Re: Wing vs. tail-mounted engines?

Date:         09 Apr 2001 15:37:12 
From:         John Liebson <jliebson@cybermesa.com>
Organization: NMIX
References:   1 2 3
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

jthorn@galileo.thp.univie.ac.at (Jonathan Thornburg) wrote:

>The industry doesn't care much about it, but safety is another big
>advantage of wing-mounted engines:  What kills people in a jet crash
>is often not the crash itself, but the ensuing fire.  Tail-mounted
>engines mean fuel pipes running from the wing (where the fuel tanks are)
>aft through the fuselage to the engines, i.e. you've got fuel right
>in the fuselage with the passengers.  In contrast, wing-mounted engines
>allow all the fuel to be kept in the wings, some distance away from the
>passengers.  (Some designs do put fuel tanks in the wing center sections
>anyway.)

What about wing-mounted-engine aircraft that _also_ have tail-mounted
fuel tanks?