Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2206 times:
- Scramjets - LHR-SYD in under 2 hours if you want to go fast, and for very fast (and very expensive) cargo
- Blended Wing Bodies if you want to go cheaply, and for fast cargo
- Transport blimps will somewhat replace cargo ships and heavier than air airfreight
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Airgeek12 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2174 times:
Yea I agree with BestWestern...
Don't we already have/HAD those we just don't like them!?
- Scramjets - a.k.a. CONCORDE- we apparently hated it so we got rid of it
- Blended Wing Bodies- How obvious.
- Transport blimps- we have those- we didn't like using them for cargo- so we put some cameras and news reporters in there and decided that went much better.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2166 times:
Scramjets - a.k.a. CONCORDE- we apparently hated it so we got rid of it
- Concorde was NOT a scramjet. It was a turbojet powered aircraft. There is a huge difference. Also it didn't go suborbital. It flew higher and faster but was otherwise rather close to subsonics in many ways.
- BWB - Well it is a rather efficient way of building an aircraft, at least in theory. It's just that we are pretty far down the tube with wings path, so it may take a while to find another way.
- Transport blimps. You laugh but there are several development projects now. First to make it viable wins. No runways, so ideal for outsize cargoes directly to the destination or close to it, not to the airport.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2161 times:
Re: "and heavier than air airfreight"
I think you'll find most freight is heavier than air
I think airships will take a bigger role as speed becomes the "premium" product and you pay less if you travel slower. They have abilities that normal aircraft don't have, like not actually needing airports. I think a cruise-airship a la Hindenberg (but without the hydrogen) would make a fortune.
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5977 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2143 times:
There have been announcements of new transport blimps yearly for the past 20 years. Somehow not one of them shows up in commercial service. I expect this to continue for another 20 years.
These rank right there with the personal aircraft in everyones garage.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2143 times:
There have been announcements of new transport blimps yearly for the past 20 years. Somehow not one of them shows up in commercial service. I expect this to continue for another 20 years.
These rank right there with the personal aircraft in everyones garage.
I agree that progress has been less than speedy, but it's all about how much pain customers are in with current methods. If oil prices rise more, or someone wants to develop lots of oilfields in Siberia fast, or something like that, demand will increase and so will investment.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
SmithAir747 From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1599 posts, RR: 33 Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2042 times:
In 100 years, technology will have advanced so far that there will be no need for traditional aircraft or other such means for long-distance travel. Let me explain my hypothesis (based on my observations of how technology has been accelerating at an exponential pace):
At the exponential rate technology has been developing in the last 50 years, look for a breakthrough in 100 years for some form of teleportation. It could be either "matter-energy conversion" type, or it could be some form of interdimensional travel. In fact, I read in a recent science news article that scientists were able to teleport a single atom from one location to another instantaneously (I can't remember right now the citation). However, to be able to "beam" a larger object (eg. a person) from one place to another (ergo Star Trek) it would require an almost infinite amount of energy (and infinite computer memory) to transport all those zillions of atoms by matter-energy conversion.
A more feasible method would be to "warp" space-time so that a person, stepping into a specially designed portal, would reappear at another portal at his destination half a world away. Providing scientists would discover how to warp space-time, it would be a much more efficient way of transporting someone somewhere. These interdimensional portals would be placed in every major city worldwide, forming an efficient global network of interdimensional gateways. This would be much more feasible, and energy-efficient, than Star Trek-style "beaming". Who knows what fare structure would exist by then? Look for such technology to totally replace airline travel (and airports) in 100 years' time. Also, there may be no computer-based Internet by then (no PCs, either)--who knows, maybe we will have developed T-Mail (Telepathic Mail) and a common global bioneural Internet with our brains being the "computers" receiving and sharing T-mail and websites (like a shared hive consciousness)!
Boeing 747s, A380s, 7E7s, and future Boeing/Airbus planes will all have ended up in museums or in scrap yards long before then! (Will this be the end of planespotting, A.net, and our hobby as we know it?) Hopefully, these lovely artifacts would have been preserved for future generations (and enthusiasts) by then, like steam trains have been preserved for today's enthusiasts.
It does no harm to speculate (based on our exponentially evolving technology)!
SmithAir747
I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made... (Psalm 139:14)
Aither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 789 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 1998 times:
About the scramjet :
Information gained from Tuesday's record-setting flight of NASA's Hyper-X research vehicle will be used by Boeing [NYSE: BA] as it designs the future of flight.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15521
JetBlast From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1198 posts, RR: 11 Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 1981 times:
100 years from now I can imagine myself being buried under the approach to 33L with an A340 flying over me....
Flyboy1980 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2003, 253 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 1941 times:
Erikwilliam - why is this post a joke? What's wrong with hypothesising whatthe future may be like?
SmithAir747 - I think it was more than a single atom, I heard on a news report they had managed to teleport a laser beam.
I guess for the next 30 - 40 years (within a lot of A.net users lifespans) the big problem will be what to pump into a/c tanks once all the petroleum has been used up.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1916 times:
The problem with teleportation may not be the actual transportation bit. If you think about it the easiest way to do it is not to transport the actual matter, but to deconstitute the matter and reconstitute it somewhere else from spare material.
But then you get into the whole problem of computing power. And how to scan the body (or whatever you want to transport). And how do you rebuild it?
Anyway I think that teleportation, while a nice concept, lies more than 100 years from now.
And for all of you who think this thread is a joke, crawl back to your hollows. It's the dreamers that make our world go forward. Not the people who keep saying "it can't be done!". If everyone said that we would still be arguing about whether we should climb down from the trees.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, RR: 55 Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1913 times:
In 100 years time we will fly on Boing 737NNNGs.
The major difference will be new CFM56-9 engines which run on methanol produced from corn. Also the landing gear will be 2 inches higher allowing a round engine intake.
Inside the airplane a major redesign will in 2104 be 90 years old. Seats will have become non-inclineable for the comfort of the passenger behind you.
Also from 95 years earlier we will enjoy a much wider selection of high quality catering which we pull from machines and pay with credit card in the terminal or near the gate.
Also in 100 years the A380 production line will close down after 5,000 planes have been built. 4,000 still serviceable, but 1,000 mostly 60-80 years old A380s are parked in the desert because of tarffic decline due to decrease in world population.
Not one single NW DC-9 thread has been noticed on a.net for fifty years.
And LHR terminal 5 will have opened.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
Don't forget that tailstrikes will happen all the time to all those stretched A380-950s
The 7777 will be powered by one enormous engine sitting on top of the fuse.
Martinair will, once again, renew it's lively.
A.nutters will discuss whether Alitalia, Iberia and American should change their livery, and how much money AA saves from not painting the frigging planes.
Winglets will have been banned from US airspace by President George W Bush VI because "they were obviously invented by the French"
The A349-700 will have really crappy takeoff and climb performance because it has 8 engines and is only certified to climb with no more than one engine out.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Dulleswatcher From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 41 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1887 times:
A technical subcommittee of the Indian Ministry of Civil Aviation will refer the Airbus A340-300 acquisition decision to a Ministry of Finance subcommittee for further review and deliberation of the fixed costs of restarting the mothballed production line. They will do this in order to avoid at all cost the dreaded prospect of updating the bid documents to seek acquisition of anything remotely modern, since that would waste decades of ponderous consideration by legions of bureaucrats and invalidate any and all prospective illegal kickbacks they may have secured over time.
Jaysit, on his deathbed, will call yet again for the only logical course of action: Air India's privatization.
AZjetgeek From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 235 posts, RR: 2 Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1868 times:
One hundred years from now, Boeing and Airbus will still be competitors. Some version of an SST/Concorde will be in operation. Airbus will find a way to build a jet that holds 800 people, thus reducing the number of flights airlines have to offer.
Southwest Airlines will fly the most up-to-date version of the 737, whatever that might be. They'll also be flying transcon routes within the U.S., but still no international service.
United will be emerging from its 12th trip into Ch 11. BA will own two-thirds of the overseas carriers; KLM will own the other third.
I happen to like this thread. It challenges the imagination.
Shankly From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 1472 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1866 times:
Topics on this forum 100 years from now:
NW denies DC-9 retirement plan
Will Concorde fly again?
SIA to dispose of A3500's in lieu Boeing 7777's
Who remembers United?
Whats Micheal O'Leary III playing at now?
Air Palestine announce Jerusalem Hub Expansion
Iraqi Airlines get 2nd 732
Why no other US airlines apart from Southwest?
BA waterbed, best business class seat?
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, RR: 55 Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1864 times:
Not only civil aviation will change a lot over the next 100 years, also military aviation.
All B-52Hs will have been re-designated B-52J since they have had all 8 HP turbine disks exchanged with new improved turbines - proving a 2% improved specific fuel consumption and reduced smoke emission. Following an 800 pages long report from the Pentagon B-52 committee stating that re-engining would be too expensive.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter - canceled in 2024 - will have been re-initiated as replacement for the now worn out Lockheed F-16G and F-16Hs built in the mid 21st century as compensation for the canceled F-35 program.
In Britain the last Canberra PR.9 will have retired years ago. The 2034 report about Nimrod MR.4 replacement will be shelved in 2084. Instead of a the report recommendation to replace the Nimrod MR.4 with a 737NNNG based platform a major rebuilding of the Nimrod MR.4 into MR.5 will be taking place - having run for 20 years - with first flight expected next year.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Where I clearly stated that we would be flying the most cost effective airliner in history made out of: toothpicks paper towel rolls peanut butter and super glue
There will be no need for gourmet meals we will have found a un ending supply of food in Soylent Green and FA's will be replaced by Oompa Loompa's
And yes we will still be talking about NW DC-9 because they will all be molded in to one aircraft with duct tape..
Oooh Oooh and that Secret Base under DEN will be found and actually be where all the baggage everyone lost is located
And the world will still be waiting for Boeing to decide what number they want in place of the E in the 7E7
JetBlast From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1198 posts, RR: 11 Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1827 times:
Boeing will finally come out with the new 747 they've been talking about!
Sponsor Message: 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2003, 253 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6431 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Ok most of you probably understood, but for the select few who didn't I meant "airfreight transported on heavier than air aircraft" 
...
From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 2152 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 1133 posts, 
From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 789 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 1472 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
