Cockpit Location
-
Can anybody answer me why flight deckss are always above the nose of the aircraft?
Hypothetically, wouldnt it be better to place the flight deck in the nose like whr the nose gunner is in the B-17, as it would offer better all round visibility?
also discounting radar position, and internal payload...
aiyo... cant use c0ckpit.... -
last time people don't have a whole bunch of electronics in the radome.
-
but you can move the radar and rubbish to a different place no?Originally posted by kopiosatu:last time people don't have a whole bunch of electronics in the radome. -
unless you want to have your health affected if u shift it behind.Originally posted by Idle_King:but you can move the radar and rubbish to a different place no?
unless you want it to affect aerodynamics if u throw everything to the sides. -
There are cases which you can have a c-ockpit in the damn front, some a/c experimental ones that does not have radars...
And plus, for the B-17, I guess its so to let the pilots have a all rounded view up top, and able to spot enemy a/c more clearly. They have a rear gunner to help too. Things come along to B-52 too, that the pilots have rear camera in some cases. -
I was asked the above Qn by my lecturer, who teaches Fundamentals of Flight btw... and since i couldnt come up with the answer he was looking for, yes, including stating that the nose is where the damned radar is, and shifting it will radiate the crap outta everyone(although there are some technologies implemented on those spiffy G550s).... and also because i boh liao im asking you chaps 
Reasons I cited:
Nose has the Radar(shifting will radiate the crap outta pilots/passengers/payload )
Above the Nose for added survivability in cases of "wheels up" landing
Now, after clarifying matters a bit(i hope), is there any other reason or for that matter any reason to put the c0ckpit on top? stupid answers also can, as long as relevant -
I have the answers for u but I would be very keen to hear what ur lecturer 's answers are! While u are at it , I hope you don't mind asking your lecturer's, whether Poly, ITE, Univ why some engines are on the wings and some on the tail. Im sure the readers here also wan to know .
thanks man!
Always keen to learn.Originally posted by Idle_King: I was asked the above Qn by my lecturer, who teaches Fundamentals of Flight btw... and since i couldnt come up with the answer he was looking for, yes, including stating that the nose is where the damned radar is, and shifting it will radiate the crap outta everyone(although there are some technologies implemented on those spiffy G550s).... and also because i boh liao im asking you chaps
Reasons I cited:
Nose has the Radar(shifting will radiate the crap outta pilots/passengers/payload )
Above the Nose for added survivability in cases of "wheels up" landing
Now, after clarifying matters a bit(i hope), is there any other reason or for that matter any reason to put the c0ckpit on top? stupid answers also can, as long as relevant -
Eh you got answers post leh!!!Originally posted by megatron:I have the answers for u but I would be very keen to hear what ur lecturer 's answers are! While u are at it , I hope you don't mind asking your lecturer's, whether Poly, ITE, Univ why some engines are on the wings and some on the tail. thanks man!
Always keen to learn.
I too am very keen on what my lecturer has to say about the question i posted but the bugger aint giving nothing away
Now, for engines mounted below the wings, i would say that they reduce stress on wings due to flutter/flex etc. It also helps a great deal in maintenance coz they're closer to the ground(bean counting). But these engines have very little ground clearance, check out the 737NGs and are prone to FOD(foreign object damage)
For rear mounted engines, they're better for landing at terrible runways, where FOD is a constant issue, as engine is lower to ground, less likely injest random things on the ground (also means push-back tractor not req.). They also reduce cabin noise.
However, rear mounted engines mean the Cg is shifted WAY aft, making aircraft balancing an issue. Also accessing the rear engines in the case of B727 / MD family, is a serious issue. Another prob. would be compressor stalls, at high angles of attack, the wing would be horizontal to the engines, but the air flowing over the wing is no longer laminar and is now turbulent. turbulent air may cause a compressor stall, and the most likely time for this will be on T/O landing
hope this helps -
Not a lecturer here!Originally posted by megatron:While u are at it , I hope you don't mind asking your lecturer's, whether Poly, ITE, Univ why some engines are on the wings and some on the tail. thanks man!
Always keen to learn.
I'd imagine that the advantages of mounting the engines in the rear would include:
1. An aerodynamically cleaner wing (i.e., you don't have the engine pylon and nacelle interrupting airflow over and under the wing),
2. Better engine-out performance due to reduced asymmetric thrust as the engines are closer to the fuselage centerline,
3. Reduced chances of FOD as the engines have greater ground clearance, allowing operations from unprepared strips,
4. Increased chances of a successful ditching in an emergency, and
5. A quieter cabin.
From what I can recall, the French-made Sud-Aviation Caravelle was the first commercial airliner to sport rear-mounted engines, but my favourite still remains the Vickers VC10.
ETA: Oops, I see someone posted before me already.
-
MG &
IdleKing.U guys got it spot on !
Jus for ur info, on rear mounted engines like MD90 or VC10, sequence of loadi
ng is v critical due CG shift on refuelling, pax embarking, cargo loading, Usually on empty acft, like delivery flights, the CG is so way AFT that we need ballasts ( freshwater sandbags ) of 600kgs to bring acft back to trim. even when towing them on ground,we need the ballasts too or else possible tail scratch.
but im still keen to know about ur lecturer's answers leh..dun tell him this site first lar..see what answers he gives..is he from Airline or jus textbook pilot?
oh btw, Idleking, nice pic of Speedbird 777 wz e Pitot n AoA trimmers. -
Wah lao!! at least PM me your answer leh.Originally posted by megatron:MG &
IdleKing.U guys got it spot on !
Jus for ur info, on rear mounted engines like MD90 or VC10, sequence of loadi
ng is v critical due CG shift on refuelling, pax embarking, cargo loading, Usually on empty acft, like delivery flights, the CG is so way AFT that we need ballasts ( freshwater sandbags ) of 600kgs to bring acft back to trim. even when towing them on ground,we need the ballasts too or else possible tail scratch.
but im still keen to know about ur lecturer's answers leh..dun tell him this site first lar..see what answers he gives..is he from Airline or jus textbook pilot?
oh btw, Idleking, nice pic of Speedbird 777 wz e Pitot n AoA trimmers.
My lecturer was from ST aero prior to coming over.... and he sounds like he came outta SISPEC, every time shouting. -
Back to the topic of cockpit location....
That's a flightworthy replica of the Granville Brothers Gee Bee. The original ones were built in the 30s and were commonly seen in the airshow circuits in that era. Note the location of the cockpit.
Taxiing that bugger must have been a nightmare. -
Lol, ALL taildraggers must be a pain to taxiOriginally posted by Meia Gisborn:Back to the topic of cockpit location....
Taxiing that bugger must have been a nightmare. -
is it me, or do i see this line insulting as a technician?Originally posted by megatron:textbook pilot?
-
Insulting? How so?Originally posted by kopiosatu:is it me, or do i see this line insulting as a technician? 
-
i read that line as 'someone who hasn't operated an aircraft before'Originally posted by Meia Gisborn:Insulting? How so?
i haven't flown an aircraft before but i am proud to say that i certainly know about my aircraft more than the pilots. -
such is the life of the engineer, the under-appreciated few who keep the aircraft in airworthy shape...Originally posted by kopiosatu:i read that line as 'someone who hasn't operated an aircraft before'
i haven't flown an aircraft before but i am proud to say that i certainly know about my aircraft more than the pilots. -
rear engines also increase survivability when ditching. engines on the wing will scoop the water and act as a pivot, causing the inertia to force the nose down - smashing it into the water and breaking the aircraft up.Originally posted by Meia Gisborn:Not a lecturer here!
I'd imagine that the advantages of mounting the engines in the rear would include:
1. An aerodynamically cleaner wing (i.e., you don't have the engine pylon and nacelle interrupting airflow over and under the wing),
2. Better engine-out performance due to reduced asymmetric thrust as the engines are closer to the fuselage centerline,
3. Reduced chances of FOD as the engines have greater ground clearance, allowing operations from unprepared strips,
4. Increased chances of a successful ditching in an emergency, and
5. A quieter cabin.
From what I can recall, the French-made Sud-Aviation Caravelle was the first commercial airliner to sport rear-mounted engines, but my favourite still remains the Vickers VC10.
ETA: Oops, I see someone posted before me already.
with a rear engine, the plane can land "smoothly" on the water surface with wheels up - this keeps much of the plane intact and has in aviation history saved several lives in at least one crash.
engines mounted below the wings can be dropped? when its on fire o.0
no ideas about the cockpit thing though -
Hi there
Not at all!! U read wrong. I have the utmost respect for technicians, ames/LAEs, ground staff, crew, catering, checkin- dispatchers, AICs, ATCs, almost 99% of all who helps to maintain n turn a plane around & in continuine airworthiness.N u better know MORE than pilots ! haha
SO rest assured its not wat u are thinking bro.Originally posted by kopiosatu:is it me, or do i see this line insulting as a technician? -
Hi
Im not sure where u get that from but I most certainly aprec engineers n everyone else. even the Makcik who came in to vacuum the flight deck n clear e rubbish. ANd if that were true, then it's not just the engineers, a lot of those who work behind the scene will b under-appreciated!
that is why we need Crew/Team resource management coupled with Human Factors & EMT.
FYI, airworthiness of an aircraft is not just the machine but a whole network of systems, certification..paperwork, trained staff..etcOriginally posted by Idle_King:such is the life of the engineer, the under-appreciated few who keep the aircraft in airworthy shape... -
Back to the threadstarter's topic of cockpit locations... again.
How's this for an unconventional location?
The aircraft pictured is a Blohm & Voss BV 141, developed during WW2. -
just found out that the answer is YES!!Originally posted by Vigelic:engines mounted below the wings can be dropped? when its on fire o.0
structural fuses in the pylons(thing attaching engine nacelle to wing) will shear the entire engine off in situations of engine damage and consequent high vibrational and drag forces.
note: the pilot has no control over the structural fuses, they act autonomously
