If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
I have seen reported that the AirBus-320 has a glide ratio of 1:15.
That was what our pilots told us the wings on Cessna 180-182 (L-19)'s glide ratio was. It does not seem consistent that a swept, thin airfoil, wing would have the same glide ratio as the Cessna. It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
On Jan 21, 7:25*am, "pintlar" wrote:
I have seen reported that the AirBus-320 has a glide ratio of 1:15. That was what our pilots told us the wings on Cessna 180-182 (L-19)'s glide ratio was. It does not seem consistent that a swept, thin airfoil, wing would have the same glide ratio as the Cessna... Some of the early smoothbore (straight turbojet) airliners such as 707 and DC-8 had best L/Ds up around 20:1, so I wouldn't be surprised at 15:1 for a high-bypass turbofan airliner, not at all. The sweep makes it hard to hold laminar flow, but the thinness and high aspect ratio are good things. Thanks, Bob K. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
Well, let's do the math. The 320 has a best glide speed (max distance) of
about 220 mph while dropping about 1000 fpm at this speed. 220 mph = 3.66 mpm, or about 19,360 fpm. If you go forward 19,360 feet while dropping 1000 feet this is about a 19.36:1 glide ratio. Allowing for other factors not presented in the data I've seen, 15:1 is eminently reasonable for the A-320. Jim -- "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." --Aristotle "pintlar" wrote in message ... I have seen reported that the AirBus-320 has a glide ratio of 1:15. That was what our pilots told us the wings on Cessna 180-182 (L-19)'s glide ratio was. It does not seem consistent that a swept, thin airfoil, wing would have the same glide ratio as the Cessna. It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
pintlar s'est penché sur son écritoire, nous avons lu:
It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? At M0.8, the ratio is near 1:16 engines iddle, the flight path angle is less than 2.5° at minimum clean speed. I have no idea about residual thrust.... Consider the cfm56-A have 2500kg thrust at FL350 and maxi cruise. You may find the real ratio for a heavy plane (weight / 5000) unable to reach MMo at FL350. Sorry, I never can test. By -- Volem rien foutre al païs! Philippe Vessaire Ò¿Ó¬ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:25:49 -0700, "pintlar"
wrote: I have seen reported that the AirBus-320 has a glide ratio of 1:15. That was what our pilots told us the wings on Cessna 180-182 (L-19)'s glide ratio was. It does not seem consistent that a swept, thin airfoil, wing would have the same glide ratio as the Cessna. It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. An a320 pilot I spoke to says the published glide ratio is 20:1 and it can be stretched to something better than 30:1 with the right weight and speed. He said that sometimes the most difficult part of landing an A320-200 is getting the sucker down! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power?
Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. ********************** .. . . .I long time ago a Canadian pilot nursed a fuel exhausted 737 (mistake at fuel loading between US and metric gallons) over 100 miles in British Colombia to land at an abandoned military runway at that time being used as a auto drag strip. He too was a glider pilot. .. . . .Then there is the biggest AirBus in the 80's or 90's going East, a tremendous distance, to glide to the Azores after losing its fuel during a near fatal fuel transfer process ( damaged piping) to balance the plane. He landed hotter than hell but managed to get it stopped. .. . . .It is hard to believe those swept, thin profile airliner wings are more efficient than those on the 182's. While the 182 wings must be 'low wing load' type, one would imagine the airliner wing to be the opposite and not as efficient. Strange, but evidently not true. I would think the drag of two engine nacelles and windmilling engines, would also lower the drag ratio. Again, seems I'm wrong. .. . . .The British fibre glass 'home built' two seater that the TV serial was made about, (the British Vetinarinan pilot/builder), had its wings designed by an AirBus engineer. They were supposedly very efficient wings. Too bad that company is no longer offering those kits. That was a beautiful plane. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
"pintlar" wrote in message
... I have seen reported that the AirBus-320 has a glide ratio of 1:15. That was what our pilots told us the wings on Cessna 180-182 (L-19)'s glide ratio was. It does not seem consistent that a swept, thin airfoil, wing would have the same glide ratio as the Cessna. It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. To paraphrase an old movie line: "If the B52 doesn't have a glide ration of at least 15:1, I'll eat my hat!" Peter |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:05:30 -0700, "pintlar"
wrote: It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. ********************** . . . .I long time ago a Canadian pilot nursed a fuel exhausted 737 (mistake at fuel loading between US and metric gallons) over 100 miles in British Colombia to land at an abandoned military runway at that time being used as a auto drag strip. He too was a glider pilot. Not BC - Manitoba - the "Gimli Glider" . . . .Then there is the biggest AirBus in the 80's or 90's going East, a tremendous distance, to glide to the Azores after losing its fuel during a near fatal fuel transfer process ( damaged piping) to balance the plane. He landed hotter than hell but managed to get it stopped. . . . .It is hard to believe those swept, thin profile airliner wings are more efficient than those on the 182's. While the 182 wings must be 'low wing load' type, one would imagine the airliner wing to be the opposite and not as efficient. Strange, but evidently not true. I would think the drag of two engine nacelles and windmilling engines, would also lower the drag ratio. Again, seems I'm wrong. . . . .The British fibre glass 'home built' two seater that the TV serial was made about, (the British Vetinarinan pilot/builder), had its wings designed by an AirBus engineer. They were supposedly very efficient wings. Too bad that company is no longer offering those kits. That was a beautiful plane. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
To paraphrase an old movie line: "If the B52 doesn't have a glide ration
of at least 15:1, I'll eat my hat!" Peter ******************************* I was lead to believe the B-52's wing took a negative angle of attack when the engines lost power. For the crew, that is nice to know that this is not true. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Another AirBus-320 question
In article ,
"pintlar" wrote: It is correct the AB-320 has a 1:15 glide ratio at zero power? Those pilots also said a B-52 and a grand piano have identical glide ratios. ********************** . . . .I long time ago a Canadian pilot nursed a fuel exhausted 737 (mistake at fuel loading between US and metric gallons) over 100 miles in British Colombia to land at an abandoned military runway at that time being used as a auto drag strip. He too was a glider pilot. Not quite correct. Google "gimli glider"... The aircraft was a 767, the flight took off from Montreal and made its forced landing in Gimli, Manitoba, I don't think they made it 100 miles, .... ....and the confusion as caused by an incorrect conversion from litres to kilograms and back again, leading to an incorrect amount of fuel being added in Montreal (they used the figure for litres to pounds and so ended up with 22,300 lb of fuel and not 22,300 kg). For further details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider . . . .Then there is the biggest AirBus in the 80's or 90's going East, a tremendous distance, to glide to the Azores after losing its fuel during a near fatal fuel transfer process ( damaged piping) to balance the plane. He landed hotter than hell but managed to get it stopped. . . . .It is hard to believe those swept, thin profile airliner wings are more efficient than those on the 182's. While the 182 wings must be 'low wing load' type, one would imagine the airliner wing to be the opposite and not as efficient. Strange, but evidently not true. I would think the drag of two engine nacelles and windmilling engines, would also lower the drag ratio. Again, seems I'm wrong. . . . .The British fibre glass 'home built' two seater that the TV serial was made about, (the British Vetinarinan pilot/builder), had its wings designed by an AirBus engineer. They were supposedly very efficient wings. Too bad that company is no longer offering those kits. That was a beautiful plane. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
airbus - Latest Plane From Airbus.jpg | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 14 | June 26th 07 09:41 AM |
Which is easier: Boeing to Airbus, or Airbus to Boeing? | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 9 | February 21st 07 01:58 AM |
A question on Airbus landings | [email protected] | Piloting | 17 | July 18th 06 09:05 PM |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
Airbus | Ace | Simulators | 0 | March 2nd 05 05:13 PM |