Here's one with lots o' motors.
I bet that looks spectacular at night, with the stars reflecting off the wings ...
More engines spread out over the wing would have the potential for some serious out of balance thrust. If all the engines on 1 wing were to fail, the engines spread out all over the other wing would cause the plane to yaw(turn). Just what you want under emergency conditions. More rudder input, creating more drag and slower flight.
A few engines, close to the plane's centerline is very manageable under engine out conditions.
Actually adding more components that might fail does not really make the system more reliable. It can actually increase the chances of 1 or some failing. And if any of those engines shared any systems (fuel lines, electrical interconnects...) it might get unreliable much quicker in the case of 1 failure disabling other devices. More stuff out there to fail means that more stuff will fail. More components to maintain means more likelyhood that some bit of maintenance will be missed and then the system is now less reliable.
I have daydreamed of an aircraft that takes off on normal engines, but with the leading edge of the wing opening up to become a long intake for a ramjet, still supplying enough resistance to deflect air over the top of the aerofoil to maintain lift, and the exhaust coming out under the back of the wing.
The normal engines could fold back into the fuselage once in full fight, and the highlight of the daydream is that I become rich
Here's a video on what airbus planes will be like in 2050.. It sounds good but don't you think that the flying so close in patterns might increase the chance of collision?
robotlover17:
.... It sounds good but don't you think that the flying so close in patterns might increase the chance of collision?
Probably not, as long as the computer is flying the plane.
But I see other arguments against formation flying.
- it will take some time to launch the all planes, during which the first planes must loiter, burning fuel land time.
- it will reduce flexibility
- do you need to move that many people at the same time?
- Is a larger plane more economical than several small planes
The interesting part is: When will you board a plane without a human pilot?
The planes can take of, fly and land by themselves. And in zero visibility, the plane must be allowed to autoland, with the pilots in a supervising role.
(Autoland has been used for 40 years)
Some of those airbuses are only a couple of lengths behind the one in front, and would be in big trouble in the turbulent air.
Even ducks don't do that do they ?
you are right, ducks and geese fly even closer.
Yes but in a V not a diamond
The ones to each side are in the updraft of the wingtip vortex, as per the article you referred , but the one immediately behind is in the downdraft.
As always you can chalk this up to the graphic being made by marketing execs and graphical designers likely with almost no input from anyone in engineering. My general rule is if a document is any more exciting than a user's manual or has pretty pictures it can't really be trusted for technical detail.
But ducks and geese can't access the graphic, and they don't fly immediately behind another one
jroorda:
As always you can chalk this up to the graphic being made by marketing execs and graphical designers likely with almost no input from anyone in engineering. My general rule is if a document is any more exciting than a user's manual or has pretty pictures it can't really be trusted for technical detail.
Haha, love it. +1 