Boeing LCF

[Force_Feedback]

The Large Cargo Freighter, another abomination from Russia :P

 

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q3/060817b_pr.html

 

For all you people that thought the A-380 or A-300-600 looked ugly, here's the proof it can be uglyer. Only the Kaspian Sea monster ekranoplan is probably uglier. Or that German biz jet with wing mounted engine pods.

 

Anyone knows what the 'new' section is made of? Is it just unpainted nickel aluminium, or is it "glare"? Or is it some Boeing composite?

[Guest IguanaKing]

If the engineers are smart, the new portion will also be 2024T3 Aluminum (which has no Nickel in it BTW ;)). Composites simply don't have the longevity needed by such an aircraft. The paint looks like a typical Chromate primer to me.

[Disso]

The Beast landing:

 

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1106946

 

And Taking off:

 

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1106601

 

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraftsearch=Boeing%20747-4J6%2FLCF&distinct_entry=true

 

 

It hasn't been fitted with new engines, so I wonder how much it's performance has been affected.

[Force_Feedback]

Let's hope they'll stay out of the trees, then everything is fine performance wise.

 

I always thought glare was lighter, tougher (no large cracks forming etc) and easier to mantain, and less microfractures. So what's with the longevity? UV-wise there should be no problem either, as there's aluminium on the outsides.

Let's see what I'm missing, maybe cost? Those bastards over here want to see lots of euros for their 'invention' (basically, all they invented was glue, which they probably sniffed a bit too much of). Other than costs I can't find any reason.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Even the best carbon fiber composites have a life limit of 500 flight hours if used as the structure of a fuselage part. Its a great technology, but it can never replace aluminum for longevity. You won't see 60 year-old composite aircraft that fly regularly. Much like we won't see 300-year-old houses that are built with this new "engineered lumber" stuff.

 

Have you seen Bob Bornhofen's Sport Jet? Its mostly composite, but the wing spar? Still aluminum. Its going to be so aerodynamically slick. All of its antennas are embedded in the skin.

[airea]

One of the ugliest flying thing I have ever seen:)

It is like the external liquid fuel tank of space shuttle is attached to the head of a 747:)

[Maverick-90]

A-380 and B-747 have a baby :megalol:

[Force_Feedback]

How come 20% of the hull is made out of glare on the A380

[suntrace1]

I don't know IguanaKing, if you’re right on that one. Modern planes and helis use composite materials for wings and rotarys and they are the most stressed parts of the plane. Besides, what plane has any of the original parts on them after 60 years of servicing - they are pretty much new planes in that time, being aluminum or composite.

[Guest IguanaKing]

I've got two 1943 C-47s under my care, and their airframes are pretty much all original. They have new wing bolts and other mechanical parts, but the airframes are all original. I'm certifying an Aerospatiale AS355F1 today that is mostly composites, and that thing's got cracks all over the gd place on it. That's just the skin though, much of the internal structure is still aluminum. The MUCH older Bell 206 in the same hangar has yet to develop any at all.

[ARM505]

Awww, cute, the poor little B747 got a cold, so they put a blanket round it! :)

 

Boeing want to build the B787's fuselage from composite materials don't they? And the (Raytheon?) Premier One bizjet has a composite fuselage too. Feels a bit odd when you tap it, but hey, it seems to work. Nonetheless, I agree IK, so far I haven't seen anything last like good 'ol aluminium. AND, some guy with his own two hands, a decent helping of skill, and a relatively low tech workshop can do real quality reskinning/fabrication work for aluminium aircraft. When the first tug driver backs into a 787, I want to see *those* repair costs!

[britgliderpilot]

Even the best carbon fiber composites have a life limit of 500 flight hours if used as the structure of a fuselage part. Its a great technology, but it can never replace aluminum for longevity. You won't see 60 year-old composite aircraft that fly regularly. Much like we won't see 300-year-old houses that are built with this new "engineered lumber" stuff.

 

Have you seen Bob Bornhofen's Sport Jet? Its mostly composite, but the wing spar? Still aluminum. Its going to be so aerodynamically slick. All of its antennas are embedded in the skin.

 

. . . . . .

 

The glider I learned to fly on (would have been 26 this year if some silly bugger hadn't crashed it) was constructed almost entirely of GRP, and the type has just had a life extension to 18,000 hours if the metal parts of the airframe are replaced . . . . .

 

Built in 1980, so probably one of the earliest all-composite aircraft around - see the Wikipedia page here for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleicher_ASK_21

 

 

It's unpressurised and not an airliner, but 18,000 hours is 18,000 hours and a glassfibre main spar is a glassfibre main spar ;)

[Force_Feedback]

I find your comments on composites very surprising, I wan under the impression everyone got full faith in composite constructions, load carrying bars etc. Especially with all the ultra lights and bizz jets getting plastic constructions. If they weren't as durable as aluminum, why all the commotion about reliability and low maintenance costs by the makers then?

I know they may be selling hot air, but why all of them, such scams can only be devised by Lockheed Martin, and maybe Boeing, then why are nearly all gliders and ultralights (unrelated to the horribly unethical marketing tricks of LM) made entirely out of composite materials?

And how are the advances with 'self-repairing' plastics? You know, self filling microfractures by using glue capsules inside the composite.