Blended-wing Airliner

Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will
Boeing ever build something like this? Or will they wait until Airbus
or Embraer or the Chinese or the Russians build one?


http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviatio...cbccdrcrd.html

Phil wrote:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will
Boeing ever build something like this? Or will they wait until Airbus
or Embraer or the Chinese or the Russians build one?


http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviatio...cbccdrcrd.html

Well, you can bet that all the Boeing
engineers would give their collective
left nuts for a 35% increase in fuel
efficiency.

OTOH, the design appears to be more of a
concept, and we all know how few concept
cars make it to production.

Loosing the cylindrical fuse is a huge
strength issue as the article pointed out.
No flapps and steep bank angle for landing
sounds sketchy to me. And the engines don't
appear to exist.

On Oct 17, 1:26 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Phil wrote:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will
Boeing ever build something like this? Or will they wait until Airbus
or Embraer or the Chinese or the Russians build one?

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviatio...0110vgnvcm1000...

Well, you can bet that all the Boeing
engineers would give their collective
left nuts for a 35% increase in fuel
efficiency.

OTOH, the design appears to be more of a
concept, and we all know how few concept
cars make it to production.

Loosing the cylindrical fuse is a huge
strength issue as the article pointed out.
No flapps and steep bank angle for landing
sounds sketchy to me. And the engines don't
appear to exist.

Ever seen a B2 bomber? They seem to manage OK.

"Jim Stewart" wrote in message
...
Phil wrote:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will
Boeing ever build something like this? Or will they wait until Airbus
or Embraer or the Chinese or the Russians build one?


http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviatio...cbccdrcrd.html

Well, you can bet that all the Boeing
engineers would give their collective
left nuts for a 35% increase in fuel
efficiency.



Gee - it should be easy to get a 35% improvement.

Just get congress to pass a law requiring it - That's supposed to be how it
works for the auto industry - right?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:55:55 -0700, Phil wrote
in . com:

Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets.

With petroleum at record high prices, by the time someone brought this
design to market, the tickets would cost more not less. :-(

On Oct 17, 1:32 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:55:55 -0700, Phil wrote
in . com:

Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets.

With petroleum at record high prices, by the time someone brought this
design to market, the tickets would cost more not less. :-(

Yeah, and it's only likely to keep going up. Of course, that's all
the more reason to build something that is more fuel efficient.

Phil wrote:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will
Boeing ever build something like this? Or will they wait until Airbus
or Embraer or the Chinese or the Russians build one?


http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviatio...cbccdrcrd.html

That website really ought to be called popscifi.com.

In a previous article, Phil said:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will

So only one person out of 40 gets a window seat? I can't see that being
very popular.




--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
I am not a vegetarian because I love animals; I am a vegetarian
because I hate plants. -- A. Whitney Brown

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:24:32 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

In a previous article, Phil said:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will

So only one person out of 40 gets a window seat? I can't see that being
very popular.

40 Hommes 8 Chevals. It's starting to make sense.

Don

Recently, Paul Tomblin posted:

In a previous article, Phil said:
Thirty Five percent more fuel efficient. That would translate into
less expensive tickets. And just a fraction of the noise. But will

So only one person out of 40 gets a window seat? I can't see that
being very popular.

That ratio isn't all that different from today's aircraft, is it?

Neil