What is the glide ratio of an Airbus A320 airliner?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    Probably about 20:1 clean which is typical for jet transport aircraft. The glide ratio is only dependent on the wing's angle of attack which then determines the L/D ratio (lift over drag) and is NOT dependent on the weight of the aircraft. The only affect weight has on the glide ratio is that at higher weights the angle of attack for max L/D results in higher airspeed which varies as the square root of the differences in weight, e.g. an airplane that weighs four times as much must fly at a speed of twice that of the same plane at the lighter weight. The plane was 900 feet above the GW bridge meaning it could glide about 18,000 feet. Teterboro was 30,000 feet away and could not be reached.

    Source(s): Basic aerodynamics. I have been an ATP and flight instructor for 35 years. If you need a source search for "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" which I think is available online.
  • 3 years ago

    Glide Ratio

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    There is a Airbus 320 that glided over 300 miles to land at an airport in the Azores. It was flying at 32000 feet when a malfunction empty the main tanks. The plane was a charter from Canada to Europe. The french canadian pilot wrote a book describing his ordeal. It was in the late 80's or early 90's.

  • 1 decade ago

    Around 20:1 with the engines off. But it does depend on load. Counter intuitively a heavy aircraft can glide further, it has more energy. It descends faster but at greater forward speed. So if he was at 2,000 feet and 180kts he had about 2 minutes to find a soft spot.

    If the aircraft isn't 'clean' then the drag is higher and it won't go as far, I think in this case the a/c would still have had the flaps partially extended.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    @ Gerald F:

    Once the flight crew determined a place to set the aircraft down, achieving a maximum glide distance was no longer a concern. Actual distance covered is not indicative of absolute possible.

    Problems with making Teterboro or returning to La Guardia may have been because they were simply out of range, but even if they were reachable, the aircraft did not have enough energy (speed/ altitude) get lined up on a runway.

    Source(s): "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" - also available in print
  • 1 decade ago

    He lost 3200 feet from his highest point and went less than 6 miles in that distance. In this case, his actual glide ratio was less than 2 to 1.

    That's the reality.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    72/0

  • 1 decade ago

    well, it depends on the weight etc.

  • 1 decade ago

    4.

    The correct answer is 4............

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.