Search the archive:
 YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
  Simviation Forum › Real World › Real Aviation › Beriev gets to build Be-2500!
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Beriev gets to build Be-2500! (Read 521 times)
Oct 17th, 2006 at 4:28am

chornedsnorkack   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 363
 *****
 
See
http://www.royfc.com/acft_news_old_sep4.html#28sep
Although I have seen different numbers for Be-2500 wingspan, namely 156 m.

The Caspian Sea Monster is different.

The biggest Caspian Sea Monster had 106 m fuselage length, 540 ton MTOW - and only 44 m wingspan.

Whereas Be-2500 has pretty conventionally shaped wing - 156 m span and 3400 square metres wing reference area compared to 79,8 m span and 845 square metres area of Airbus 380 show Be-2500 has about twice the span, 4 times the area and roughly the same aspect ratio as the Airbus 380 wing. The wing loading is also similar. Be-2500 is perfectly capable of flying as a conventional, free-air plane.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Oct 18th, 2006 at 12:22am

Boomtown Rat   Offline
Colonel
Ushuaia
Wellington, FL

Gender: male
 Posts: 529
 *****
 
This has a picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be-2500

Very very cool looking plane, nice choice of name too (Neptun).  I'd love to see it in real life.  Grin
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Oct 18th, 2006 at 1:28am

SkyNoz   Offline
Colonel
Project Kfir!

Gender: male
 Posts: 1720
 *****
 
Sure is a Monster, just hope it doesn't turn out to be another Spruce Goose! Roll Eyes Grin
 
Project Kfir!&&...&&My Gmax page&&Aircraft modeler/Aircarft painter&&&&Aye the key!&&[GeneralEngineData]&&//0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Oct 18th, 2006 at 2:20am

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
 Posts: 6058
 *****
 
Quote:
Sure is a Monster, just hope it doesn't turn out to be another Spruce Goose! Roll Eyes Grin

Combo of Alexeyev and Beriev design... not a bad start.
 
Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Oct 18th, 2006 at 3:44pm

flyboy 28   Offline
Colonel
Jacksonville, FL

Posts: 13323
 *****
 
Looks like another version of the Boeing Clipper.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 6:37am

chornedsnorkack   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 363
 *****
 
Quote:
Looks like another version of the Boeing Clipper.

Let´s compare some specifications:

Boeing 314: 4 engines. Wingspan 46 m. Area probably can be found. MTOW less than 40 tons.

Fuselage width about 12,5 feet - like Boeing 707 or 737, or Boeing 307. Layout unlike 707 and somewhat more similar to 307. Namely off-centre aisle with one seat on narrow side and triple seat on wide side. The triple seats could convert to berths across the plane and pairs of single seats opposing could convert to one berth lengthwise.

Hughes Hercules: 8 engines. Wingspan 98 m. Area about 1000 square metres. MTOW hard to tell... how do you check if it is overloaded if it has only flown once? But somewhere around 200 tons.

Fuselage 7,5 m wide and 9 m high - higher and wider (slightly) than A380. No passenger interior installed - there must be options.

Be-2500: wingspan 156 m. Area over 3000 square metres. MTOW planned as 2500 tons.

Have not seen specifics for fuselage or interior.

 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 9:37am

beaky   Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender: male
 Posts: 14187
 *****
 
Quote:
Sure is a Monster, just hope it doesn't turn out to be another Spruce Goose! Roll Eyes Grin


There was nothing inherently wrong with the H-10, or the Saunders-Roe Princess, or all of the more successful flying-boat airliners... but for some reason, these things have never been able to compete with land-based airliners despite the enormous amount of coastline and number of large lakes available globally.
« Last Edit: Oct 19th, 2006 at 10:57pm by beaky »  
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 1:04pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
Quote:
There was nothing inherently wrong with the H-10, or the Sunders-Roe Princess, or all of the more successful flying-boat airliners... but for some reason, these things have never been able to compete with land-based airliners despite the enormous amount of coastline and number of large lakes available globally.

None before though have been able to carry 2,500 tons before though. With that sort of capacity it should be able to compete with pretty much anything.

Though I'm pretty sure that the 2,500 limit will only be achieveable while the aircraft is within ground effect.
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 1:42pm

Hagar   Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159
 *****
 
Quote:
Though I'm pretty sure that the 2,500 limit will only be achieveable while the aircraft is within ground effect.

I'm pretty certain that's how it's intended to be operated. The Ekranoplan does not fly in the conventional sense. The WIG (Wing in Ground Effect) concept is more like a hi-tech ship than a conventional flying boat. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6HQSNERadQ

 
...

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 2:30pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Just a small point...



...who's paying for it?
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 11:12pm

beaky   Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender: male
 Posts: 14187
 *****
 
Quote:
Just a small point...



...who's paying for it?


Russian mafia?  Wink Grin

Seriously, though, I'm curious, too- I haven't exactly studied current russian economics, but I can't quite figure out where the money's coming from for things like this.
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Oct 19th, 2006 at 11:22pm

Boomtown Rat   Offline
Colonel
Ushuaia
Wellington, FL

Gender: male
 Posts: 529
 *****
 
Quote:
Russian mafia?  Wink Grin

Seriously, though, I'm curious, too- I haven't exactly studied current russian economics, but I can't quite figure out where the money's coming from for things like this.


Maybe the Russian Government?  There's huge demands for Russian Cargo Aircraft, since the Russians beat the US in the Heavy-lifting category.  Demand is so high that they are finishing the second An-225 Mriya.
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Oct 20th, 2006 at 12:21am
cheesegrater   Ex Member

 
I doubt that the Be-2500 will ever be built. Although it looks interesting.

Also, I doubt that any work has been done on the second An-225.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Oct 20th, 2006 at 12:41am

Boomtown Rat   Offline
Colonel
Ushuaia
Wellington, FL

Gender: male
 Posts: 529
 *****
 
Quote:
Also, I doubt that any work has been done on the second An-225.


According to both the Ukrainian Minister of Transportation and Communications Nikolay Rud'kovskiy, http://www.flightlevel350.com/Antonov_AN-225_aircraft_facts.html as well as wikipedia.org , the second An-225 is being completed, with most construction completion dates being set for 2008.
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Oct 20th, 2006 at 4:25am

chornedsnorkack   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 363
 *****
 
Quote:
I'm pretty certain that's how it's intended to be operated. The Ekranoplan does not fly in the conventional sense. The WIG (Wing in Ground Effect) concept is more like a hi-tech ship than a conventional flying boat. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6HQSNERadQ


See above for the difference between Ekranoplan and Be-2500. Basically, the Ekranoplan has short, stubby wings - 44 m span for a 540 ton MTOW. Whereas Be-2500 has wide, 156 m wingspan. Thus, the wing loading is similar with a conventional large jet, like C-5, An-225 or Airbus 380. 2500 toms should be doable in free air.

An advantage of flying boats over landplanes is that a landplane requires a runway sized for it. Airbus 380 was developed for a 80 m box. Whereas a seaplane is not constrained by airport infrastructure - where a small seaplane can fly, a big seaplane also can.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
  « Home ‹ Board Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge