This photo makes me very happy

Discussion in 'Boats, Planes, Other' started by nappyjb37, Feb 23, 2013.

  1. The first CSeries flight vehicle is now structurally complete, now that the engines have been mounted.
  2. what am i supposed to look at?
  3. neat. now all they have to do is sell a bunch of them.
  4. Bombardier is building a 737-600/A319 sized composite aircraft. The first flight test vehicle is nearly complete.
  5. Cool. What are the advantages?
  6. Well, the big selling point is it will have 20% better fuel economy than anything Boeing or Airbus will be selling for the next decade. It also has the right number of seats to replace the old MD-80s, 717s, and 737-classics being retired. For the passenger, it will have the lower altitude and bigger windows that Boeing and Airbus are using to sell the 787 and A350.
  7. I've been wondering what Southwest is going to replace their 737s with. Maybe this?
  8. It's definitely been suggested. Especially when they still had AirTran's 717s people felt like it was a shoe-in. But who knows.
  9. Rollout ceremony was today also
  10. I thought Korean Air had some on order? No?
  11. I believe but they need to sell far more than that.
  12. Doubt it.
  13. First flight vehicle has left the paint shop. Nothing special, but this is how it will look for the first flight. The date has narrowed to somewhere between June 17th and 30th, possibly coinciding with the Paris Air Show.
  14. Are they better quality products than their trams?

    I think the city of Helsinki sued Bombardier a while ago because the trams had "problems coping with northern climates". I thought you had pretty northern climates in Canada.

    I have to look more into it where they were assembled.

    It's funny how the metro trains and trams made by Valmet made in the 70's work just fine but Bombardier trams and the Alstom/Bombardier metros, both purchased in the early 2000's break down all the time.

    For instance the floors of the 70's metro trains are still original but the floors of the 2000's trains have been replaced TWICE.

    And it's not a maintenance issue either because I happen to know that the guys who work with these machines are pros. This is the northernmost metro system in the world and 99,8% of all the departures are on time. And it's also the deepest or one of the deepest systems in the world (50-100m underground), one of the reasons being that the tunnels can be closed and they can house some 200,000 people if necessary.

    Small wonder when the USSR wanted some war reparations in 1945, the last of which were paid in 1952 and the total value of which was ~400 million 1938 gold dollars... the USSR wanted quite a large portion of it in Valmet trains.

    But yeah, that plane sounds good and innovative and I hope it's of good quality. Boeing and Airbus are not small competitors. Let's see what happens. But in any case, I wouldn't want Finnair's first accident involving fatalities during its 90-year-old history of commercial flight to be due to a technical failure of Bombardier planes. Neither does any other airline. Test flights, baby, test flights. Does it have GE or RR engines? Or has that even been decided yet?
  15. Kinda unrelated, sorry VanIce, but I have to post this before I forget and don't want to make a separate thread.

    To gun/micropenis people out there:

    If you are into AK-type guns and happen to get your hands on a Valmet RK-95 or 92S (same gun but only semi-auto), buy it. It's by some margin the best AK-derivative there is, including the IMI Galil (that was modelled after the Valmet RK-62). Not kidding here. Try one and tell me if you liked it or not.

    Ok, now back on topic about planes and shit

  16. #16 nappyjb37, Jun 8, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    It has Pratt and Whitney geared turbofans. The engines are currently undergoing flight testing at on Pratt and Whitney Canada's two 747SPs in Montreal. The CSeries version received type certification from Transport Canada earlier this year.

    Edit: as far as Bombardier's rail transport stuff, their quality varies quite a bit it seems. A major explanation is that it bought a large number of European manufacturers in the late-90s/early-00s, and the quality of subsidiary products suffered while they transitioned into the larger Bombardier. What are your thoughts on the newer Bombardier trainsets used on the Shanghai metro or the Beijing Subway, or perhaps their high speed trains in China (since you may have experience with those)?

    Bombardier Aerospace was also a product of a number of aquisitions (namely Canadair, de Havilland Canada, and the remnants of Avro). However, all the acquired companies shared a similar corporate culture and worked on similarly high level projects. For interests sake, this is a good watch:
  17. Bombardier light rail in Vancouver are very good vehicles, they still run the ones from the 80's and they usually keep up pretty well with the Millenium line trains which are much newer. Interesting that they would fail so frequently in Finland, although with that in mind they have to clear the tracks when it snows more than one day, so they are very much fair weather vehicles.

    Awesome info about this plane though, never knew this was in the works.
  18. #18 The Niggar King, Jun 9, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    I watched. That convinced me.

    All the metros in Shanghai said "Siemens" on them and seemed ok

    Beijing was ok too but I never noticed what their brand was

    Most of the trains are brand new, though, and I don't know anyone who maintains those things so I can't really say what's their overall quality

    I didn't find the company who built Helsinki metros but the trams were built in Germany by a Bombardier subsidiary Stadler Rail

    And honestly, they are shit

    I went from SH to BJ and back once in a HSR train and those were A+

    Much better than anything SNCF or DB has to offer

    But it was a Japan devil train that looked funky as hell

    China has so much cash they just buy everything from everywhere to try which equipment is the best lol

    Helsinki doesn't
  19. Apparently they were designed by Adtranz as well

    So it's Germany's fault


    Bombardier just bought the company so the city had to sue Bombardier

    I now have more faith in Canadian product quality

    And less in German
  20. New paint job before first flight.
  21. Cool but that chord looks far less advanced compared to the LEMAC on a 787.
  22. I imagine that you use these terms quite differently in trades than in academia, as I'm not sure the mean chord can be estimated from that photo. I'm personally not experienced enough to describe an airfoil profile as "sophisticated" by visual inspection, at least between two modern examples.

    Nevertheless, it is probably the case that the airfoil is towards a more workhorse design. The primary new technologies are in the geared turbofans and composite construction, which are already huge steps forward in this seating class. Leveraging new technologies too heavily is of course an unacceptable risk in business practice.

    The 787 has a high enough price point and a large enough wingspan that it's able to exploit a number of new wing technologies that the CSeries cannot, like raked wingtips; and potentially some of these can be leveraged in the 737 MAX. It's generally accepted that wing drag on a modern airliner will be on the order of 40% classical Prandtl induced drag during cruise, and the 787s do better than this, which is impressive. Through a gratuitous selection of effective incidence and chord length, it's pretty easy to get the ideal elliptical circulation distribution (a la Prandtl), and most skin friction and pressure drag is from the body anyway, so you're really looking at optimizing your tip vortex interruption from what I understand (where the 787s really stand out). Although, admittedly, I don't work so much in applied or practical aero.
  23. Why are the turbine blades shaped like that?

    And what was your line of work again? Fluid dynamics something?
  24. You can't actually see the turbine blades in these photos. The blades at the front are fan blades, while compressor and turbine blades are in the (obstructed) engine core. From the hub out, the fan blades have three annular sections: one which corresponds roughly to the engine core with a low solidity, one which corresponds to the bypass duct with high solidity, and next to the duct itself that interacts with the duct boundary layer. These sections may be either implicit or explicit; older turbofans typically differentiated these sections with blade pitch alone.

    Although fans do increase pressure, they are generally not very efficient compressors. As such, the section of the fan blade in front of the engine core is generally symmetric in profile, and of low solidity, such that the compressor does most of the compressing (saving on shaft work). This blade section is normally mostly structural in nature, rather than aerodynamic. The portion of the fan corresponding to the duct bypass has a higher solidity, complex airfoil profiles, and produces most of the thrust of the engine. The purpose of the duct is to reduce tip losses and thus the blade tip needs to be near the duct wall. However, this means the blade tip is located in the duct boundary layer, which can create horseshoe vortices and rob power. Modern blades have a small blade section at the very tip in order to minimize boundary layer interaction.

    My understanding is limited though. I study very low speed fluid dynamics (Mach~0, Re~0), so I don't touch propulsion much.

  25. I understood most of that! What's a horseshoe vortex?

    I knew the part that they are fan blades (of a high-bypass turbofan) but I didn't know the correct word in English. Now I do.

    Now tell us something interesting about the Very Low Head- turbine.

Share This Page