[blackwasp]

Airbus has unveiled the livery on its latest transport aircraft - the Beluga XL. The paint job was selected by 20,000 Airbus employees from 6 design choices. The livery makes the aircraft look like a smiling whale.

The Beluga XL measures 63.1m long, 18.9m tall and has a wingspan of 60.3m. The main fuselage diameter is 8.8m and the plane has a maximum payload of 53 tonnes. It can carry two wings of the Airbus A350 XWB.

The transport aircraft was planned in 2014 as a successor for the current lot of 5 Belugas used by Airbus. The first of the planned five units is expected to undergo ground tests by the end of 2018 and commence service by 2019. The Beluga XL (Airbus A330-700L) is based on the A330-200 and is set to replace the existing fleet completely by 2025. The aircraft's lower fuselage will be manufactured on the existing A330 assembly line before moving to a dedicated facility for a year-long assembly of the nose part and the upper fuselage.

The BelugaXL is powered by two Rolls Royce Trent 700 engines, which are rated at a maximum thrust of 316 KN each. Airbus claims that the airplane can cover a maximum distance of 4,074 km at full payload using these engines.

The Beluga program started in 1992 and was put into operations by late 1995. The plane is based on the Airbus A300 with the model officially called as the A300-600ST. While the lower part is identical to the A300, the upper fuselage consists of a large 7.7 m tall horseshoe-shaped cargo hold. The fleet of 5 is used to fly aircraft components including wings from their factories to the final assembly between Toulouse, Hamburg and 9 other cities across Europe. They have also been used to transport large cargo including vehicles and satellites for many space programs, helicopters, chemical tanks, large artworks as well as humanitarian supplies. Initially called as the Super Transporter, the Beluga name came due to the resemblance with the Beluga whale.







Link to the Team-BHP News

[SCORPION]

I have seen this plane before and it sure looks weird. To my layman eyes, it looks like an aerodynamic disaster with that huge wall like (although rounded) bulge in the front.
The range you mentioned also seems quite low for such a huge aircraft considering it's based on the A330. Could the increased payload and the design constraints for increased cargo area be a contributing factor?

[ChiragM]

Originally Posted by SCORPION

Could the increased payload and the design constraints for increased cargo area be a contributing factor?

Yes, the increased payload is the main reason why the range is low.

For example, the current Beluga has a range of just 2,779 km with a 40 ton payload. However, this goes up to 4,632 km with a 26 ton payload.

[SmartCat]

I'm struggling to spot 10 differences between Beluga XL and 1st gen Ssangyong Rodius

Erstwhile Soviet Union did a much cleaner job of increasing the size & load carrying capacity of Antonov AN 124 to Antonov AN 225.

AN124 (max payload 125 tons)



AN225 (max payload 225 tons)

[gkveda]

Originally Posted by SCORPION

I have seen this plane before and it sure looks weird. To my layman eyes, it looks like an aerodynamic disaster with that huge wall like (although rounded) bulge in the front.

Exactly my thought when I first looked at this image. However, Bernoulli's principle works on the wings and flights are designed to fly based on pressure difference created at wings top and bottom side to lift the flight and not at front face(Of course, PD is generated at front as well. But primarily, wings are responsible for flying).

Looks are individual opinions. Hence, do not comment on that. But, engineering design wise, I think this design has no major impact

[SCORPION]

Originally Posted by gkveda

Exactly my thought when I first looked at this image. However, Bernoulli's principle works on the wings and flights are designed to fly based on pressure difference created at wings top and bottom side to lift the flight and not at front face(Of course, PD is generated at front as well. But primarily, wings are responsible for flying).

I do agree that the wings provide the necessary lift for the aircraft.
What I meant by saying aerodynamic disaster was the wind resistance due that huge, almost wall like frontal area. I was wondering if it affects the maximum cruising speed and fuel efficiency. And looking at the side profile, and the relatively large windage area, I am sure crosswinds will in all probability prove to be a greater challenge to the pilots as compared to regular aircrafts.

[9thsphinx]

I can think of two analogies here -

1) Why so serious?

- Looks like Airbus is paying homage to The Joker!


2) All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy!

- What's wrong in Airbus allowing its employees to have a little fun while they're at it.

[ferrarirules]

Originally Posted by smartcat

Erstwhile Soviet Union did a much cleaner job of increasing the size & load carrying capacity of Antonov AN 124 to Antonov AN 225.

These are one off planes which are intended for Airbus internal use. Airbus had gone for minimum redesign cost approach for this plane. Using A300 or A330 base helps them alot during variant certification. As this is a type of A330, it doesn't have to go through the same tests as when A330 was first introduced. The certification will be for the changes only.

Hence i don't think the concentration was on making these look beautiful as there are five of them to be built. The concentration was to get new planes (which are cost to Airbus) at minimal cost. If you want to look for similar approach check out - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Dreamlifter. Boeing did the same thing when it wanted a plane to transport 787 parts.

AN-124 was designed keeping commercials in mind which meant designing a proper plane with ROI.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by ferrarirules

T As this is a type of A330, it doesn't have to go through the same tests as when A330 was first introduced. The certification will be for the changes only.

Hence i don't think the concentration was on making these look beautiful as there are five of them to be built. The concentration was to get new planes (which are cost to Airbus) at minimal cost. If you want to look for similar approach check out
AN-124 was designed keeping commercials in mind which meant designing a proper plane with ROI.

True, even so, the certification on modifications tend to be a very lengthy and expensive process. I don’t think the hold is pressurised so it is quite a different design on the hull alone.

I wonder if it handles very differently and to what extent the pilots need a different rating and or training.

As you say both Boeing and Airbus designed their planes as part of the logistic process of building their new planes. So from a design point of view they are optimised for that primarily. So as low cost and functional for that purpose. They have been used to carry the occasional other loads as well. (Space station parts, art pieces, all sorts of special machinery). Mind you, these things run a tight schedule. There isn’t all that much time available to do anything else then haul Airbus parts!

I read somewhere that the old Beluga’s will have reached their technical life time by the time the new Beluga’s come in. There will be several years overlap flying the old and the new one.

I wonder if the old Beluga’s will make it into the ‘freight hauling’ business. Not sure what kind of life is left on these planes. Obviously, for Airbus they are at the end of their life, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it can’t or won’t be allowed to fly. But of course, due to the design, it is obvious that it has quite a limited amount of applications. Expensive to maintain and fly, limited range. But if you need to transport huge things, who knows?

Jeroen

[sandeepmdas]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

As you say both Boeing and Airbus designed their planes as part of the logistic process of building their new planes. So from a design point of view they are optimised for that primarily.

Exactly.

The design process of the Beluga was totally constrained by the length of runway at Hawarden Airport near Broughton in Wales, which is limited, at only 5,500 feet. The Broughton "wing factory" produces wings and related components for various Airbus models. Broughton has an awesome history as once the birthplace of several legendary Vickers and De Havilland aircraft.

The runway remains as the main focal point for the upcoming replacement of Beluga also.

The DreamLifter and the awesome AN225, the aircraft that we see in this discussion, cannot operate from such short runways. The "hot-and-high" runway requirement for the mighty Antonov is 11,000 feet.

[Rehaan]

Originally Posted by blackwasp

The paint job was selected by 20,000 Airbus employees from 6 design choices. The livery makes the aircraft look like a smiling whale.

The smiling face definitely ups the similarity levels to the Beluga Whale!




Image source

[wanderernomad]

Further, the design of AN225 or Mriya caters to more conventional payload lift while the Beluga with the frontal bulge can take it the unconventional loads a swell and provides greater adaptability.

[SmartCat]

Beluga XL made its first public flight today
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/19/airb...irst-time.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B2SK3kX_G4

[RM Motorsports]

The iconic Airbus Beluga aircraft, Super Transporter made a special appearance at Ahmedabad Airport.


Source -FPJ

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by RM Motorsports

The iconic Airbus Beluga aircraft, Super Transporter made a special appearance at Ahmedabad Airport.

Source -FPJ

One gets a feel that if we inflate this plane a bit better, then it will become a proper A380 with 2 engines and fancy h-stabilizers !