6 ms·

Are there no aerodynamic concerns for that installation? The VHF instruments pictured on top of the fuselage make this thing look like a plow that would be bett

by strgrd 4y ago

Are there no aerodynamic concerns for that installation? The VHF instruments pictured on top of the fuselage make this thing look like a plow that would be better fit on top of a Sprinter van... they couldn't have gone for a dome?

ShakataGaNai 4y ago
The Ku/Ka band antenna's used by other providers are quite significant in size. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/gogo-2ku-inflight-wifi-70mbps/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/gogo-2ku-inflight-wi... https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/466228743522893824 https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/466228743522893824
- londons_explore 4y ago
  If I was an airline considering this, I'd want to see $/km fuel costs from the extra air resistance in the sales brochure...
  - borissk 4y ago
    It will be a lot less than the percentage a radio antenna increases the fuel consumption of a car. Modern planes like the 787 are made to a big degree from composites and the antenna can be installed inside the fuselage - leading to 0% increase in air resistance.
    - londons_explore 4y ago
      The pictures on the site show a roof mounted one... It's raised like 4 inches off the body, so it's gotta cause quite some drag at 500 mph
    - Pasorrijer 4y ago
      This is not accurate. I don't know of a single installation within a fuselage, because the composite has enough metal in or around it to cause interference. The fuel concern is a significant one, as well as performance. Enough fuel or performance impacts and you can restrict the airports flown with these antennas. It's not as big a problem on widebodies, but it's the reason you haven't seen WiFi on small regional or the smallest narrow bodies until recently.
  - esskay 4y ago
    It's vastly smaller than what most airlines have installed right now for KU band. Those things are huge.
  - jmacd 4y ago
    Manufacturers are very good at these calculations. One interesting example is that for the initial IFE systems that were deployed, the heat generated by the displays was significant enough that the largest cost to the installation was the required upgrade to the cabin air conditioning systems.
dreamcompiler 4y ago
It's thinner than the fat bump on top of Southwest planes which is not a phased array AFAIK.
walrus01 4y ago
there are plenty of ku/ka-band geostationary VSAT systems that already exist, which mount as a bulge on the upper fuselage, which are larger and less aerodynamic than this. in addition to antenna systems for iridium and inmarsat L/S-band stuff. there is a lower limit to the size of aircraft that can accommodate something like this, of course. for instance: https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2021/09/panasonic-next-gen-ku-antenna-thinkom/ https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2021/09/panasonic-next-gen-ku-... https://www.getsat.com/products/milli-sat-ex/ https://www.getsat.com/products/milli-sat-ex/
carabiner 4y ago
Barely any... the fuselage is non-lifting and this will add a bit of parasite drag. Same with rain, dirt buildup on surfaces.
katrotz 4y ago
Was wondering the same, but taking into account the planes are flying with its nose lifted a bit, most of the drag should be created by its lower part

by strgrd 4y ago

ShakataGaNai 4y ago

The Ku/Ka band antenna's used by other providers are quite significant in size. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/gogo-2ku-inflight-wifi-70mbps/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/gogo-2ku-inflight-wi... https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/466228743522893824 https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/466228743522893824

londons_explore 4y ago
If I was an airline considering this, I'd want to see $/km fuel costs from the extra air resistance in the sales brochure...
- borissk 4y ago
  It will be a lot less than the percentage a radio antenna increases the fuel consumption of a car. Modern planes like the 787 are made to a big degree from composites and the antenna can be installed inside the fuselage - leading to 0% increase in air resistance.
  - londons_explore 4y ago
    The pictures on the site show a roof mounted one... It's raised like 4 inches off the body, so it's gotta cause quite some drag at 500 mph
  - Pasorrijer 4y ago
    This is not accurate. I don't know of a single installation within a fuselage, because the composite has enough metal in or around it to cause interference. The fuel concern is a significant one, as well as performance. Enough fuel or performance impacts and you can restrict the airports flown with these antennas. It's not as big a problem on widebodies, but it's the reason you haven't seen WiFi on small regional or the smallest narrow bodies until recently.
- esskay 4y ago
  It's vastly smaller than what most airlines have installed right now for KU band. Those things are huge.
- jmacd 4y ago
  Manufacturers are very good at these calculations. One interesting example is that for the initial IFE systems that were deployed, the heat generated by the displays was significant enough that the largest cost to the installation was the required upgrade to the cabin air conditioning systems.

dreamcompiler 4y ago

It's thinner than the fat bump on top of Southwest planes which is not a phased array AFAIK.

walrus01 4y ago

there are plenty of ku/ka-band geostationary VSAT systems that already exist, which mount as a bulge on the upper fuselage, which are larger and less aerodynamic than this. in addition to antenna systems for iridium and inmarsat L/S-band stuff. there is a lower limit to the size of aircraft that can accommodate something like this, of course. for instance: https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2021/09/panasonic-next-gen-ku-antenna-thinkom/ https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2021/09/panasonic-next-gen-ku-... https://www.getsat.com/products/milli-sat-ex/ https://www.getsat.com/products/milli-sat-ex/

carabiner 4y ago

Barely any... the fuselage is non-lifting and this will add a bit of parasite drag. Same with rain, dirt buildup on surfaces.

katrotz 4y ago

Was wondering the same, but taking into account the planes are flying with its nose lifted a bit, most of the drag should be created by its lower part