as well as when they board. It should not be a surprise when travelers begin to request this aircraft....

I doubt it. Most travelers take no notice.

I think only those with an interest in aviation will notice the differences.
By the way, is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?
 
kdalaggie
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 1:10 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:35 am

I can't help think about how it's gonna fly with the new type of curves and surfaces. Although, with almost everything FBW now I'm sure there will be negligible difference. That also makes me wonder about the flight envelope based on her sleek design. Will it be a little more difficult to slow.

I'm sure it will not even come close to the SR-71. That thing just sliced through the air like crazy.

my .02...
Gig'em Ags!!!!
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Sun Jul 11, 2004 11:32 pm

How does the old saying go, "you can only polish a turd so much"?

I think that with all the tweaks, a 50 year old design is still a 50 year old design and it will reach it's limit at some point. I think the current crop of twinjets is boring. The golden-era aircraft were curvy, they almost had a certain sex appeal to them. Even the 727 had the look of just being fast with that tail. IF this aircraft truely is the next step, and is an improvement over the traditional designs then I'm all for it.

Look at the most recent designs on the GA side. You have aircraft like the Citation X, A500, Premier and others utilizing radical design and knocking the crap out of anything else in their category in terms of speed, size, and efficiency.
DMI
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Mon Jul 12, 2004 4:32 am

I don't like how people are talking about the new design in terms of appearance. The innovations aren't manifested in visible details on this plane.

The 727 might have had a fast-looking tail, but did it have optimized aerodynamic characteristics? No. Was there any engineering justification for the curvy shapes (weight savings)? No. (Etc.) I don't understand how poorer technology is better for you guys just because it looks nice.

As far as the overall layout of the aircraft, as Pilotpip is addressing, it's not as easy for Airbus/Boeing to play around with things like the BWB/Sonic Cruiser if the airlines aren't going to go for it. It's not the same as the GA side in this respect. The airlines have a lot of input on commercial aircraft development, and at a time like this, they did not feel like taking major risks.


>knocking the crap out of anything else in their category in terms of speed, size, and efficiency.

For the 7E7: size is set by airline demand, speed is limited by drag rise near Mach 1 (although this plane should fly at a higher M than anything in its category), and it will "knock the crap" out of other aircraft in terms of efficiency. All without taking radical, unnecessary risks at this time.
 
7E7Fan
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 4:44 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:56 am

MITaero: *laughs out loud* Of course I know there is more difference between the 767 and 7E7 than the looks, I don't call myself 7E7Fan for nothing!

However I was just so annoyed with this 'it's new and hence I don't like it' attitude that was going on in this thread... I for one think that it is really really interesting and fun to see that a major player like Boeing, risks everything on a bet that an all new airplane almost down to the bolt, not only will work but also sell and take Boeing back to the number one aircraft-manufacturer in the world.

The elimination of bleed-air for instance is a good example of what I mean. Or the bigger windows, or the more-composite structure that allows for higher air-humidity in the plane or the led-lighting... I can go on for ever... but basically my opinion is that the shark-fin looks good in my eyes and as long as it's not going to cause crashes I really hope they keep it!

/Mike
 
fspilot747
Posts: 3455
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 1999 2:58 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:16 am

That plane looks like a damn joke, a mockery to aviation, IMO. Call me old fashioned, but we don't need a starwars cruiser.

I echo Roberta's sentiments here. If that plane looks like that when it comes out, I'm going to be really, really dissapointed. But whatever, unto each his own.

It doesn't even look nice. It's obvious that the model looks like that to make it "look cool," but it really just looks like an accident. Especially that nose, looks like BMW had a hand in this!
----------

So that's my rant about the aesthetics. It better be as efficient as their making it out to be. But it will never ever replace the 757..Now there's a plane you can call sexy.

FSP

[Edited 2004-07-13 03:22:52]
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:20 pm

Ok, MITAero, some of the new designs have great curves that DO serve an aerodynamic purpose. Prime examples are the huge fairings on the Citation X and the Raytheon Premier. I'm not an engineer, but from what I understand in simple terms, they make the disruption of air around the wing root more gradual so it is less of a factor. They also make the plane look really good, and really fast in my opininon.

That being said, I would like to see airliners take the next leap forward, and I hope that the airlines themselves see the benefits from a new design.
DMI
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 13, 2004 3:20 pm

Aerodynamics dictates design in cases like that. It just so happens that it turned out to be aesthetically pleasing to you. That's totally different from the older aircraft for which the engineers had fewer aerodynamic tools, and thus went with sleek-looking designs in lieu of anything proven to be better.

I agree with you, Citation X looks cool. Isn't aerodynamics great?  Smile
 
Mender
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 9:36 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:44 am

When I look at that picture of the 7E7 in ANA's livery I can't help thinking I've seen the underlying shape before...........It's kind of like a Caravelle and a Comet merged together. Kind of like the new mini. It's a brand new car but it still has design cue's from the old mini.

Crikey.... I'm going to come in for some stick for saying that.

Am I right in saying it's going to have a carbon fibre fuselage?

That alone will be interesting to say the least. Let's hope it doesn't end up like the first Comet's. If it really does have a carbon fuselage how will it stand up to the impacts airbridges and cargo loaders give metal aircraft? Will serious damage be detected before take off? I hope so.
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:57 am

Mender,

There's a thread in Civil Aviation that addresses your concerns.
Note: don't pay attention to the people posting - just read the article linked in the first post  Smile

https://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1647951/
 
JMV
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 4:22 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:15 pm

First, I like the look. I like the distinct shape of the nose and tail. It certainly distinguishes it from other aircraft, which leads me to my next point.

Assuming that the tail structure does not penalize efficiency, and the 7E7 will live up to Boeing's projections, wouldn't the distinct look help airlines flying the 7E7 with marketing? Wouldn't the different look play well in print and other media, with the airlines touting the consumer-facing aspects of the plane? I could see an airline tying the 7E7 tying exterior images with the interior features that really are important to passengers. Eventually people would equate the unique shape of the nose and the tail with the larger windows, the more comfortable cabin environment, and whatever else Boeing has up its sleeve for the interior.

It wouldn't be the first time that Boeing used the exterior shape of one of their planes to separate itself from the others. The 747 could have been a widebody without the hump. Yet, there it is, and as a result it is one of the most easily recognizable aircraft in the world, even to non-aviation enthusiasts.
Google begins where my brain ends! ©
 
Craigy
Posts: 1076
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 6:24 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:27 am

Think about how aircraft design has evolved from the Wright Flyer through the Tiger Moth, Connie, DC-3 to the present shape - which is more or less the 1950's design of the 707.

Isn't it about time to move on?

Craig.
 
User avatar
Aloha717200
Posts: 3879
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:50 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:28 am

The 727 might have had a fast-looking tail, but did it have optimized aerodynamic characteristics? No. Was there any engineering justification for the curvy shapes (weight savings)? No. (Etc.) I don't understand how poorer technology is better for you guys just because it looks nice.


This is completely incorrect.

The 727 was an advanced design for its time. It was a 3-engined plane being built when many carriers still had the mindset that a 4-engined plane was ideal and safer. It DID have optimized aerodynamic characteristics:

the swept wing afforded higher speeds....the "clean wing" design, the new flap designs, meant to optimize short-field performance and open up markets that were unable to be served by the 707. You have to think back here: This was the early 1960s. 3 engines and a swept, clean-wing were real innovations back then. A jet airliner that could handle gravel strips, was an innovation. All of those curves had a purpose. Back then boeing was striving for efficiency increases too, but you don't go from a 707 to a 7E7 overnight. You should know that.


So to say that the 727 was all looks but no basis for those looks is absolutely wrong. The 727 was the 7E7 of the 1960s. It was innovative and advanced for its time. Trying to say that because it didn't feature what the 7E7 has is like comparing apples to oranges. In fact, one could say, that the 7E7, compared to the 767 a similar aircraft, is less of an advancement than the 727 was compared to the 707.

There was no "comparable model" back then. The 7E7 is a new design based on designs that have already been proven: The 767 and A330 markets, which it hopes to replace. The 727 was something that had to prove itself, there was no proven predecessor or comparable model at the time. So, the leap from the 707 to the 727 could, in fact, be considered a greater leap than that from the 767 to the 7E7.



I personally love the 7E7 though I am glad to see the tail straightened out a bit now. The plane took a long, long time to grow on me but now I like it. I still think the window spars look like they're going to block the pilots' 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock views, but i could be wrong.
 
User avatar
Aloha717200
Posts: 3879
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:50 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:32 am

Isn't it about time to move on?


OK, propose the next step. Was it the Sonic Cruiser? While certainly interesting, had it happened, I bet we'd see complaints that it looked too much like the SR-71 and that "We need to move on past existing designs."


So, what would you like? What's good enough for you? A space ship? A suborbital transport? Those would be fantastic, but getting them economical and affordable would take decades and Boeing doesnt have decades to introduce something new to the market.

So, what, then, do you believe is the next step because clearly you don't want something that has an elongated fuselage, a pair of wings, and jet engines mounted on the side and rear. So, what DO you want?


Comments like that irritate me.
 
JMV
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 4:22 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:55 pm

I'm no expert, but I would respectfully disagree that the advancement between the 727 and 707 was greater than the advancement between the 7E7 and the 767. And although it is a bit off-topic, I'll explain why.

With the 7E7 Boeing will be manufacturing virtually an entire commercial jetliner out of composites rather than metal. The body of the aircraft will be loaded with sensors that will identify and report structural problems via a neural network. These two elements alone represent a huge advancement in technology between the 'E7 and '67. But for good measure, Boeing is also moving to two engines that are interchangeable (a commercial aviation first) and eliminate bleed air, making the engines extremely efficient. They are going to electrical systems rather than pneumatic systems. They are moving to a totally new, highly efficient raked-wing.

For all practical purposes the 727 was a smaller version of the 707. It had a 3-engine configuration because four were not needed to handle the range and payload targets, and two were not yet powerful or reliable enough. Both had swept wings, though the angle between the '07 and '27 may have been different to improve efficiencies. There were no major advancements in control surface mechanics. Certainly there were differences, but nothing revolutionary.

In my opinion, there is no comparison in the advancements between the '07/'27 and the '67/'E7. The delta between the '67 and 'E7 is far greater.
Google begins where my brain ends! ©
 
oly720man
Posts: 5813
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 7:13 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:00 am

Same tail?  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeremy Irish/cactus wings

wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Fri Jul 16, 2004 5:45 am

>This is completely incorrect.

Um, no. And I never said the 727 was "all looks but no basis." I never even mentioned swept wings or anything like that. We're talking about subtle, flashy-looking contours here.

If the 727 designs were optimized, why are they not being repeated? There is always a subset of shapes for any given aircraft that are not "justified" by engineering. There will be parts like this on new aircraft as well, but fewer, since there are more engineering tools to help pick the right curves.

No one ever said the 727 wasn't advanced for its time. Please read before posting.

BTW - sweeping a wing doesn't constitute an "optimal" design.. how much sweep? Neither does designing better flaps.
 
AUAE
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 4:41 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Fri Jul 16, 2004 9:25 pm

**
There is always a subset of shapes for any given aircraft that are not "justified" by engineering. - MITaero

**

I agree. Looking at some of the plain looking aircraft these days, I would say they need more "unjustified" style. Like those cars of the 50s!! Hey, this also reminds me of a story that some the old Lockheed hands talked about. They said the different fairings on the L-1011 came about becasue a new program manager wanted to leave his mark. No real technical merit to the design change. Check out the tails below, where the engine meets the fuselage. Have to say, the later is a bit more stylish!

Shawn



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rosvalmir Afonso Delagassa




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michel GILLIAND

Air transport is just a glorified bus operation. -Michael O'Leary, Ryanair's chief executive
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1014
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:23 am

I think JMV makes a good point. The real 7E7 advancements are more in manufacturing features and technique than form visible to the user..(darn, I really like the flying dolphin, which may not survive). The latest wind tunnel model had a rectangular tail. Aero form may be pretty much optimized at this point, with no new rabbits to be pulled out of the hat in that area. C'est la vie. Economy, capability and user comfort seems to be the new offering here. I think more serious to the product "new features" mission is keeping humidified air and the large windows, etc. rather than the external form.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Sun Jul 18, 2004 12:57 pm

>> "Isn't it about time to move on?" <<

Yes it will be soon, but they are not too many pushes at the moment to do so. Besides, you are asking a question that may not need to be asked as they are in reference to multiple fronts and directions; I'm saying the trend is that current technology demand is maturing.

I doubt the only practical/radial shape for high-subsonic would be Sonic Cruiser nor that Concorde's shape is how lowsonics are supposed to be... Insane

IMO, people who believe certain technologies are supposed to be a certain way AND those who believe I am suggesting doing away with tradition should be bitch-slapped.

The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Mon Jul 19, 2004 4:56 am

The body of the aircraft will be loaded with sensors that will identify and report structural problems via a neural network.

They actually seem to have decided against that.

N
 
JMV
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 4:22 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:57 am

Gigneil,

Not doubting you, rather asking the question just to keep up on matters, do you have a link to an article or press release regarding the decision on sensors?

Thanks.
Google begins where my brain ends! ©
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14123
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 8:02 am

the nose/tail curvers were not a result of aerodynamic studies

they were introduced to set the aircraft apart from it´s competitor.

people could think boeing was copying a concept which is something people don´t wantto hear & would be killing for the crusial public support.

as boeing said themselves those shapes won´t hurt aerodynamic performance.

now that the project has a go ahead as said "reality kicks in"
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:12 pm

For all practical purposes the 727 was a smaller version of the 707. It had a 3-engine configuration because four were not needed to handle the range and payload targets, and two were not yet powerful or reliable enough. Both had swept wings, though the angle between the '07 and '27 may have been different to improve efficiencies. There were no major advancements in control surface mechanics. Certainly there were differences, but nothing revolutionary.

Wait a second, wasn't the 727 the first aircraft to feature triple-slotted flaps and leading edge Krueger slats? Sorta revolutionary if you ask me, because combine with the JT8D, it gave the 727 great field performance for its day.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:49 pm

JMV-

http://flug-revue.rotor.com/FRHeft/FRHEFT04/FRH0408/FR0408c.htm

Its almost exactly down the page. Look for the word "neuronal", it somewhat stands out.

N
 
videns
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:28 pm

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:26 pm

We are in the age of 1.) fluid dynamic simulations, 2.) wind tunnel tests, and 3.) strict certification processes.

1.) Only as good as the software that's written for the simulations. Requires tons of man/hours to complete each test with each configuration, even if the changes are minimal.

2.) Wind tunnel tests also require a lot of time. In this case not only to perform the tests, but also to get the models ready. And since (to my knowledge) there's no true size wind tunnel available to fit a full size mock up of an airplane, it's also not accurate enough (although they get pretty close).

3.) It's not an industry where there can be continuous development applied to the product. The certification process would just be too expensive. An example of this would be Formula 1 racing. For each race (or for smaller teams, as fast as their budget will allow), every team brings new parts developed for their cars. Some changes seem to be invisible to the untrained eye, but yet they introduce performance gains. And what do all those cars have in common? They are THE most technologically advanced cars there are. (No wonder Renault is joining Boeing to do joint development programs). They have the money to do continuous development, and regulations that let them apply all those small steps into their cars.

Aircraft manufacturers, even if their budget allowed them to, simply cannot keep making little changes and applying them on their new-builds. That's why bigger changes happen with each new aircraft introduced every 5-10-15 years instead of it being an every-week occurrence.
On top of that, and in my own opinion, aircraft manufacturers are slowly getting close to the practical limits in terms of aerodynamic development of their products. And with that, I mean that modern commercial airliners are incredibly efficient compared to say a 707 or a 727. That being said, the cost/performance-gain ratio is starting to become a real issue, because for every penny spent in development, there's a smaller increase in performance for the money spent... I don't think that scrapping hydraulic systems and developing lighter airframes for the 7E7 is a coincidence, and it's still a huge step forward in the development of modern aircraft.

In my opinion, every new development is welcome, be it the A380, the 7E7, or whatever new thing is or will be on the drawing boards...

my 2 cents...

videns
Travel? Why would i travel if I can watch it on TV?
 
cancidas
Posts: 3985
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 7:34 am

RE: 7E7 Nose/tail

Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:54 pm

i'm on a sensability binge today for some reason. so here is my question:

why are you all arguing about little details of an aircraft yet to be built? do you really think the boeing designers and engineers are going to care what a bunch of people say about thier plane on some website?

bottom line, let them build it and then decide on if you like it or not.
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos