the airfix mossie will be the old 48th kit(excellent as it is) with a new nose and new engines….

coanda

leans down to…

bang head against desk

hmm not as complex as that matey……………

coanda

I used to fly with a guy who would spend about 3 months in a year down that way and even further into south america on charters for the airline he flys/flew for.

coanda

its not suggesting that the aircraft is landing nosewheel first, its suggesting that the touchdown angle is such that all three wheels will touch the ground more or less at once, this is because of the low angle of attack. This is probably because the aircraft doesnt actually need to be at a high angle of attack to generate the lift require to support it. it could also be because the flap pitching moments force that angle of attack.

coanda

whats the most precious cargo that concorde carries?

Transplant organs and Diamonds

Gold is too dense! It would load out the airframe before it reached anywhere near an economical financial solution.

when all trimmings are removed, freighter conversions are lighter when empty than the passenger equivalents(pop along to the airbus website and look for the A300 family, characteristics on the A300 and then the A300F).

Also, given the actual space inside the concorde, there is certainly no room for average sized pallets or containers. This aircraft, as a freighter would carry small, or one off items of mail/freight over long distances at high speed, there is a limited market for this. And would certainly grow if advertised and carried out in this way. There are plenty of trans atlantic firms out there willing to pay for this service.

As for virgin getting a couple, I wouldnt know. I do know that it would be a loss to the aerospace manufacturing and design industry, as it has its own airworthiness requirements and certification documents, quite apart from the ‘average’ airliner. I would suggest that you might well be seeing more aircraft cruise climbing across the atlantic in the next 20-30 years.

I have a design project funded by airbus, for a ‘new’ transport aircraft, and its completely open to what you want to do. This is led by the capability sustainment manager for airbus UK, here in Filton. Whilst Airbus is quite anally retentive when it comes to technology inclusion (you may not think it but it is) in its products (you’d be amazed at what we could put into an airplane!). There are two ways of thinking, slower, and marginally faster. Cruise Mach numbers have come down over the past 20 years, and it could be said that they would fall and stabilise at about 0.65-0.7 and stay that way. Or….with greater design and research we can come up with an aircraft cruising at about 0.9-0.95. There are ways and means to achieve this, but it all depends on whether people like airbus are gonna shell out for the research.

coanda

PS Airbus HATES BWB designs

The stability offered by high wing aircraft, for me is the ONLY reason why the Cessna series of aircraft got anywhere(that and next to no competition). The high failure rate of the nosewheel is another reason why I dont like them.

I am biased, having flown the bulldog more than the 152, however the all over performance of the aircraft is greater than that of the cessna 152.

the visibility alone should be seen as essential in a training aircraft. and looking at the ground won’t do you much good when you cant see in the upper 3/4’s of the sky…….where the majority of the problems are going to come from!

sorry guys….just my own two pence worth!

coanda

Destroy It Yourself

coanda