Author Topic: big planes (Read 629 times)

Ripsnort · « **Reply #15 on:** November 09, 2005, 08:12:56 AM »

I think technology will bring us faster, for less energy used, rather than bigger. Lack of large-airframe infrastructure and passenger-preference convenience will discourage further growth in size of commerical airliners.

Golfer · « **Reply #16 on:** November 09, 2005, 10:27:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ASTAC
This is more a "Surface effect ship" , than an airplane...they only skim a few feet over the water.

so did the Wrights at Kittyhawk but that's an airplane too.

For the nitpickers...Water = Surface

Chairboy · « **Reply #17 on:** November 09, 2005, 10:50:28 AM »

The Ekranoplan pictured can only fly within ground effect. It's a great idea for carrying heavy loads fast, but can really only practically "fly" over water.

Furball · « **Reply #18 on:** November 09, 2005, 12:51:21 PM »

Quote

This 7E7 commercial is brought to you by Boeing
I think technology will bring us faster, for less energy used, rather than bigger. Lack of large-airframe infrastructure and passenger-preference convenience will discourage further growth in size of commerical airliners.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #19 on:** November 09, 2005, 12:52:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
The Ekranoplan pictured can only fly within ground effect. It's a great idea for carrying heavy loads fast, but can really only practically "fly" over water.

70% of the earth's surface is water.

Chairboy · « **Reply #20 on:** November 09, 2005, 01:00:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
70% of the earth's surface is water.

And 99.9% of surface land is more than a mile away from an ocean shore. Pluses and minuses...

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #21 on:** November 09, 2005, 01:09:39 PM »

Better disband the maritime industry. Container ships cant get to Denver either.

Chairboy · « **Reply #22 on:** November 09, 2005, 01:24:20 PM »

Hey Holden,

I'm not sure what we're arguing about. I was just making a note that the Ekranoplan technology can't really be used anywhere other than the oceans. It's a vehicle that's slower than airplanes, has the same fuel consumption per lb carried, and its primary use as designed was to quickly deploy invasion forces (with heavy infrastructure).

Unlike maritime shipping, the Ekranoplan tech is very fuel intensive per lb of cargo, more like airplanes.

If you're just trying to make a point, then just say so. You're definately entitled to do so if you feel a need for that validation, I just don't want to waste thread space if we're not really having a discussion.

Debonair · « **Reply #23 on:** November 09, 2005, 03:16:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ASTAC
This is more a "Surface effect ship" , than an airplane...they only skim a few feet over the water.

That was in response to the Spruce Goose, which was also never out of ground effect.
Dont miss the McMinnville, OR aviation museum if you're in the area. Its not just the Spruce Goose, they got tons of nice planes there. Also aerobatics training at that airport. Corby is there also, he is Oregon's best weather briefer.

Pei · « **Reply #24 on:** November 09, 2005, 06:47:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
This 7E7 commercial is brought to you by Boeing