The upward curve is only unique in terms of the overall scale of the Airbus. Think WWII fighter - Vought Corsair with its downturned 'inverted gull' wing (to allow a huge propeller to clear the ground). You could say the Airbus has a Gull Wing. The Boeing Dreamliner actually has the unique wing if you look at how the wing twists into an upward twist. Both beautiful ..
m
. . . and now all they have to do is sell about 400 more A380's just to break even.
Great plane, lousy business model.
btw, I recently visited the Toulouse Airbus facilities . . . the wings from that angle have a nice rakish swoop, but overall the plane is kinda stubby looking. They had to keep the dimensional space within airport/tarmac limits so the height:length ratio is not visually appealing.
Fred,
I have to disagree, Airbus doesn't need to sell 400 aircraft to make the decision to develop the A380 a financially good one - regardless of whether the usual complaints about Airbus receiving corporate welfare are true or not, and even if the current order book never increases in size, the decision to go with the A380 will not break the bank. For Airbus the new design features and assembly techniques first developed for the A380 will help future designs as the company moves forward with the development of the next generation of passenger aircraft.
Of course, they seem less willing to apply these features and techniques to the A350, but one would hope that they will seriously consider them as the first generation of A320 aircraft come up for retirement and a new generation of single-aisled passenger jets come up for developement.
Just as it was the right thing to do for Boeing to scrap the 747NG program (which, if I'm not mistaken has sort of been revived)to pursue the 787 (nee 7E7), so too was it a good investment for EADS and Airbus to go with the A380, though the benefits may take a decade or more to be fully realized.
Curved wings are pretty common. When the plane is on the ground, the wing carries the weight of the wing and engines, when the plane is up, it carries the weight of the plane. Making the wing so rigid it doesn't flex visibly would make it too heavy. I think the photo angle and the weight of the plane make this noticeable. The droop of the C-17 wing is a similar phenomenon, but droop is acceptable for the C-17 because the wing is on top.
Posted at 2007-10-28 06:55:57 [PermaLink]