Future Planes Might be "Flying Wings"
by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 11. 8.05
The next evolution in commercial airliner design might just make it a lot harder to get a window seat, but the lucky few that do will have a spectacular forward view! The "flying wing" concept was created in 1961 by Sir Frederick Handley Page and Greener By Design (a group which includes Airbus, Rolls-Royce and the UK Department for Transport - they work on sustainable aviation) believes that the new airliners will start operational service in 2025 and that by 2055 they will make up a third of the world’s fleet.
From WorldChanging:
The fuselage would be turned into one wing to create less drag and engines would sit on top, with the wing shielding the noise from the ground. Passengers would sit in rows of up to 40 seats across. Wings would consume only a third of the fuel used by existing aircraft. They will be constructed of plastic, rather than aluminium, to reduce their weight. The outer surface would be covered in millions of tiny holes to reduce drag by sucking in air as it flows over the wing.The impact on the world’s climate would be reduced even further by changes in the way that airlines operate. All airliners will alter their cruising altitude to avoid the conditions that form condensation trails. They could also reduce the amount of fuel they burn by flying in formation, as jet fighters do.
Boeing is working on designs for a military flying wing that will serve as a troop carrier or tanker. Cranfield University, in Bedfordshire, is producing a scale model for Boeing, which will be used for flight tests.Airbus is also working on a flying wing design under a four-year, £20 million research project that is funded by the European Union and expected to report in 2009.
From the IEE on some of the ways used to make the future aircraft less noisy:
* putting the engines above the aircraft, so that the body of the plane itself shields the ground from noise
* embedding them in long ducts, muffled with acoustic liners, to reduce the noise
* designing an advanced engine; relocating the engines inside the airframe raises many engineering challenges.
::The future of flying is batwing – and it's all to save the planet, via ::The Future of Flying is Batwing, ::Greener by Design, ::The approach of the Silent Aircraft, ::Handley Tribute Page
The Boeing concept is called the Blended Wing Bomber ("BWB"). It's one great failing is that is cursed with a Boeing pricetag ($$$$).
Older wing-bodied planes were plagued by problems in flight, but I've heard that recent versions, utilizing computer monitoring to help with flight are as stable as any other plane. The potential for increased lift and cargo space begs for more development.
both Northrop in the USA and Gotha in Germany were working on flying wing designs by the 1930s. Another unsung pioneer in lifting body design was Carlo Burnelli - check out http://www.aircrash.org/burnelli/
I don't want to sit on one side of the wing when the plane leans thirty degrees in a turn.. imagine looking down to the other side of the plane. Maybe there'll be separate cabins or rows or something.
Otherwise sounds good.
I have heard of Sir Frederick Handley Page however he didn't invent the concept of a flying wing. The aircraft that is shown in the picture is a "blended wing body" not "bomber" (probably wouldn't make a good bomber due to large radar cross section anyway) Anonymous seems to have an agenda against Boing in the way he presented his comments. Magazines such as Popular mechanics have been showing them for years as improved passenger aircraft forms. This is not new as the article puts forth. As Carl said BWB aircraft should be researched further.
"Blended Wing Bomber"
Nope. BWB stands for Blended Wing Body, and has nothing whatsoever to do with bombers (although there's no reason you couldn't design a bomber with a BWB).
Northrop's flying wings, including the XB-35, predated Handley Page by at least 30 years.
Thanks to all the aviation buffs for the comments. I used to keep semi-current with some airplane stuff, but that was years ago.
Mikey, due to the magic of centripetal acceleration and coordinated turns (that's an airplane thing), you wouldn't feel the aircraft bank at all, if it were flown properly.
And, nowadays, it's very easy to make planes fly properly. Heck, it's relatively straightforward to have them fly themselves properly.
Hey, Tim, have you heard of the B-2 Spirit? It has a blended wing-body design, and a radar cross section about the size of a really excited hummingbird.
Sparky,
Thanks for the link to Burnelli's planes. Very cool designs. My previous comment about trouble in flight referred to 'flying wings', actually. Do you know if his designs had intrinsic problems of any kind? I'm wondering if it required more power to get aloft or accelerate, or if there would be a severe problem if a heavy load were to shift to one side....
Surprised that Learjet or someone didn't latch on to the 'wide cabin' concept by now.
Carl,
Heavy loads shifting in flight will crash any cargo aircraft. That's certainly not a problem unique to wide-bodied aircraft.
Flying wings are not quite as inherently stable as conventional aircraft layouts, but that problem is relatively easy to solve with modern fly-by-wire systems. (Not that it's simple, but the problem is straightforward and well-understood).
The big problem is wingspan. The BWB design has to be pretty big in order to be practical. But, from a straight aircraft design perspective, it's got a lot going for it.
Carl -
The only intrinsic drawback I can think of with the Burnelli lifting body designs is pilot visibility. They would be much more 'survivable' in a crash since the engines and fuel are much further from the passengers than in a conventional design. Pity there isn't more about them on the web.
great help for my school paper about the furture of avaition.
there is one problem with this aircraft.If it is to hold 215 there is only two escape doors at the front so for 215 people to get out in an emergency wouldn't work. thanks for you time joel ivell
--
editor note: Wouldn't it be possible to add exits in the floor and roof (with ladders, retractable stairs, etc)?
Now I do like this design. I've always been a bit of a plane-buff, but recently, the environmental impact of planes has put somewhat of a downer on my hobby. I think the flying wing aircraft is a great idea, and any stability problems can be ironed out with computer technology. Whatever flaws it may have, surely it's green credentials will outweigh these. I like the design, it's even nicer than Concorde! It might be possible that only one pilot will be needed to fly it. i don't like the idea of planes flying themselves though, I guess I just find it more reassuring to know that there's a human at the controls and not artificial intelligence.
Russians had a lot of ideas for these kind of aircrafts, but after the fall of soviet union everything was stopped.
The sound control on this BWB is great but it will never be adapted to the BWB. The BWB is just too expensive to build with all the perfect curves that need to be manufactured separately.
Check this out.
Google Images, GB-888A. Compared to the tubes, this 1964 Burnelli design would be built in 1/2 the time, cost 1/2 or less (1/5 the BWB), use 1/2 or less the runway (takeoff/land @ 110 mph), carry more than twice the load using the same amount of fuel and easily cut your fares by 30 to 50%, and, above all save the lives of thousands of future flyers in survivable accidents.
Sure, the BWB could do most of this too except for the airfare. With the astronomical price tag and long production your airfare will only increase.
Also see, www.meridian-Int-res.com/Aeronautics/Burnelli_AIAA.pdf
and aircrash.org
Think Safe, Think Simple, Think Green!
I'm workin' on it.
it is awsome
this plane is awsome