Composite Vs Aluminum - Which Fuselage Is Best?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 фев 2022
- Modern jets, such as the 787 and A350, have seen a switch to composite materials for fuselage construction. This seems set to stay as the way forward for new aircraft designs. There are challenges, but the lower weight offers significant improvements in efficiency and operating cost.
Article link: simpleflying.com/composite-vs...
Video sources:
787 Etihad • Boeing 787 - Air to Ai...
a350 air france • Meeting with Air Franc...
DC3-178 NC17334 www.youtube.com/watch?v=01052...
777 history • 777's proud past, bril...
747 Historical Everett Boeing • Boeing's Everett Site ...
767 Aeromexico • XA-TOJ takeoff Aeromex...
A380 Lufthansa American DC-3 Eastern DC-7B • Amazing First Airbus A...
Photo sources:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
www.flickr.com/photos/ktylerc...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopwith...
www.flickr.com/photos/summer1...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havi...
Simple Flying:
Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.com/podcast/
Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.com/simple-flyin...
Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.com/daily-digest/
Check out our second RUclips channel: / @longhaulbysimpleflying
Follow us on social media:
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
Linkedin: / 33222643
#aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying
I would guess that one of the reasons that Boeing chose not to use composite for the new 777x is because they know, and as history has shown, a lot of these will be converted to freighters 10, 15, 20 years after entering service. The 787 on the other hand will most likely never be a viable freighter option.
The use composite in the wings
@@danielmeador1991 B777x wings are composite but Boeing does not use "copper foil/mesh" lightning protection system in the B777X unlike the 'flaking" A350 or the B787.
The 777x is not a major redesign of the 777series. For that reason a big chunk of parts and processes were not rethought. It simply doesn't make sense, the same way as a carbon fiber a320 wouldn't.
@@set3777 yea I know
Biggest reason would be, that they would have needed a completely new type cerificate. Which would have made it a new airplane.
I'm not entirely sure with this one. Both the 787 and A350 have their pros and cons. Both are much more fuel efficient, but the fatigue resistance of carbon fiber could be outweighed by the fact that the 787 uses complete barrel sections, meaning that, if the aircraft is damaged, an operator may need to order an entirely new fuselage section, likewise with the A350's paint issues, with the operator having to apply paint much more often, not to mention that carbon fiber is much less malleable than aluminum, so I don't think applying a doubler to a damaged section would be possible, though I could be wrong.
Another thing is that carbon fiber contains, well, carbon, which is highly flammable and more vulnerable to a lightning strike. In 1995, Bristow Helicopters Flight 56C was struck by lightning, damaging its carbon fiber tail rotor, causing the helicopter to go out of control and forcing the crew to ditch in the ocean.
Yet another thing to consider is what happens to an aircraft when it reaches the end of its service life. Aluminum aircraft can be melted down and recycled, but whether or not the same applies to a carbon fiber aircraft is questionable.
The thing about carbon fiber aircraft, as is the case with electric aircraft, is that its story is still being written. Maybe they'll be successful, and maybe they won't. There isn't enough information yet to say one way or the other.
So Well-said Autism Takes On!!
There are ways to repair smaller damages avaible also for CFRP. If the damage is so huge, you have to replace an entire section, you are screwed anyway. As mentioned, CFRP is more resistant to fatigue, wich prevents the most damage in the first place.
Regarding fire resistance: the carbon fibre is ignited at 3000°C, but the resin (plastic) used in CFRP starts melting at ~180°C. Aluminium does have a higher melting point, but looses beyond 200°C a lot of its strength.
Recycling is an issue, that needs to be solved yet. One possibillity is to melt/burn the resin and reuse the carbon fibre, but this is has its own drawback.
Composite is definitely the future. As we are seeing right now with the paint issues for both Airbus and Boeing, there is still research and development required to perfect the use of composites. But if electric or hybrid power is the future, we will need to continue to reduce the weights to allow for heavier battery implementation.
Nah, we need better battery tech before hybrid or full electric is feasible
@@evolancer211 I agree. Right now the weight of electric/hybrid is prohibitive. Hopefully that tech also advances and brings down the weight.
Composites yes, batteries not likely ever.
Unless you believe Elon’s acid trip of vtol supersonic electric jets.
@@evolancer211 I’ve heard some pretty amazing battery technology is on the way so it might be sooner than we think
I totally agree with you. But the recycling process of composite materials is still an issue and we must solve it quickly first.
I think composites have to potential to be great, but they need to understand that it will require a major rethink in construction techniques and the painting of the fuselage itself.
Why do u think the 777x didn't use composites for the fuselage l?
@@jirehla-ab1671 Because the 777-9 is essentially a 777-300ER but with a longer fuselage and an all-new wing.
@@Sacto1654 I recently changed my view on locking the windows like on the 787 & the upcoming 777x, that it won't be a problem for me AS long as they add another camera near the wing or the engine & be accessible through the IFE, somhow a derivative to Emirates 777 first class Virtual Windows
Great video, and keep up the great, informative aviation content!👍
I am an engineer who works with aluminium structures for a major Southern Hemisphere airline and I choose metal over composite any day of the week. Metal structures are imminently repairable while composites are not. As aircraft age, they gather all kinds of damage. The worst damage a metal structure will get, aside from actual mechanical damage from accidents, is corrosion and is very well understood. Composite damage, on the other hand is not so easily found or fixed. In addition, the toleration for damage is equally not well understood. From where I stand, composite structures are more gimmick than progress.
Thanks.
Composites have an advantage in fire safety. After a plane crash, it takes longer for flames to burn through to the interior of the aircraft. This gives passengers more time to escape, whilst having less exposure to smoke.
From the passenger's point of view an advantage of of composites is that they allow a higher level of humidity in the cabin air - less danger of long term airframe corrosion. Less of the "I'm dying of thirst" feeling you get with aluminium aircraft.
Composite material is reliable but Aluminum has characteristics that can't be questioned.
Composite usage in commercial aircraft will be the future for now in that it’s a new material for aircraft construction, and engineers always want to try something new. The odd thing is that in the private aircraft industry, composites were readily being excepted as far back as the 1980s. Composite construction really took of when race car builders embraced the technology.
Lightning protection is also an issue since the 'resin' is epoxy, which when burned, gives off cyanide. Proper bonding (and routine inspections) are mandatory. Titanium is very hard to form and is heavier than aluminum--and corrodes when exposed to skydrol (hydraulic fluid). That's why bleed ducts on Boeing airplanes are gold-plated.
So if there is a fire you would likely die of cyanide poisoning. What lethal chemicals are expelled when aluminium melts during a fire. Which one would give more chance of living in those situations.
I am curious to see what happens with complete plastic fuselages when in different kinds of crashes or go on fire. We have all seen the different scenarios with aluminum.
Interesting, you failed to mention that the Beech Starship was the first commercial all-composite aircraft built back in the 1980s
On small general aviation composite aircraft, I have seen my share of numerous cracks on them. Had the same cracks been with aluminum they would have addressed.
Interesting is the case that Airbus are building the A350F freighter. This composite design I hope can stand up to the rigors of loading and rough treatment on the tarmac. One puncture by a loader and its game over. Speed tape doesn't work to well on punctured composites.
Like the marine industry, just because composites boats are commonly made, aluminium will always be around. They both have there place in the future.
May I ask what the background music is for this video? It always makes me think of simple flying!
Is it fire resistant? Which material would do better in a situation involving fire? Hopefully this won't ever be the case🙂.
As a Canadian, I always find it hilarious how Brits and some others pronounce aluminum.
You mean the correct way 😉
Excuse me, but I grew up in the '50s. Every Sunday afternoon we watched "Omnibus," and one of its sponsors was Aluminium Canada. Yes, they pronounced it aluminium, just like the Brits.
As a Brit, I always find it hilarious how Canadians and Americans pronounce aluminum.
I learnt in school, in aircraft construction composites will never replace aluminium 100%, there is always a place for the use of aluminium alloy. Aluminium alloy is proven, so that’s another reason to carry on using it.
@yo yo On A380, leading edge is already made of CFRP
Not everything you learn in school is always correct
Laminary composite would be more cost effective for manufacturer as with only 1 type of aircraft can derived for multiple variant including Freighter version.....in other hands efficient for operators & happy for passengers as it allows wider windows
“Wood was practical but not strong enough for high speed flight”
Umm the De Havilland Mosquito was made almost entirely of wood and was one of the fastest planes of World War II.
"Umm" top speed 415mph at 28Kft? So mach 0.59 at altitude. Just below the drag divergence mach numbers which start around 0.6. 747 maxes out at 0.9, cruises at 0.8 with parts of the body in the transonic regime, totally different forces at play. Lol "fastest planes of World War II" war over in 1945, speed of sound broken 1947, ok
@@enotdetcelfer I believe the DH Vampire had at least a partially wooden fuselage. Not supersonic but considerably faster than a Mosquito.
Bugatti 100p
What about metal fatigue? Will composites have a longer lifespan than al fuselages?
Once they work out the issues with the A350 (and I’m not entirely convinced the 787s won’t have a similar problem someday) and they can make it easier to convert them to freighters, composites will be the dominant building material. But it will probably take at least another decade before air craft builders fully switch.
Composite is the future. Think that also the car manufacturers gonna use composite.
Audi is experimental with composite, in greater cars like the A8 and the RS7,RS8.
You don't mention the C-Series/A220 which followed the 787 (but preceded the A350) in pushing the commercial application of composite technology. Also the wings represent another critical application; while you mention that the 777X retains an aluminum fuselage, you omit that it has a new composite wing.
Graphene ❤
I don't think the Composite will replace aluminium in at least a decade or two, but it definitely will in longer run.
For me it is always funny when people talking about the weight. Even if you remove 6t of weight out of the fuselage structure, as long you have to put back 8tons of power return cable it is not an improvement! But for sure it sounds great in a commercial to have a "modern" material used... However, may be in the future, CFRP will become a better option.
Huh? CF airplanes are definitely lighter overall, where did you get your numbers from?
Your comment makes no sense, sorry.
@Timothy De Vries But it doesn't even come close to the numbers he gave. If they were true, then nobody would ever use composites.
Correct, composite aircraft require the addition of metal bars, straps, and cables called the Current Return Network (CRN). It does add mass, however I'm not certain about 8t. Aluminum, the airframe is the electrical earth wherever you need it.
1:08 Thats a Mexicana De Havilland Comet i am proud that Mexico had that power to buy such of airplane type
The one thing I’ve never been able to get a handle on so far: what’s the ACTUAL difference? You, the manufacturers and every other website and news article talk about ‘significant weight savings’. Well, how much? What would be the difference between, say, an A350 fuselage made the way it is, versus if it were made of aluminium?
I don't know the numbers by heart, but it will be in the 5-15% range. But, since airframes are highly optimized this is as lot for operators. In addition, composites (at least in theory) promise to elongate the inspection interval because they do not suffer from fatigue. So, a little lighter and longer inspection intervals are the key benefits for operators.
Hi can you please shade some light on narrow bodies if they are made of composite material or maybe Aluminium.
A220 is composite, rest all are aluminum.
Until industry can figure out how to make composite structures safely and reliably be able to shed static electricity and not be damaged by lightning. Airbus is having a difficult time with its exterior paint coatings reacting with its skin.
Absolutely, the higher demand for more fuel efficient planes will drive down the price/cost for composite built aircraft.
How many airforce/military aircrafts use composites?
But what about strength and crash resistance? Will composite stand up alot better than Ali? An Ali fuselage plane just disintegrates most of the time, even if you're just trying to land on a flat field after a double bird strike!
title fix - Aluminium, not aluminum!
Nah. The spelling is correct. It's the pronunciation that is rather hilarious.
@@piisfun Davy's original term for it was Alumium so there's another option 😃
I think Boeing should make a composite 777 and run test between both and see how customers would react to all composite 777
the cost of production versus the profit will scare off any customers thats why the composites can only be found in the wings of the 777x
Unfortunately, until we have an composite aircraft accident/crash, and the here mentioned techniques to investigate such composite failures are tested & valid, we cannot maintain the same scientific certainty we have in the Aluminium stress crack analysis.
Knowing the eventual long term threat of "delaminating layers' in the fibreglass structures in all forms of transportation, we might possibly project that to these newly developed aircraft and its carbon fibre composites.
Thing is, tracing the precursor of the fault or crack in the fuselage that causes the catastrophic failure is an unknown given that when a carbon fibre structure breaks/disintegrates in a crash, it does so 'exploding' into millions (?) of carbon fibres debris. Add to that, high altitude+fire+underwater recovery ...
How to do ... what can be done ??? :-(
Erratum : "... a composite aircraft"
It really did take the big jet industry a long time to start using carbon. The gliding world started using it in the mid 1970s. I own a glider, built in 1978, which is substantially carbon fibre. Light weight, high strength and capable of being moulded into very good aerodynamic shapes was the reason. The glider is a Schempp Hirth Mini Nimbus C . Standing the test of time after 43 years of flying!
I like the cabin pressure and humidity of the 787 better than aircraft fuselages made mostly of aluminum, particularly flying long distances.
A350 is even more comfortable
Also magnesium was included. To make the suitable alloy we need aluminium with magnesium to resist corrosion and titanium for extra strength but what do I know about alloys? Stainless steel and chromium are great in thoery but rather heavy. Carbon steel is also great but rather heavy. Like aluminium, magnesium is light weight. Lithium is the lightest weight metal but rather reactive. The Airbus A380 used woven fibre glass known as GLARE, I wonder what it stands for.
GLARE is used for certification purpose. Fatigue and failure of CFRP is very different from metal, so the aviation rules are cautious about it. While GLARE could provide similar characteristic as metal and also gain some performance improvement, so it's used on A380.
Isn't the A220 composite as well?
Think for big planes be composite, smaller aluminium
Boeing should use their 787 test bird in a simulated crash landing like the NASA 707 and that 727 did. Get to know it’s behaviors and characteristics first hand so we know a really hard landing isn’t a death sentence.
The right question is which is cheaper?
Composite will replace aluminum. To what extent... who knows. But it'll become more and more prevalent as the price of fuel continues to climb.
With high fuel prices composites its the route to go.
Guys I think your sound messed up at the end portion. Not hating, jusst trying to help. :)
Why aren't there any composite narrowbodies?
Because narrow bodies are relatively low loaded. In that case, composites are not competitive anymore because they are much more sensitive to impact (e.g. hail). So, whether or not composites are the right choice, depends on the critical failure mode of the different parts of the structure. If large parts are critical for impact, aluminum is typically a better choice.
Classic why not both scenario
The big issue with these new aircraft is they are terrible at end of life issues when it comes to disposable and recycling but over the long term saving on fuel burn and longer life in the air acts as a counterbalance, but I am not sure which side wins out
My point exactly ... what's gonna happen to all that composite material ? How wil it be recycled ?
2:18 CFRP*
Isn't the a380 made from composite to
0:49 "wood .. was not strong enough for very high speed flight" - the Mosquito was one of the fastest planes in WW2, and it was made of wood.
Also the A220 is a composite made plane ?
A 220 has composite wings, but mostly aluminium fuselage.
Isn't an aluminum frame better suited to withstanding lightning strikes?
Yes
I'd hate to say but the A350 situation is just an integral part of the way forward.
It appears that the A350 has major problems so much so Qatar is suing Airbus and Airbus cancelled their 50 plane A321 order to Qatar. The 787 does not appear to have the same paint wire mess issues that the A350 has. Composites will slowly replace aluminum.
its the qatar ceo being awkward and the 787 does have paint issues on the wings
I think Qatar was more just looking for a way to have covid grounded planes to be paid for. Other airlines just had the problems fixed
Using the picture of qatar a350 when the word damage is said... clever..😆😆
Composites have advantages, particularly being lighter. However until they can get the production costs down and volumes up we probably won't see them in single aisle fuselages.
A decrease in diameter by 1 unit of measurement will decrease the circumference by 3.14 units reducing the potential for weight saving disproportionately the narrower the fuselage is.
Flatter surfaces don't suffer the same diminishing returns as they get smaller, and, apart from the weight savings, the (particularly in the case of wings) ability to produce complicated more aerodynamically efficient profiles not (as yet) viable using alloys could well make the additional costs worthwhile.
I suspect that we could possibly see an updated A320 series with composite wings as it is probably the next single aisle due to get any significant airframe upgrade, unless in the unlikey event of the MAX becoming a sales or production disaster it forces Boeing into a total redesign.
I expect we will see a hybrid with composite wings/wing box and some forum of aluminium for the fuselage.
A220 is 70% advanced lightweight materials and 46% composites. The fuselage is aluminum-lithium.
“Wood was not strong enough for high speed flight.”
The deHaviland Mosquito has entered the chat.
V.32 modems operating at 9.6 Kb/s were once considered "high speed" too.
The Fokker 130 metal bonding techniques and intelligent use of composites are at the base of the lightest and most durable airframe of the industry. These proven techniques result in excellent fatigue life, corrosion resistance and low maintenance cost. It builds on almost 60 years of trouble free experience, gained in multiple aircraft programs, and backed by more than 45 million landings. The Fokker 130 has a crack-free-life of 45,000 cycles and economic repair life of 90,000 cycles.
As it was never built how can this be proven?
@@Biggunkief It's on their website, how much proof do you need ?
@@RoderikvanReekum if its on their Website it needs no proof...
Composite is future
Depends on did regulator want to make aviation more environmentally friendly at all cost.
Qatar loves composites.
Depends on who made it. Airbus seems to be struggling with it
The paint of the 787 wings is falling of as well...
@@andreaspoppe3124 not even comparable but there's always one who likes to try
@@andreaspoppe3124 The problem with the A350 is very different from the B787 (you haven't heard any complaints from Airlines about the 787 regarding paint issues, have you? Is it written or documented anywhere? And which Airline have the complaints come from?). Please enlighten me!!
@@whiteandnerdytuba At both the paint is not like it shall be... May be the reasons are different but the result is similar!
@@kojoharrison630 The internet is full with pictures of wings with patches and damaged paint of the 787 issues! But keep your eyes closed!
Great, let's fly in paper planes now
Does this mean we can now have gallium and mercury shipped via air? The entire point about not allowing it to be flown is because if it leaks, it can completely destroy the strength of aluminum.
Composites are definitely the future of aircraft, which is unfortunate because we haven't found a way to recycle them yet.
They can use what works best. Just don't join the parts together with chewing gum 😜
Polymer is plastic and will deteriorate as it age.Aluminum is metal.
CFRP is not the future nore is metal .. it will have to a blended approach. The reason being is repairs in the field.. CFRP has little to no history.. metal has been manipulated for decades and we are still waiting for transparent aluminium (scotty is lagging behind on that ) . Like all plastics , they lack the ability to flex out side of thier design parameters.. metal will usually give tell tale signs before catastrophe event and or be able to flex in extreme events that CFRP will just fail.. yes F1 uses CFRP to make the chassis or driver tubs , but it is designed to dissipate energy in a crash.. airframes are not F1 cars..
A good engineer will understand why composites will kill you, some proof is already evident The airlines have and never will understand the cost of engineering and material science versus profits. Give the engineers multi million dollar golden parachutes and this could change.
2nd to comment
problem is when the planes are decomissioned, how are we going to recycle them? alu can easily be extracted and melted down, but what about CF and other composites?
Boeing doesn’t have issues with the paint. That’s an Airbus thing.
Think Air New Zealand might not quite agree with that.
@@clarkneil1980 Really?? Is that reported/documented/complained about? Qatar Airways also has Dreamliners but no complaints from them yet about their fleet of Dreamliners!!
@@kojoharrison630 you know how search engines work?
@@clarkneil1980 Neil, due to the nature of my job and it’s demands I don’t really indulge heavily in the online aviation exploration. I keep it really simple. I’m a fan but do not really explore as deeply so I dip in and out but the thing that jumps at me without searching is the Qatar/Airbus Issue which has become a real issue…..it’s unfortunate 🥺
@Paul O. some 787's have paint issues on the wings, awaiting your apology
For a moment I thought it was a video about bicycles.. carbon or aluminium 😂
Omg, these comments are wonky as ever...🤣
yep armchair experts
Windows are old school, being replaced by superHD paneled interiors. One can mimic windows, and show any of many camera feeds on the exterior of the airframe.
No thanks.
🤔
Sus
New aluminum-lithium alloys are superior to composites in most ways for aircraft. The 787/A350 will probably be the only ones.
With the demand for lithium for batteries I can't see that being a volume product?
25 seconds yikes