Chinese Aviation Industry

B.I.B. said:

Friends of ours have been Mercedes purchaser for decades off the same franchise holder. Last year they indicated to the Mercedes salesperson that they had decided to purchase a Lexus instead. Whereupon Mercedes turned around and made them a deal which would have been stupid to turn down.
My point here is that i think Airbus and Boeing would do the same thing to retain their customers.

Click to expand...

There is never a doubt that Boeing and Airbus would do all it can to make this and any follow on aircraft by COMAC still birth but what would happen then, as in the analogy you had given about Mercedes dropping it's price to sway the sale, is these companies profit would not be as much as it should and would have a knock on effect, everthing from jacking the price up on other models to cover the loss or having less money to spend on future R and D. Long story short, just as in the Lexus eventually it will succeed so long as it keeps trying, back in the eighties the lexus were nickname a Camry in tuxedo but look at them now they are on a leaque of their own.

SamuraiBlue said:

You can't reduce weight by enlarging the wings unless you drastically reduce structural enforcing beams within them in which case you'll have to reduce the amount of cargo since you have less structural strength in the wings.

Click to expand...

The greater building height at the wing root leads to a reduction in weight.

delft said:

The greater building height at the wing root leads to a reduction in weight.

Click to expand...

It also contributes in creating more drag and requirement for a larger wing box adding more weight.

SamuraiBlue said:

Bigger the wings, bigger the drag.
Unless there is some benefit in economy in enlarging the wings engineers will not consider it.

Click to expand...

You are completely neglecting the variability of drag coefficient.

AssassinsMace said:

Concept passenger airliner.

View attachment 34972

Click to expand...

Is this in anyway official, or these guys just built it on their own?

Any updates on MA700??

Pakistan has put in a order for this aircraft

latenlazy said:

You are completely neglecting the variability of drag coefficient.

Click to expand...

Nope since Drag coefficient comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamic drag: skin friction and form drag.Since you are comparing two sets of wings designed by engineers they should have similar form drag so the only variable would be skin friction. With larger wing surface you have larger skin friction thus larger drag coefficient meaning larger drag.

SamuraiBlue said:

Nope since Drag coefficient comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamic drag: skin friction and form drag.Since you are comparing two sets of wings designed by engineers they should have similar form drag so the only variable would be skin friction. With larger wing surface you have larger skin friction thus larger drag coefficient meaning larger drag.

Click to expand...

Form drag doesn't just come from wings, but the entire airframe. Even somewhat slight differences in airframe design will incur different amounts of form drag at different flight envelopes. That's why we test entire airframe designs, and not just wings on a tube, after all.

latenlazy said:

Form drag doesn't just come from wings, but the entire airframe. Even somewhat slight differences in airframe design will incur different amounts of form drag at different flight envelopes. That's why we test entire airframe designs, and not just wings on a tube, after all.

Click to expand...

It still will not compensate the larger drag generated from a larger wing surface since all air liners are streamlined for optimal drag coefficient. Try again.