Skip to main content

View Diary: Air-Minded: the C-130 Replacement that Wasn't (114 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Very interesting concept, will it become reality? (5+ / 0-)

    The lift, capacity, efficiency, and design layout are very promising.  To make something like this haul cargo, you just hinge the fuselage right behind the cockpit if I'm not mistaken.  Doesn't seem like a big deal in an era of fly-by-wire aircraft.  While the concept looks solid, I wonder if global economics will prevent it from ever becoming reality.

    "Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property. Corporate personhood is the legal fiction that property is a person." David Korten, When Corporations Rule the World

    by Delta Overdue on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 09:01:44 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Probably not (3+ / 0-)

      Blended flying wings have been around since the 1930s (e.g., Burnelli UB-14), but because of the blended wing and fuselage they're more expensive to build.

      While the market might be changing, it also seems that airlines don't like them because it's hard to change the configuration of a blended wing plane. With a typical "tube" fuselage it's easier to widen or lengthen it for various purposes. With a blended wing not so much.

      •  They also tend to have (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Delta Overdue, DaveinBremerton

        some nasty flight characteristics that make them much less likely to see commercial service (can't even imagine what a cross-wind approach would be like in one of those).  And as for efficiency, I would imagine that they would be very efficient from a thrust to payload ratio perspective, but the concepts in the photo would appear to be extremely high drag to me.  Probably ok when you are carrying a couple of M1's, not so much when filled with wrinklies headed for Ft. Myers were every gallon counts.

        •  Airfoil through the thick section pretty optimized (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PeterHug, IreGyre, Roger Fox

          There's weight savings in that the structure that carries the payload and pressurization loads is the same structure that carries wing bending loads. Supposedly it's a ~25% fuel efficiency gain over a comparable tube-and-wings airliner.

          Search for "blended wing-body" for more. Still an active NASA project. Doubt Boeing will build it because it's ~$6B invested before they see a dime back and because it was originally a McDonnell Douglas design from before Boeing bought the company.

          Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

          by Simplify on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 08:55:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  With less pure vertical surfaces (0+ / 0-)

          a cross wind should have less grip on the shape..?

          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 03:29:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Boeing claimed to have solved expandability (0+ / 0-)

        by making a larger version be the same as a smaller version only with a center section insert.

        Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

        by Simplify on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 09:00:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So whats Yellowstone? (0+ / 0-)

          Yellowstone is divided into three projects:

              Boeing Y1, to replace the Boeing 737 product line. Y1 covers the 100- to 200-passenger market, and is expected to be the second Yellowstone Project aircraft to be developed. If launched, it will compete with the Bombardier CSeries and the planned Airbus NSR family.
              Boeing Y2, to replace the Boeing 767 product line. It may also replace the 777-200. Y2 initially referred to the highly efficient, more conventional, baseline aircraft for the Sonic Cruiser, which was project "Glacier".[3] It has now been built as the 787 and covers the 220- to 320-passenger market. It will compete with the Airbus A330, A340 and later A350 families.
              Boeing Y3, to replace the 777-300 and 747 product lines. Y3 covers the 300-400+ passenger market, and is expected to be the third Yellowstone Project aircraft to be developed. It will compete with the Airbus A380 family as well as the largest model of the A350 family, the A350-1000, which will be introduced in 2015.

          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 03:23:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  For cargo (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Delta Overdue, DaveinBremerton

      If another large cargo carrier is ever designed clean-sheet the blended-wing body (BWB) will be a strong candidate based on potential efficiency gains and large cargo space.   But it is not likely to be used for passenger service due to likely passenger discomfort for anyone seated out by the edges; that far from the roll axis the roller-coaster effect would be very noticeable during turns.

      sPh

      •  Passenger comfort studies supposedly OK (0+ / 0-)

        Only downside for cargo is that it couldn't be one cavernous bay — it needs internal ribs to handle the pressurization load, so the bay would be divided into sections. Dunno whether they looked at an unpressurized bay possibility.

        Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

        by Simplify on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 08:58:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  fuel in wings, passengers are still within (0+ / 0-)

        same area, little or no dif.

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 03:21:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  See Yellowstone project (0+ / 0-)

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 03:14:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site