Saw this Honda Jet recently

[-]

Far-prophet@reddit

They build em right here in Greensboro, NC. Gotta couple of friends that are engineers that work there.

[-]

Snowychains@reddit

Used to be down the taxiway from them at my previous job

[-]

MoccaLG@reddit

Looks more like "Honda jet sees you" :)

[-]

Taptrick@reddit

Took 12 years to get FAA certified, from December 2003 to 2015. Wild.

[-]

No idea. I remember reading my dad’s Flight International magazines and that jet would pop up now and then starting in the late 90s. It was almost a running gag at some point. Here’s a story about the Honda Jet’s development again!

[-]

AllReflection@reddit

I did a project for GE Aviation around 2008 and they were really excited about this airplane. Sad that it hasn’t made much of a splash.

[-]

farina43537@reddit

Looks cool! How is it to maintain the engines when you’ve got to stand on the upper wing surface to work?

[-]

Prof_Sillycybin@reddit

I worked at the assembly plant for 5 years, these aircraft are not very tall. I am 6'2, could access most of the engine standing on the ground at the rear of the wing, for the upper portions of the engine a small 2-step stand was plenty. One the inlet side a stand at the front of the wing generally allowed plenty of reach.

[-]

Direct_Cabinet_4564@reddit

Other than occasionally changing the igniters and the starter generators there isn’t a lot that needs done on a turbine engine other than oil changes. So it probably isn’t a big deal.

[-]

bike-pdx-vancouver@reddit

Is that emperor palpatine? https://imgur.com/a/Dhoc9FH

[-]

anopsis@reddit (OP)

Good eye!

[-]

GlockAF@reddit

SO ugly…

[-]

hydromatic456@reddit

I don’t know why people are downvoting you so hard over a subjective statement lmao.

I agree with you though, they’re not really pleasing on the eye at all. The pylons are faired way chunkier than any other normal engine mounting of that size, the windshield shape combined with the bulbous look of the cockpit makes that area look very unnatural, and in my opinion the wing mounting of the engines is a solution in search of a trivial problem and just doesn’t look good aesthetically.

Neat from a developmental standpoint I guess but they’re nowhere near the running for prettiest jet.

[-]

GlockAF@reddit

Agreed, but Honda fanbois gonna fanboi

[-]

Tokyo_Echo@reddit

What is the benefit of mounting them like that?

[-]

wouldjaplease@reddit

Some answers below make sense and may be true. But I worked at Honda when this design came out. The literature said the engines are mounted to be in line with the center of gravity, to enhance fuel economy.

[-]

Sawfish1212@reddit

Major drag reduction. Honda went for efficiency over everything else in the design. The wing skin is one piece from trailing edge to trailing edge to have no drag from seams. There's only one mill in the world able to produce metal this wide. The nose was designed for maximum efficiency by reducing drag and then Honda engineers found that tail mounted engines were very inefficient due to drag from the pylons and proximity to the fuselage, those weird fat pylons to the wing produce way less drag than fuselage pylons and the structure of the fuselage can be lighter because it isn't supporting the weight and thrust of the engines. This is the same reason why modern airliners all have wing mounted engines.

[-]

One-Internal4240@reddit

On an airplane, think of everything as hanging from the wing. It's the thing that's stuck in the sky. Closer you are to that wing, the less structure you need to build up. Also, since it's an engine, it's not just hanging, it's trying to move that wing so that it can hang in the sky in the first place. Which is another good reason for those two systems to live near each other.

[-]

Deno_TheDinosaur@reddit

I think cabin noise is lessened. Not sure if there’s an aerodynamic/performance difference.

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

We can continue guessing, or just look it up. Per Wikipedia:

It uses two engines mounted on pylons above the wing, a configuration called Over-The-Wing Engine Mount, or OTWEM, by Honda Aircraft.[71] This configuration maximizes cabin space by removing the structure required to mount engines on the rear of the fuselage.

[-]

ctesibius@reddit

Putting the engines on the wings does mean that the wings bear the load directly in flight, so the structure throught the wing roots to to the fail cone can be made lighter. I'm not sure how much difference it make in practice, but it's a common argument against tail-mounted engines.

[-]

everydave42@reddit

Noise, but also none of the engine mechanics need to take up fuselage space, so that was a key reason.

[-]

Cesalv@reddit

Some pilots say that noise and vibration reduction is minimal, but it's still a cute plane

[-]

atomicsnarl@reddit

Bunny ears!

[-]

everydave42@reddit

Noise a mentioned, but also none of the engine mechanics or supports need to take up fuselage space, so that was a key reason.

[-]

75International@reddit

Engine to fuselage proportions seem so off.

[-]

coliozenobio@reddit

Saw one at the Honda heritage center museum in Marysville OH. Cool plane

[-]

Acethepilot2006@reddit

God I love honda

[-]

Pubics_Cube@reddit

The tarmac isn't their native habitat. Usually they're in the dirt

[-]

WarBirbs@reddit

Is that a joke that flew over me or are they known for issues/crashes? Both?

[-]

Pubics_Cube@reddit

They're infamous for runway excursions

[-]

psunavy03@reddit

Interestingly, the T-45 Goshawk had similar issues re: twitchy directional control at takeoff speeds. Boeing and the Navy solved it by essentially putting a mini-fly-by-wire in the nosewheel steering that modulated inputs by help of a yaw rate gyro.

[-]

LightningGeek@reddit

Got anymore information about the nosewheel steering on the T-45? Sounds like an interesting way to get around the issue.

I do wonder if the issue exists with the T.1A as well, or if it became a problem with the gear changes made for the T-45.

[-]

psunavy03@reddit

It's been over 15 years since my last T-45 flight, but as far as I'm aware, it was the latter. NWS was set at plus or minus 12 degrees at low gain, with plus or minus 60 degrees high gain available via a button on the stick for maneuvering on the flight deck. Every carrier jet has a similar low gain/high gain setup. But something engineering-wise in that whole setup caused a band of directional squirreliness at takeoff/landing speeds. People who'd flown both compared it to almost like flying a taildragger. A couple of students went off-roading with one ejection, so NAVAIR said "enough" and started looking for a fix.

[-]

MiddleTB@reddit

Phenom 100 was like this too - clean sheet fly by wire brake system and no reversers….im seeing a trend here…

[-]

Maleficent-Grass-438@reddit

I was living near the Mesa AZ Falcon Field AirPort earlier this year when this jet failed to lift off and crashed into a vehicle on Greenfield Drive. One survivor from the jet but I haven’t seen any reports on this crash yet. Apparently the jet actually exceeded rotational speed and may have even lifted off briefly but obviously something went terribly wrong. These reports take time of coarse but I had no idea there is a history with this jet.

[-]

Kid_Vid@reddit

Oh dang, the article someone linked above about runway excursions mentions that crash I think:

https://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/aircraft-propulsion/hondajet-runway-excursions-raise-questions

Unfortunately, a high-speed runway excursion after a takeoff attempt at Mesa-Falcon Field (KFFZ) on Nov. 5, 2024, resulted in five fatalities. The pilot and three passengers were fatally injured, along with the single occupant of an automobile that was struck by the aircraft. One passenger was seriously injured.

The NTSB’s preliminary investigation used security video to capture images of the aircraft accelerating on Runway 22L for about 3,000 ft. With 2,100 ft. of runway remaining, the aircraft began to decelerate. The publicly available ADS-B data suggests that the aircraft lost an insufficient amount of velocity before going off the end of the runway.

It overran the departure end of the runway, struck the airport perimeter fence and continued across a roadway, whereupon it struck a single vehicle.

The Secure Data card showed that the aircraft accelerated to about 130 kt. before it began to decelerate. Why was the takeoff rejected at an abnormally high speed? The preliminary report gave no indication. Flight control continuity was verified by the investigation team on site. The control column gust lock was located uninstalled. The aircraft brake and anti-skid system were examined, with no anomalies noted. No engine anomalies were noted. Clearly there are many questions for the investigation team to analyze.

[-]