Why hasn't this been done yet (commercial airliner demo team) ??

[Keatah]

Yeh, why have they not done this yet? Doing airshow aerobatics with full-sized commercial airliners? You could strip them down and get decent performance. And they can be rolled and looped too. They even rolled a 707 back in the day.. So today's better built craft should be able to handle almost anything!

 

[TSPenguin]

Short answer: Because it is too expensive
Long answer will probably ensue with increasing thread length

 

[HAL9001]

because they can make a better, more exciting airshow for less money when they use military-jets and similar

but it woud really be cool

 

[Keatah]

I've seen hundreds of airshows and they all feature the same, boring, seen-it-before-been-there-done-that tiny-ad fighter jets zooming around and stuff.

It would *BE* cooler to have a major change of pace. You could even have wing walkers on these full-sized jets. Just have a full-sized door open right over the wing. And you could do huge cargo drops. Monster fireworks displays and everything!! Not to mention putting neon lighting (L.E.D. nowadays) and making a light show too! You could even modify a 737 and put two of the 777 engines on it! Now you got a spunky little cartoony-looking jet that can tow anything!

---------- Post added at 03:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:31 AM ----------

Anyways, Boeing says it's commercial jets should be able to handle loop-de-loops and stuff. Consider all the aviation incidents where the planes got flipped over and nose-dived and did all sorts of passenger-upsetting manoeuvers and came away unscathed.

You can loop a 747 in X-Plane. And the VC-10, a serious 4-engined airliner, has done loops too!

 

[HAL9001]

what's about the A380?
can he loop and roll?
I think yes!

 

[FordPrefect]

Yes, we need more stuff like this...

 

[garyw]

what's about the A380?
can he loop and roll?
I think yes!

Any airbus can do a loop and roll but it's prevented from doing so by the fly by wire software protections. Do you really advocate removing those protections just so a few people can get a thrill?

Not a good idea. Not good for safety. If you do not like airshows as they are then do not attend them.

 

[agentgonzo]

Do you really advocate removing those protections just so a few people can get a thrill?

I do, but then that's just the type of shenanigans that got me killed the last time.

 

[Keatah]

We could pimp-up the planes a little -


And there could even be a Special Olympics version too -





I wish I knew where I got these from, they had hundreds more like 'em anybody recall seeing these around anyplace?

 

[Keatah]

Yes, we need more stuff like this...

YouTube - B52 Airshow Practice Crash

Not any different than this -

 

[garyw]

Big difference. Things called ejector seats.

 

[FADEC]

Yeh, why have they not done this yet? Doing airshow aerobatics with full-sized commercial airliners? You could strip them down and get decent performance. And they can be rolled and looped too. They even rolled a 707 back in the day.. So today's better built craft should be able to handle almost anything!

It has not been done because of safety reasons and maintenance costs. Commercial airliners are certified for safe operation within relatively low margins. Most commercial airliners like the Airbus A320 are certified for load factors between about -1 to +2,5 g in clean configuration (flaps and gear up). And it is only about 0 to 2 g with flaps set. The airliners structures certainly can handle more stress. Especially with a minimum of fuel and of course no passengers and cargo aboard. But that is outside of legal certification and rather risky, more than ever in front of audiences whilst presenting stuff during low approaches.

Barrel rolls are possible, but loops certainly would cause damage to the structure. Commercial airliners have to be very fast for starting loops and finish them (close to their usual cruise speed). A high rate of climb whilst going up very steep certainly would cause severe damage to the wings, if not even rip them of.

The famous 707 barrel roll was performed by Alvin Johnston, a now famous former Boeing test pilot. He was told not to do it ever again. When Boeing test pilot John Cashman was retiring 4 years ago he was told "no rolls" on his last flights :lol:

Best Regards

 

[Saturn V]

Kinda like trying to jump an 18-wheeler over 30 motorcycles...why? Advertising? Ticket sales? It wouldn't make me want to be aboard a 747 that was doing barrel rolls or an Immelman on approach to JFK (quite the opposite) anymore than than I'd want that 18-wheeler for my personal ride (even if it actually managed to jump over 30 motorcycles).

Now, if somebody wants to arrange a ride in a MiG29 or an Su27 when it does a "cobra," or a hop on an F15 while it does a boom & zoom, hey I'm there!

 

[deltawing777]

Yeh, why have they not done this yet? Doing airshow aerobatics with full-sized commercial airliners? You could strip them down and get decent performance. And they can be rolled and looped too. They even rolled a 707 back in the day.. So today's better built craft should be able to handle almost anything!

Its kinda like saying why don't 18 wheelers drive on one side on 9 wheels? Because something will fail and it will roll over and crash! But lets say it did happen. How much altitude and distance would it need to do it safely? Or as safely as it can be done. Would the people on the ground even be able to see it and have a good view the maneuver? If it can't be seen clearly then whats the point of risking it at all?

 

[halcyon]

Commercial airliners aren't designed for aerobatics, as FADEC pointed out. Plain and simple.
Underwear is designed for your...you know.
Can you wear it on your head? Yes.
Was it designed for your head? Not really.
Is it safe wearing it on your head?

That depends on who you ask.

 

[Linguofreak]

It has not been done because of safety reasons and maintenance costs. Commercial airliners are certified for safe operation within relatively low margins. Most commercial airliners like the Airbus A320 are certified for load factors between about -1 to +2,5 g in clean configuration (flaps and gear up). And it is only about 0 to 2 g with flaps set. The airliners structures certainly can handle more stress. Especially with a minimum of fuel and of course no passengers and cargo aboard. But that is outside of legal certification and rather risky, more than ever in front of audiences whilst presenting stuff during low approaches.

Barrel rolls are possible, but loops certainly would cause damage to the structure. Commercial airliners have to be very fast for starting loops and finish them (close to their usual cruise speed). A high rate of climb whilst going up very steep certainly would cause severe damage to the wings, if not even rip them of.

I've tried it out in X-Plane, and a loop certainly can be performed in a 747 without busting the speed or G limits of the aircraft.

This does not mean it is a good idea, however.

 

[Hielor]

Not any different than this

Very different. In that post you linked, no one was even injured, much less killed.

In the B-52 crash above, I believe there were 8 people onboard, all of whom died.

I've tried it out in X-Plane, and a loop certainly can be performed in a 747 without busting the speed or G limits of the aircraft.

This does not mean it is a good idea, however.

Because if you can do something in X-Plane you can do it in reality, mirite?

That aside, I'm curious as to what your entry/exit/peak altitudes were during the maneuver, as well as your entry speed. I'd think it wouldn't make for much of an interesting airshow, since the plane would be too high and too far away from the viewers for most of the maneuver...

 

[FADEC]

I've tried it out in X-Plane, and a loop certainly can be performed in a 747 without busting the speed or G limits of the aircraft.

This does not mean it is a good idea, however.

One can do almost anything in X-Plane and Microsoft Flight Simulator, even if one enables damage options. That's the interesting thing about flight simulators. I have done a lot of interesting things in X-Plane and Microsoft Flight Simulator too. But I doubt it can be done the same way in reality. Those airliners are not responsive and robust like smaller airplanes. At high speed regime of flight they are, but they also become more fragile for certain maneuvers.

In case a loop would be possible with a 747 mathematically, I think nobody would be willing to try it. Not Boeing, and not the most experienced test pilots

 

[Linguofreak]

Very different. In that post you linked, no one was even injured, much less killed.

In the B-52 crash above, I believe there were 8 people onboard, all of whom died.


Because if you can do something in X-Plane you can do it in reality, mirite?

Not necessarily, but simulation still trumps speculation, and it should be applicable to the question of "can a generic airliner pull a loop" even if not to the question of "can a 747 pull a loop".

That aside, I'm curious as to what your entry/exit/peak altitudes were during the maneuver, as well as your entry speed. I'd think it wouldn't make for much of an interesting airshow, since the plane would be too high and too far away from the viewers for most of the maneuver...

Target entry speed for my most recent attempts of 290 kias (The Vno speed listed for the model in Plane-Maker). I've tried everything up from 270 kias to the listed Vne (365 kias). I've tried entry altitudes from 3000 to 5000 feet msl, giving peak altitudes around 8000-10000 ft msl with an entry speed of 290 kias. At the top of the loop the plane is traveling well below its level-flight stall speed. With the deployment of spoilers on the way down it is possible to come out about 500 ft below the entry altitude with a peak speed less than 10 kias above the entry speed.

 

[Ark]

Seems like a bad idea. At least fighters can only kill a limited number of people when they crash. A 474 could wipe out a few city blocks worth of bystanders.