Re: Misconceived Mammoth

Date:         13 Jan 97 18:35:30 
From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
References:   1
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>Why is the A3XX Omnibus not a V-tail mid-winger?
>This configuration, which is entirely feasible on a fly-by-wire mammoth,
>minimises both profile and interference drag, with enormous benefits all
>round - except to Boeing.   So why isn't it being employed in this
>clean-sheet-of-paper design?

Some early versions of the A3XX proposal had twin vertical tails --
not like a Beechcraft Bonanza as the angle between them was not very
great and there were still horizontal tails, which a Bonanza-style
V-tail would not have.  I assume the rationalle for doing this was to
reduce tail height for hangers and perhaps to reduce the structural
weight from what would be required by a single, enormous vertical
tail.  Anybody know more about it?

The mid-wing configuration is a problem for ditching.  Not insoluble
since even high-wing designs have been used for relatively recent
commercial aircraft -- the BAe 146 and the ATR family are two common
examples, though neither is intended for long overwater flights.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@netapp.com
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills