Comment by inhumantsar

Comment by inhumantsar 10 hours ago

11 replies

> Airbus is also assessing shielding the area of the fuselage closest to the engines to minimize the risk of a blade off — one or more composite blades breaking, which could dent or puncture the fuselage and, in the worst-case scenario, strike a passenger.

sightly terrifying

mapt 9 hours ago

The cowling of the current turbines serves the same purpose, but needs to cover 360 degrees of rotation, so it's heavier and draggier. The blades have a bit more angular momentum in the propfan than in a high bypass turbofan, but there's fewer of them.

  • dameyawn 9 hours ago

    Instead of reinforcing the fuselage, I wonder if just having a 1/4 nacelle that shields the passenger side would work.

  • pavon 7 hours ago

    The impact area of the fuselage looks much larger than an unrolled cowling, and thus significantly heavier to reinforce. The smaller cowling will save drag through.

    • ahartmetz 2 hours ago

      It might hit the fuselage at a flatter angle than it would hit a nacelle, which would help.

  • fsckboy 9 hours ago

    >The cowling of the current turbines serves the same purpose, but needs to cover 360 degrees of rotation

    this doesn't make sense. if you are not worried about fan blades flying off in directions other than the fuselage, why cover 360 degrees? (and if you are worried 360, then why open rotor?)

    • somewhereoutth 8 hours ago

      The cowling is its own structural support, so needs to be strong all around, otherwise it would fail on the other side and you'd get blade+cowling approaching the fuselage at high velocity.

in_a_hole 9 hours ago

I had a sharp intake of breath after reading this and then clicking through to see the header image of the article.

csours 9 hours ago

High bypass turbo fans do this as well, it's just in the fan/engine housing, not the fuselage.

roboror 9 hours ago

Yeah I'd think you'd need some serious shielding to prevent a puncture