| ▲ | potato3732842 6 hours ago |
| > in which case, why have the tail engine at all? "you know what this motorized piece of anything needs, less power" -nobody, ever |
|
| ▲ | loeg 5 hours ago | parent [-] |
| You know you can just make the wing engines 50% more powerful, right? |
| |
| ▲ | psunavy03 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > just make the wing engines 50% more powerful You realize this is not quite how aerospace engineering works, right? | | |
| ▲ | loeg 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Essentially every new design is a twinjet, so it's clearly possible to make appropriate decisions in that design space. And both Boeing and Airbus have given up on quadjets. | | |
| ▲ | lazide 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Now it is, yes. At the time, it would have required 4 total engines, which is a different matter altogether. |
|
|
|
