From: Jean-Francois Mezei <email@example.com> Organization: Vaxination Informatique Date: 03 Sep 96 01:16:50 References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
Karl Swartz wrote: > Wings are the same basic design, again with structural reinforcement > over time as they learned where the weak spots were and wanted to > increase gross weights. It was my impression that the -400 had some > significant changes beyond the winglets, but someone told me that a > 747-400(D) has a wing that's identical to the -300 or a late -200. >From the Canadian Airlines WEB site (http://www.cdnair.ca) How much weight does an additional six foot (.8m) wing tip extension and winglet add to the 747-400 wing? None! A weight saving of approximately 2,270 kg. (5,000 pounds) has been acheived in the wing with the application of the new aliminum alloys, which offset the weight increase of the wing tip extension and winglet. To me, this sounds like a redesign. New alloys used, longer wing by six feet, and the winglets. But I guess that to the industry, this is considered the same wing design with some modifications. Does this mean that Boeing didn't have to re-test the wing (wind test, try to break etc) ? Is there really such a thing as a brand new wing ? If Airbus builds it big jumbo jet, won't it wings really be a redesign of the 340s wings ? When you already have a FBW plane, is building a bigger wing (more lift capacity etc) really done from scratch, or can much of the past experience, many of the components (sensors, motors etc) be re-used or just adjusted for the new design ? I realise that making a wing bigger is more complex than just clicking on a point of the wing and stretching it on the computer, but doesn't computer technology make it a lot easier today to build a "new" wing ? So, my qestion is: is it really that simple to modify an existing wing? is it really that expensive to design a new wing ? is the difference between the 2 really that big now that computers and previous designs help ?