PDA

View Full Version : New Boeing "Flying Wing" to Seat 800


The Guvnor
11th Feb 2001, 14:40
From today's Sunday Times...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2"> Boeing's 800-seater 'flying wing'
prepares for take-off

James Clark




IT looks like the sort of
creation that could have
graced Gerry Anderson's
Thunderbirds show on
1960s television. Yet this
vision of the future could be
the way we all fly in just 10
years' time, according to
Boeing.

The plane maker is consulting focus groups in America to see
if the public would board the revolutionary "flying wing". If they
are keen, the company expects a prototype of the 800-seater
giant, twice the size of a jumbo jet, to be flying within three
years.

Known as a blended wing-body aircraft, or BWB, because of
the way the wings and body taper at the same angle - a design
that is currently unique to military fast jets - it will be much
faster and more economical than current passenger aircraft.

If passengers can be persuaded to sit in what amounts to the
wings of the craft, the first thing they will notice will be that
there are virtually no windows. Instead they will see a view of
the outside world on video screens in the back of the seat in
front of them.

The BWB would not have a traditional fuselage or tail fin,
instead using fins on the wing-tips for rudder control and
gaining power from three massive jet engines mounted at the
rear of the body between the wings.

Passengers would be seated on two decks, with window seats
so rare that they would become one of the most exclusive
ways to fly.

Although the flying wing design is not new - it was invented in
the 1920s by Jack Northrop - it has never been used in civilian
aircraft. It has been most famously deployed in the US Air
Force's B-2 stealth bomber.

The plane would fly at the same height and speed as a
standard jumbo jet, but would use just three quarters of the fuel
load and be far quieter.

Boeing confirmed that it was experimenting with the new
design. A 17ft model built at Stanford University first flew four
years ago, and a second model, this time one quarter of the full
size, is now being built at the company's Long Beach plant in
California.

"It looks different, but it isn't that much different from the B-2,
and we know that works," said Robert Liebeck, a Boeing
engineer working on the project. He said that Boeing could see
the aircraft as a rival to the other planned passenger giant, the
double-decker Airbus A-380.

Allen Mulally, head of commercial aircraft design at Boeing,
conceded that there were safety problems to deal with, such as
how the aircraft might pull out of a stall, a crisis in which there
is not enough lift beneath the wings to keep it flying.

Airbus, which rejected BWB designs, was certain that the
plane would fail. A spokesman questioned how such a large
cabin area could be pressurised, how passengers would
escape in an emergency and suggested that BWB designs
were aerodynamically unstable - a problem that troubles the
stealth bomber, even though it is less than a tenth the size of
the planned Boeing superjet. </font>

http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2001/02/11/STN11superjet.200x130.gif

JBravo
11th Feb 2001, 23:17
Looks like Boeing is clawing on to a straw to not fall behind Airbus. The biggest problem for this aircraft is to get all those people out of it in time, in case of an evac. I wonder how they are going to do that. Even for the more "conventional" A380 it is a problem! Let alone this monstrousity...

Juliet November
12th Feb 2001, 00:03
And imagine the problems on the ground ... "XX123 your parking is stands 30 thru 34"

Nope, this machine is stillborn and probably just a fancy move on Boeings part to keep the public focused on their products. I sincerly can't see any airline getting seriously involved flying SLF's around in something like this.

Some time ago Tcas Climb started a thread urging Boeing to get their act together in order to catch up with Airbus. Knowing the power of pprune they've probably read that thread and acted accordingly. However, in that same thread ppruners throughly dismissed the idea on various grounds.

Maybe for cargo operations, but that's it.

[This message has been edited by Juliet November (edited 11 February 2001).]

747FOCAL
12th Feb 2001, 00:45
You could use it as a cargo airplane only. Passengers don't like to drop or rise 40 50 feet in a bank turn.

GJB
12th Feb 2001, 14:49
This design was proposed years ago. It is an unstable design and requires FBW to control it. Looks impressive, but is impractical. It strikes me as a pretty vain effort by Boeing to grasp the imagination of the public. They haven't come up with much since the launch of the A380.

stab trim
12th Feb 2001, 19:25
A bit more on this subject:

http://www.199.97.97.163/IMDS%AEROWORLD%read%/home/content/users/imds/feeds/sptimes/2001/02/10/eng-sptimes_index/eng-sptimes_index_070857_236_261600351427

Ceppo
14th Feb 2001, 15:40
Superb idea but not yet realistic unfortunately.

FOR
More lift
Less drag
Quieter
Less fuel used
Many pax
Good resistance in the event of a crash
Engines on top so no debris will enter

AGAINST
Evac would be tough
Flying wings are INHERENTLY (read inherently) unstable...but they CAN be stabilised
Engines on the top at the rear so they arne't exposed to clean air like conventional engines
Bad longitudinal stability
Pax would have very few windows
Pax sitting at the sides would experience a seriously sickening oscillatory motion
Pressurisation would be tough
Even at low angles of attack, the engines would be starved of air leading to bad performance and in some cases compressor stall.
It's too big to park.
Variants would not exist, and even if they did they would have to be redesigned aerodynamically which would be expensive.

Naaah not for a few years

gaunty
14th Feb 2001, 18:11
Doesn't look like anything I'd be comfortable getting into.

Anybody that can show me a bird that looks like that, I might change my mind