Sign in to follow this  
brucek

How much larger is A320 Fuselage to the B737?

Recommended Posts

Driving past KDEN the other day and noted what I first thought was a B76 (because of the larger fuselage, and had followed a number of 73's so I had a comparison). It didn't take long to realize that it wasn't big enough for a 76, then I recognized it as a Ted aircraft (A320's).I assume that the A320 fuselage is bigger, but with 3+3 seating (same as the 73), how much bigger can it be? Does a fatter fuselage have any efficiency penalty from drag?Thanks,Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I believe their is a 1 inch difference which is especially useful for the aisles, I dont know the exact numbers but you are right about it being bigger.

Share this post


Link to post

3.68m on the A320 compared to 3.54m on the 737 so theres 14cm (5.51 inches) difference

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Doug and Ben,Interesting that about 5 inches becomes noticeable.Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, having put many miles in on UAL's 320s, the extra room is noticable.

Share this post


Link to post

You get less than an inch of extra butt room. You also get less headroom, because Airbus feels that cargo deserves more headroom than you do, by making the cabin floor higher. :)The only difference I can really feel in my coach seat, is when the airline decides to leave more room between mine and the one in front of me. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks guys. Interesting about the larger cargo area in the A-32x.Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post

So true. Plus, unless you can watch them target-type reversers and triple-slotted flaps do their thing, flying is boring. :)

Share this post


Link to post

G'day Bruce,I think you'll find the difference is a result of the different methods of construction.Boeing use a double bubble fuselage. The fuselage is in the shape of a figure 8 ie. a large dia. upper cylinder (pax cabin) on top of a smaller dia lower cylinder (cargo space). The floor beams joining accross the intersection of the two circles. This results in a Boeing fuselage being narrow and deep.This approach gives an upper fuselage wide enough for 3+3 seating AND a lower fuselage with enough volume for a decent cargo compartment.If a fuselage is constructed as a single tube then once the floor is lowered to accommodate 3+3 across seating then there is VERY MINIMAL space below floor level for cargo.This was a huge failing of the DH Comet. In order to achieve a reasonable cargo space (essential for an aircraft to be commercially successful) the diameter of the fuselage would have to be increased and this would then give more room also in the 3+3 cabin. I know nothing of the Airbus fuselage construction but suspect this may be the case. "There's no such thing as a free lunch". Yes there will be an increase in Profile drag but with reasonable streamlining this would not be very much. Any increase in structural weight would have far greater effect on performance.Cheers,Roger

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Roger. A great explanation.Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this