Flying V blended wing concept model flown
 

KLM and Airbus are onboard backing the project, see

https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospa...139999.article

Would roll rates be an issue for pax in the outboard?


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....136ac79fff.jpg

Not to mention the possibly of upsetting the drinks trolley. What could possibly go wrong?

Kidding aside, I think you've hit upon a possible problem with the Flying V configuration. I guess roll rates could be severely limited via software, but what effect would that have on the overall controllability of the aircraft?

Cheers,
Grog

No problem. There is a system available that lowers the nose of an aircraft somewhere at the west coast.

Boeing has been looking at a blended wing-body concept for years - apparently there is a significant drag reduction relative to the conventional wing/tube layout. However Boeing was mainly looking it as a military freighter - at least for the initial implementation. Once all the problems and details were worked out, there were thoughts that it might find its way into the commercial arena.
Granted, they were saying the same thing about the tilt-rotor V-22...

I think we had some discussions last year when KLM and Airbus announced the project with sketches. Interesting to see a model flying - although I wish they had included the "rough landing."

Let's see. A flying wing that is also a slender-delta wing that is also a cranked-delta wing that is also a tailess delta that also has a big chunk missing out of the trailing edge.

Rather a mash-up of a B2 with a Concorde and a Draken - with a little Antoni Gaudi thrown in for the interior design....

I won't say "what could go wrong?" But it must have the pitch dynamics of an amphetamine-laced flying squirrel.

Anyway, I wish them well. Certainly inventive. Some design ideas explicated here: https://www.tudelft.nl/en/ae/flying-v/cabin/

I'm a complete novice, but presumably this is an example of an unstable design that require totally on computers and redundant aerodynamic controls to keep it in the sky. Given the reliability of computers and modern engineering this should be very safe once perfected but we all know that software can take time to perfect. The Max shows what happens when something goes wrong but as we are talking about a completed new design certification levels will be much higher. The question is what happens in extreme conditions. Can pilots fly it in direct law? Might airlines want to operate as an all freighter for a few months whilst passengers (and some crews) gain confidence?

Excluding concorde it must be the most radical design since the jet age started.

I guess the pax can press their face on these windows as a backup de-ice system.

Interesting to see what happens if a window pops out or in.

I recall the Mirage with its delta wing needed a very high rate of knots to glide to overcome the delta wing drag. Generally, gliding was only done during dead-stick practice (the figures are incredible) and normal approach required more than normal fuel burn to motor in than other non-delta wing craft.

Remember the Sonic Cruiser?
With lots of planes the stretched version is the best (sometimes only) version to enter service.
How to do that ?

Dealing with icing conditions might be problematical.

Also......“Captain, the bloke in seat A, row thirty two has just had a bird strike”.

I hate to say it, but it looks like a daydream

Aerodynamically, it will work, there have been more flying wing designs, that operated well enough (for their mission), and modern technology will certainly help in new areas. The problem with non-fuselage aircraft is the survivable crash landing and the 90 seconds certification rule for evacuation. In that case, the wing leading edge may become distorted and the doors may not open. So other means of evacuation exits must be conceived. Jettisonable trailing edges?

Ah yes. Once again the flying wing. I have no doubt that in this day of artifiial stability and fly-by-wire control it can be made to fly. However, as washout says in post #13 is, how do the people in the middle get out in a crash? We have enough problems complying with the "90 second rule" in a tube with a few holes in the sides. How do you do it in a movie theater configuration?
If you want to see a preious try on this concept, go to the New England Ait Museum and see the Burnelli transport of the 1940's being restored. It will give you a feel for the problem.
Incidentally, I saw it when it was being prepped for an Arctic exploration at Teteboro Airport in New Jersey back in the forties. Quite a surprise to see it again at the museum.

Composite structure makes that less of an issue than with more conventional aluminum. The other noted issues with passengers - not so much.
Which is why Boeing was looking at is mainly as a freighter.

Looking at other photos of it, it is more of a two-fuselage aircraft than a non-fuselage, so this may not be as much of a problem as it at first seems, departure from the "trailing edge" looks entirely possible. There are two large engines in the vicinity, but then we manage that with existing overwing exits. Crash survivabilty may still be an issue - I think a V would tend to stop a lot harder than single conventional fuselage. Be interesting to know where those engines are going to go in a hard stop too, engine cores tend to go through pretty much anything that's in the way, and it looks awfully like the fuselages may be in the way...

Make it a double decker (no cargo underneath, therefore no increase in fuselage height), maintain 3 abreast, no passengers in the middle. Put cargo in the middle of the wing instead. Sorted.

Some one taught me almost anything placed under a certain angle provides lift. Disadvantages of this design seem evident. It looks heavy, cargo seems impractical, staggered aisle probably inefficient, streched versions, etc, etc. Nice for experimentation though.