Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Hangar Talk
Could this be the 737 Replacement? >

Could this be the 737 Replacement?

Search

Notices
Hangar Talk For non-aviation-related discussion and aviation threads that don't belong elsewhere

Could this be the 737 Replacement?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-16-2011, 11:39 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
Since spanwise flow is at the rear-most part of the wing, and local increase in AOA happens there, it will stall root-first. Since this is the aftmost part of the wing, a stall causes a nose-up pitch...generally the opposite of what you want.
The canard can prevent this by stalling and pitching down before the wing reaches a critical AOA, as in the Rutan designs.
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 07-16-2011, 12:52 PM
  #12  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default Yes, but...

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
The canard can prevent this by stalling and pitching down before the wing reaches a critical AOA, as in the Rutan designs.

Tom:

True, Rutan avoids an aft-wing stall by purposely limiting the amount of "up" lift the canard can generate. This does prevent an aft-wing stall, but also limits the aft-wing from generating anything close to CL-max. This means you need even more wing, or more flaps, to get a reasonable approach or takeoff speed. More wing or more flaps equals more complexity and more weight, which equals more cost. (Both to acquire and to operate). Minor consideration on a homebuilt; more on an airliner.

If the canard (or foreplane) can be made to have a huge range of motion, an aft-wing stall with this configuration could be made recoverable by making the canard lift go to zero, or even a negative value, which would drive the nose (and AOA) down. On all supersonic fighters that I can think of there is an all-moving stabilator (instead of a horizontal stab and elevator), to achieve the required control moment-arms with the large center of lift-ranges generated from approach speed through supersonic flight.

All-moving slabs haven't been used on airliners because, I believe in part, they are more responsive, and would make for a rougher ride in an airliner. This same characteristic makes them perfectly applicable to fighters, where rapid g-onset (and pulling to CL max) is often a necessity.

Rick mentioned fly-by-wire. You don't have to make it that way (as above), but to get maximum benefit from a FSW jet with a canard, you would probably want to. A FBW system would make an all-moving canard stabilator easy to adopt without sacrificing ride quality.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 07-16-2011, 01:45 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 777 Left
Posts: 347
Default

It seems Boeing would make a mistake by introducing a platform to transport category that is "unstable" by design. Airbus avoided doing this with the fbw on the 320 and for good reason.

I also think the canards would be a problem in ground handling.
FastDEW is offline  
Old 07-16-2011, 04:01 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TonyWilliams's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Default

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
OK, can anyone explain why this post was "moved" ?

I put it right back in the Delta RFP thread. It could be relevant.

The design makes a lot of sense, but would be a runway hog.

Maybe a flying saucer is relevant for Delta in the future, but for now, this is merely hangar talk.

Besides, any new airliner from Boeing / Airbus will be used by more than just Delta, or US airlines, for that matter.

When there is a concrete plane for Delta to buy, and Boeing and Delta are ready, willing and able.... then you have a story about Delta.
TonyWilliams is offline  
Old 07-17-2011, 05:42 AM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

UAL T38 Phlyer,

Thanks for the explanation. I was curious about the lack of interest in scaling up canard designs for larger aircraft. For transport aircraft, static instability may offer unneeded advantages at the price of unwanted problems.
tomgoodman is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vagabond
Technical
4
10-31-2010 01:43 AM
1Seat 1Engine
Major
11
06-15-2007 05:20 AM
Freight Dog
Major
61
02-26-2007 07:06 AM
Widow's Son
Major
3
04-03-2006 08:39 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices