OT - Being 787 issues, does this mean carbon composite has issues?

[William Muriithi]

2009/8/8 James Knott <james.knott-bJEeYj9oJeDQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org>

> Peter wrote:
> > I am not so happy with flying Airbus myself, after a few hard landings in
> which
> > I saw the cabin bend like a banana.
> Large structures, such as bridges, tall buildings and even aircraft are
> designed to bend under load.  As long as it's within specs, it's fine.
> BTW, take a look at how much the wings flex on large aircraft.  Some
> military planes (B-52 & U2 come to mind) require outriggers, to keep the
> wing tips off the ground, when full of fuel.  A rigid airframe would be
> prohibitively heavy and perhaps not as able to withstand loads.
>

Right on the head. If the bend was accommodated in the design, then its
alright.  You can make it as stiff as esthetically possible, but that would
be adding weight,  which mean more fuel burnt and a more expensive ticket.
In fact, it can be argued that a stiff frame is more risky as that imply
brittleness. Physics sometime contradict most of the day to day assumptions.

Regards,

William

>
>
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20090808/43e8b73d/attachment.html>