멤버가 된 해 | |
온라인 마지막 접속 일시 | |
언어 | English (USA) |
I agree with the note that using thrust reversers to back away from the gate is putting extra, and unneeded, wear and tear on the engines. When I worked at FedEx, we would regularly walk the gate areas looking for foreign objects. The reason was the multi-million dollar engines would suck loose stuff up and damage the engines. Using the thrust reversers at pushback would risk debris being blown forward and then get sucked into the engine. Tugs remove those risks.
Written on 2020/12/23
Another issue is that many airlines took a look at their procedures when fuel prices spiked. Several years ago, I was reading about airlines literally looking at every item on the aircraft to assess whether the weight was necessary. In those articles, there were also comments about minimizing engine runtime. Saving fuel by getting engines shutdown as soon as possible, and on the other end, not firing them up any earlier than necessary. I think there was a time with airlines where they just accepted all the fuel costs as just necessary for the business. But, that has definitely changed.
Robert Mills Jr - I agree that the termination of the 757 was a stupid decision. And, to be honest, I think it was a poor decision to shut down the 717 (the MD-95 inherited in the MD merger). While the CSeries (A220) was a clean sheet design, the 717 would have been a good option for that segment of the market. For the 757, I do hope that the rumors of a "757-plus" are true. Given the financial situation in the industry, if there is to be a "new" mid-market aircraft anytime in the next decade, it isn't going to be clean sheet design.
Written on 2020/11/10
Robert Mills - While the flying wing is an efficient design, it is also one that has some serious control challenges. I've expressed on another picture of this plane that it would be interesting to know how much of the development cost was attributed to the flight control issues. The tube and wing design used for commercial aircraft, while not as aerodynamically efficient is a relatively simple structure. I can't prove it, but I suspect that flight control issue accounted for a large chunk of development costs. If so, it would explain why commercial aircraft design hasn't gone down this path... .yet. Over the years, I have seen some prototype models of flying wings but there are no indications that they will become commercially viable in the near term.
Written on 2020/10/22
귀하의 브라우저는 지원되지 않습니다.. 브라우저를 업그레이드하세요 |