Re: A330-300HGW & new gear

Date:         14 Jul 97 20:27:00 
From:         domk1031@cetus.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (Burkhard Domke)
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 13 Jul 97 01:25:49 , kls.NOSPAM@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote:
>>- what difference between the so called new -500/600 wing and the
>>existing -300 wing   there will be
>The current wing is designed to accomodate either two relatively large
>engines (A330) or four considerably lighter engines (A340-200/300).
>The A340-500/600 will have four engines, each larger (and heavier)
>than the two on the A330.  That added engine weight alone imples some
>substantial changes.  (The 777 was designed with 100,000+ lbs thrust
>engines in mind from the outset.)

The A340-600 wing is designated WBI (Wing Box Insert) by DASA. I was
told by some DASA tech-staff that considerable area is gained by
extending the wing torsion box CHORDWISE, adding a section with a
third spar. Though they claim this to be aerodynamically feasible, I'd
dare to question the economic viability of the concept.
During a colloquium on Adaptive Wing Technology held at TUB recently,
a wing study was shown, featuring triple slotted fowler flaps
inboards, double-slotted fowler flaps outboards and a single-slotted
flaperon supported by no less than four tracks, the latter due to
aeroelastic considerations. The concept was said to aim primarily at
reducing zero-lift alpha or increasing lift at takeoff with a
rotation-angle limited configuration respectivley. This wing study may
be closely related to the A340-600 pogram.

IMO, AI should should cancel the -600 outright, shelve the A3XX, and
rather go for a completely new single-deck widebody with around 450
seats (three-class) to compete with both the 747 and the 777 HGW/ER
versions. This would deprieve Boeing of their Jumbo 'cash-cow', and we
would most likely see prices soaring up for Boeing's smaller types as
a direct result.