My knowledge of real world aviation is almost zero. So bare with me please.When a large aircraft (any I suppose ,its relative I would imagine) say a 747 is parked up between flights or for any length of time ,don't the four massive engines exert a mighty downward strain on the wings.That's it If wrong forum then please move.And yes this is a genuine question.No I haven't been on the quaff (ale)Yes I will be later.Andy

My knowledge of real world aviation is almost zero. So bare with me please.When a large aircraft (any I suppose ,its relative I would imagine) say a 747 is parked up between flights or for any length of time ,don't the four massive engines exert a mighty downward strain on the wings.That's itIf wrong forum then please move.And yes this is a genuine question.No I haven't been on the quaff (ale)Yes I will be later.Andy

Far less than they're designed for... in flight they must support the full weight of the airplane.DJ

Definitely for hangar chat but the answer is not really... The wings have been designed to sustain 150% of load if I remember correctly so those engines are nothing compared to the load the wings are designed to sustain... I get more concerned in flight with heavy turbulence watching those massive engines bounce all over the place when they are exerting a lot more downward force than just sitting there.

OK Thanks GuysI did say my real world knowledge was minimal. :((Have flown only once in real world ,believe it or not.) EGKK-EDFF.Strolled some mountainsEDFF-EGKK.Andy

RR RB211 weight around 10000lbs X 4=40000lbs. The wings are designed to support most of the aircrafts weight in flight. 800,000 lbs ( not including G forces + and -). The 40000 lbs static weight is miniscule in comparison. I'm no aerospace engineer but sure sounds good at the pool hall talk :)

RR RB211 weight around 10000lbs X 4=40000lbs. The wings are designed to support most of the aircrafts weight in flight. 800,000 lbs ( not including G forces + and -). The 40000 lbs static weight is miniscule in comparison. I'm no aerospace engineer but sure sounds good at the pool hall talk :)

Shows my complete lack of engineering/sciences type knowledge.I assumed that in flight the lift generated by the wings ,would sort of (technical term) reduce the load on the wings ,as there being supported in air.Anyways, reassuring to know if I ever take that second flight that its unlikely the wings will fall off .I have been a little light heart-ed in this topic ,but i did wonder.Thanks AllA.

"I assumed that in flight the lift generated by the wings ,would sort of (technical term) reduce the load on the wings ,as they're being supported in air." You are not wrong with this assumption - in smooth air and in level cruise conditions, lift=weight so the load on the wing is far less than it's designed for. But the guys are right in saying that the wing structure has to support far more than the aircraft's weight whenever it is subjected to g forces - whether in turbulence or excessive control inputs. If anything is likely to fall off, it's the engine pod (rare but does happen) - structural failure of the wing is very unlikely unless it is stressed way beyond its allowed limits.

Some good vids on yutube of wing load tests to failure.scott s..

Edited February 16, 201214 yr by scott967