This Over-Wing Engine Setup Helped Boeing’s YC-14 Master Short Runways
C-130 Hercules is one of the most popular aircraft in military service today. Since the aircraft was introduced in 1956 as the US’s next airline company, military and civil organizations have been abundant for a large cargo compartment. Over the last seven (!) In decades, HERC had more benefits than a Swiss army knife serving in many other jobs where it was served in the air, maritime patrol, search and rescue, air fire brigade and service.
Lockheed wasn’t the only 70 -year -old plane that kicks hard, but it was almost not. Only 15 years before HERC’s life, the US Air Force was looking for something new to change it-a jet that works with a jet designed to work from the airports of the C-130 of the C-30 of the C-30. Air Force, two finalists in this short take-off and landing competition, YC-15 and McDonnell Douglas and the things we look at today: Boeing YC-14.
At first glance, jet looks like one of them Chibi cars crushed in Photoshop to look like a cartoonAnd these large jet engines on the wings result in a different look than others. However, its strange design is function on the form, because when the speed is lower and the elevator is lower, YC-14 can use large excessive wing engines to do things that no other jet can do: it can produce its own elevator.
Read More: These movies and TV shows have the best car breakdown
Advantages of Excessive Wing Design
Comouflage painted on asphalt YC-14-Christian Volpati/Wikimedia
Air Force’s advanced middle stol (AMST) transportation project carried YC-14, 27,000 pounds, while the half of ERA’s C-130 (half of ERA’s C-130)-and had to have a 400 nautical mile radius. The Air Force also hoped more space inside … enough to carry the army’s M109 and M110 self -driven howitzers.
So why did Boeing choose excessive wing design? It is the first and most obvious openness. For an airplane aimed at working from an airplane -free or damaged runway, the higher the motors protects the wrecks of the wings from swallowing. And these slopes were not just short, but could also be placed in mountainous lands and surrounded by buildings, trees and other obstacles. Boeing’s solution? Create a plane that can make your own elevator.
The two general electric CF6-50D turbofan of the aircraft were large and produced more than 50,000 pounds. They also produced abundant exhaust gas that could increase the elevator when it was blown on the wing. This is known as the upper surface blowing when the air flow is directed on the wing and on the wings. As the wings decrease, the COANDRY effect glues the exhaust of the engine to the surface of the wing and directs it towards the ground and gives the plane forward and upward momentum. The concept never went beyond the NASA test, but it was the perfect choice for a large, heavy cargo plane running at low speeds. Boeing rolled the dice.
If it doesn’t break …
It worked. Surface blowing, the plane made a rocket, only 800 feet needed to fly up. Once, YC-14 minutes can rise in 6,000 feet-C-130’s abilities. It was impressive on the approach with slow downs of 68 miles / hour, allowing a rough wind aircraft to stand only in 387 feet. And with only 800 feet departure and landing, the YC-14 broke the expectations for the competition. The aircraft can carry up to 69,000 for Stol operations on 27,000 pounds or 150 parachutists and traditional tracks.
After testing the two finalists for years, the Air Force declared the C130 winner. Following the result of the Vietnam War, the Air Force quickly learned two things. First, the C-130 was still a perfect plane for your job, and a handful of upgrade can keep it in service for decades. Secondly, the Air Force needed larger jets closer to the transport capabilities of the C-5 galaxy. As a result, the AMST project ended in 1979 and the C-130 still holds its role. Instead, the iconic YC-15-based C-17 Globemaster’s Air Force has become the lifting of the Air Force, and the cargo transport can carry cargo on shortest runways as 3,500 feet came to the cargo transportation (CX) project.
Technically, did McDonnell Douglas win? Or did Boeing win because he absorbed McDonnell-Douglas in 1997? Cool planes were built and a lot was learned. So nobody lost.
Do you want more like this? Join the Jalopnik Bulletin To get the latest automatic news sent directly to your incoming box …
