Airbus MAVERIC, blended wing body aircraft demonstrator
I wouldnt mine no window, if there was a forward looking cockpit window cam hooked up to the inseat screen that was active the whole flight including ground movements and take off/landing.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a serious question, from someone who knows they don't know: how much information is gained from building an RC model of such small size, over what can be gained from wind tunnel tests and computation?
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Southern Hemisphere
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consider the possibility of making the skin of the aircraft invisible to passengers, using either internal screens, or glasses hooked up to a multitude of external cameras. The glasses might be a better idea, considering that some passengers will prefer a nice, dark and non-threatening environment.
Never mind the lack of windows, I cannot see where the underbelly cargo and pax bags are going to be loaded and unloaded. There also seems to be limited opportunity to have more than one door for passenger embarkation and disembarkation.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Just south of the Keevil gap.
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like your thinking Capn P.
If you could have separate pre-fuellable/loadable pods for consumables and payload it could make turnarounds quick. And an inflight jettison switch for the pax pod (with a parachute of course, we're not monsters) - behave or else.......bwahahahahaaaa.
If you could have separate pre-fuellable/loadable pods for consumables and payload it could make turnarounds quick. And an inflight jettison switch for the pax pod (with a parachute of course, we're not monsters) - behave or else.......bwahahahahaaaa.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If aviation is going to pull its weight in terms of reducing carbon emissions (or keeping them the same with growth in traffic) then these are types of aircraft designs that will be required. And its not just the aircraft shape/form, it also allows new engine architectures such as open-rotor designs to be used. Only by combining all these aspects together will you get step changes in efficiency.
What you airline chaps need is a system pioneered in the helicopter world, in line with Cpt. P's suggestion. detatchable, so it could double as the lounge at the gate and rolled out already loaded to the aircraft, economy introduced as well by getting rid of the bus transit from lounge to aircraft at those airports that use that system.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking on this picture I wonder why Airbus have decided to make an observation deck looking like a cockpit from outside? First class or observation deck will be totally fine with LCD screens imitating the front view, no need for extra structural items and expensive front windows...
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Isle Dordt
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understood it was a "control demonstrator", that means that the goal is to demonstrate that this shape of plane can be controlled in flight, can take-of and land safely and such. Wind tunnel tests are too static for that and a full dynamic simulation requires huge amounts of cpu-time.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus PR
Wasn’t this very layout pioneered by the Me 262 already?
He means the -262 was the first of what became the conventional layout that we fly today. The -163 was most like the Maveric, and yes, every seat was a window seat.