English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Could we see a return to those glorious days of the 30's when trans-atlantic/pacific aircraft were flying on a daily basis. With the delays and problems of FBO's and the availablility of costal landing sites, would the aviation industry ever attempt to come up with a commerical transport aircraft. We have seen such a tremendous advancement in AC construction, that this would seem a viable option.

2006-07-14 17:36:02 · 8 answers · asked by gregva2001 3 in Cars & Transportation Aircraft

8 answers

No.
In order to provide the high mach numbers that modern aircraft travel at (.82.85 mach) and carry a profitable load, there isn't alot of room to change the modern configuration of most jets. (Thats the reason that most pax airliners look remarkably alike these days)
To design a seagoing aircraft capable of high mach cruise and acceptable handling on the ocean with a decent payload ....is just too many comprimises.
Another consideration is that touch down speeds of modern airliners are around 120-160kts. This would waaayyy too high to consider a water landing. So you would have to design the aircraft with the ability to fly MUCH slower and again..too much of a comprimise.
Not to mention salt water corrosion, water ingestion into the engines, difficulty in servicing....
Nope not gonna happen

You might goggle 'Beriev' to see a somewhat successful water borne large jet..but for a very specific application

2006-07-14 17:56:58 · answer #1 · answered by helipilot212 3 · 0 1

Yes!
I hate to break the bubble of some people, but plans are in fact being floated (pun) for such a plane. The market would be a super jumbo plane. Bigger than the 747 or A 380. Land aircraft are limited by current facilities. Length of runway, gates, parking areas, weight are factors seaplanes can bypass. 3/4 of the world is water. so the ability to say land on the Hudson river in Midtown NyC and other places make for a great transport option. A seaplane could be wider than current planes like the 747. You could build real walking room, a casino, a bar or club, sleeping bunks,etc. Mass transport in comfort. And for those wondering about speed? The Navy's Martin PM-6 Seamaster could do mach .9 in 1956 on the deck and out fly the B-52. The Russian company Beriev have bee a leader in Seaplanes for years & has some large types in place today!

2006-07-15 13:37:25 · answer #2 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 1 0

Sadly seaplanes have (for the most part) gone the way of the Dodo.

They were popular at a time when engine failures were a common thing and since it would be almost "normal" for the plane to make and unscheduled landing, Flying Boats were the best option for trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific routes were most of the flight was over water.

Maintenance and operating costs of seaplanes (think of the corrosion) make it quite unlikely that they will ever make a comeback on major airline's fleets.

2006-07-14 18:38:23 · answer #3 · answered by frankclau 3 · 1 0

Think of the limitations. Airports that service these planes would have to be on a coast or near a major body of water. I don't think the major airlines, who would be the customers for these aircraft, would want to deal with the limitations imposed by having to be near large bodies of water.

2006-07-14 17:47:08 · answer #4 · answered by bazzmc 4 · 0 0

Not feasible. That's why they went out to start with. With the amount of passenger traffic today, a plane needs constant inspection and maintenece. That would be very costly to do if the plane was floating on water.

2006-07-14 17:59:46 · answer #5 · answered by crazytrain_23_78 4 · 0 0

Yes, i think that it is possible but i think it will be very hard to determine(company wise and economically) if they should stay in the normal air or branch off into the air/water industry.

Great idea for cost to cost tavel because if you hit hard flying conditions you can just land.

2006-07-14 17:51:34 · answer #6 · answered by DJ 2 · 0 0

it is a possibilty but probly not the only reason they had the float planes were becaus they a lack of runways

2006-07-15 17:31:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

maybe anything could happen that doesn't mean a yes or no

2006-07-14 17:39:39 · answer #8 · answered by Marissa S 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers