Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
VirginFlyer wrote:Veigar wrote:Hm. All of the points posed here bring up the question as to why Boeing even did the design they did when developing the 727. If anything, the rear end of the 727's area (everything where the tail is) would be even HEAVIER with the middle engine that has the S-duct inlet. Also, do low bypass engines only work on this type of aircraft? (If it's as big as the 727 or 757 obviously) I know for a fact no manufacturer will make a plane nowadays with low bypass engines, so it'd make sense as to why it could've worked back then and not now.
When the 727 was designed, there weren't high bypass turbofans; the JT8D was basically it. They needed three engines for performance. I am under the impression podded engines under the wing were discounted in favour of getting a cleaner wing to enable better field performance. The rest of the design would have flowed on from that.
https://s30.postimg.org/ldn46b0vl/IMG_2412.jpg
TWA772LR wrote:Veigar wrote:jubguy3 wrote:Yes, because Boeing's primary concern is to make a throwback aircraft.
Weren't they aiming to do something similar with the 7J7? I believe it looked identical to a 727 minus the s-duct engine
A 3-engine, UDF, T-tail, MoM plane would be the coolest airliner to grace the skies since Concorde. Would have to have a super tall landing gear so the fans don't hit the runway upon take off, but who cares? That would be one sexy machine! Like the love child of a 727 and Q400!
an MD-80 body, with a 787 cockpit, and smaller 787 engines. Who knows. We all know that Boeing does get creative sometimes.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:an MD-80 body, with a 787 cockpit, and smaller 787 engines. Who knows. We all know that Boeing does get creative sometimes.
No, please I cannot imagine.
GF
Veigar wrote:SWALUV wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the main reason T-Tail aircraft aren't designed more often is simply because of the added weight needed for structural purposes.
I would love to see another modern T-Tail though. That'd be gorgeous!
Yeah, I had thought this to be the case, but on the flip side, aren't T-Tail airplanes more aerodynamic?
kitplane01 wrote:Veigar wrote:SWALUV wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the main reason T-Tail aircraft aren't designed more often is simply because of the added weight needed for structural purposes.
I would love to see another modern T-Tail though. That'd be gorgeous!
Yeah, I had thought this to be the case, but on the flip side, aren't T-Tail airplanes more aerodynamic?
Typically not so much.
The reason to have a T-Tail is to either ...
1) Get the tail out of the blanking effect of the wing for stall recovery.
2) Get the tail out of the way in order to place the engines on the tail (DC-9).
Piper had a bunch of aircraft that they converted from normal tails to T-Tails for looks and marketing.