"Hans Holbein" wrote in message
...
Orval Fairbairn schrieb:
In article ,
Hans Holbein wrote:

Troy schrieb:

What is the Problem with this design?
Why did they come up with it so late?

It was a significant departure from the way Beech has always built
airplanes -- from metal and -- significantly -- did not deliver the
desired performance.

Most Beech products use similar components, but the Starship was one of
a kind and required too much logistical support, so they bought almost
all of them back and scrapped them.

I was not specifically talking aubout Beech, I meant the canard design.

They had something like this at the end of war in japan, but then again,
aircraft were designed the conventional way until today with few
exceptions like the Typhoon, the Kfir, the Raffale and some Rutans.

Is there anything about the canard layout which makes it improper for
airliners or transport aircraft?

If you consider the supporting structures such as spars and the actuation
mechanisms to move the surfaces, canards likely require too many compromises
to be easily worked into concepts for transport aircraft and airliners.

If it doesn't save money or produce a higher return on investment, buyers
aren't going to go for it.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)