RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Came across these images while browsing the web, and I know they arent real and that the BWB project was discontinued in favour of other projects, but they certainly show 'what could have been'.
N328KF From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1707 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Thread starter): I know they arent real and that the BWB project was discontinued in favour of other projects
I think it's premature to characterize the BWB in that manner. It has always been regarded as a long-term research item, and it will clearly require more work. However, I wouldn't be surprised to see a BWB being pitched for tranche 2 or 3 of the KC-135 replacement order.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1693 times:
I've seen the design thrown around a lot. The problem with the design is the pax located in the wings will encounter a 30+ degree bank when the aircraft has to turn. Try standing and keeping your liquid in your cup during that turn, yeesh.
The actual design is solid, but that one problem when the aircraft banks has put a hamper on the design.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
N328KF From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1682 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 4): I've seen the design thrown around a lot. The problem with the design is the pax located in the wings will encounter a 30+ degree bank when the aircraft has to turn. Try standing and keeping your liquid in your cup during that turn, yeesh.
The actual design is solid, but that one problem when the aircraft banks has put a hamper on the design.
Yes, but now think of how much utility the military might find out of a BWB.
For a tanker or cargolifter, this wouldn't matter, and troops will complain but deal with it.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Phollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1670 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Thread starter): Came across these images while browsing the web, and I know they arent real and that the BWB project was discontinued in favour of other projects, but they certainly show 'what could have been'.
The project still floats around at Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA). However, you really cannot say it was dropped in favor of other projects because it was never really picked up. BCA will periodically update and reevaluate the concept. However, I suspect that the uncertainty of the benefits of the BWB are such that BCA does not, as of yet, feel that it is a compelling enough product to enter the commercial market.
Quoting N328KF (Reply 2): However, I wouldn't be surprised to see a BWB being pitched for tranche 2 or 3 of the KC-135 replacement order.
The only way you would see it as a KC-135 replacement is if the USAF was willing to fund the entire development. This just isn't going to happen for a KC-135 replacement only. If it is part of a much larger procurement then it might work.
Halibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1670 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 4): I've seen the design thrown around a lot. The problem with the design is the pax located in the wings will encounter a 30+ degree bank when the aircraft has to turn. Try standing and keeping your liquid in your cup during that turn, yeesh.
The actual design is solid, but that one problem when the aircraft banks has put a hamper on the design.
Agreed .
And less window seats , not that many want those seats . It is , however very intrigueing though ! What would be the approximate pax capasity be on this strange looking a/c ?
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1664 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 5): Yes, but now think of how much utility the military might find out of a BWB.
For a tanker or cargolifter, this wouldn't matter, and troops will complain but deal with it.
Now I didn't read anywhere about military application, but good point. It would be interesting to see in USAF or other air forces colors.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1647 times:
Quoting Halibut (Reply 7): And less window seats , not that many want those seats . It is , however very intrigueing though ! What would be the approximate pax capasity be on this strange looking a/c ?
The aircraft was quoted by Boeing to carry approximately 800 passengers in 3 class configuration. Its the approximate length of a 747 and as has a slightly larger wingspan than that of the 47, but the area of the wing is significantly larger, therefore carrying large amounts of cargo as well as passengers with outstanding lift (the whole aircraft is a flying wing.) Also, it was meant to be two decks, the top one for passengers and cargo on the slightly smaller bottom deck.
Estimated range was that of the 747 ADV, same cruise speed as well. This is from a show I watched way back on the Discovery Wings channel (now Military Channel.)
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
Phollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1642 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 4): I've seen the design thrown around a lot. The problem with the design is the pax located in the wings will encounter a 30+ degree bank when the aircraft has to turn. Try standing and keeping your liquid in your cup during that turn, yeesh.
The bank angle is the same no matter where you sit in reference to axis of rotation. So a 30 degree bank angle is the same for a BWB as it is for a conventional tube and wings. The problem with rolling in a BWB is that the the arc length increases with radius. This means that the velocities and accelerations will be higher toward the outer portion of the cabin. This produces the "fast-elevator" effect. You can feel this when sitting in the far aft cabin of a 767-400, 777-300, A340-600 or other very long aircraft at rotation. It is a little disconcerting, but much better than the side to side motion that you get when turning on the taxi-ways in these aircraft.
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
Quoting Phollingsworth (Reply 10): The bank angle is the same no matter where you sit in reference to axis of rotation. So a 30 degree bank angle is the same for a BWB as it is for a conventional tube and wings. The problem with rolling in a BWB is that the the arc length increases with radius. This means that the velocities and accelerations will be higher toward the outer portion of the cabin. This produces the "fast-elevator" effect. You can feel this when sitting in the far aft cabin of a 767-400, 777-300, A340-600 or other very long aircraft at rotation. It is a little disconcerting, but much better than the side to side motion that you get when turning on the taxi-ways in these aircraft.
I couldn't figure out exactly how to put that in laymans terms (brain running on mathematical calculations ATM), but you summed it up quite well. Thanks for that.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
AA54Heavy From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 189 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1607 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Thread starter): Came across these images while browsing the web, and I know they arent real and that the BWB project was discontinued in favour of other projects, but they certainly show 'what could have been'.
Quoting RichardPrice (Thread starter): I think it's premature to characterize the BWB in that manner. It has always been regarded as a long-term research item, and it will clearly require more work. However, I wouldn't be surprised to see a BWB being pitched for tranche 2 or 3 of the KC-135 replacement order.
Quoting Phollingsworth (Reply 6): However, I suspect that the uncertainty of the benefits of the BWB are such that BCA does not, as of yet, feel that it is a compelling enough product to enter the commercial market.
For what its worth (I'm not working at Boeing or anything), about 1 week ago a gentleman from Boeing Long Beach made a presentation to my department (Aero/Mech Engr at Univ of Arizona) regarding this specific project. It was indeed MCD's project initially, and Stanford made a small flying model of the BWB and I guess has been regarded as the last MCD to ever fly, as it flew 6 days before Boeing took over.....
According to this guy, the project is very much active and they are working with Stanford to build a bigger flying model with actual jet engines that will be flown in 2006 (was originally 2004, but pushed back).
He promised a theoretical fuel savings of roughly a 1/3 over the Airbus A380. Also, they have done evacuation studies of the passengers and apparently has been regarded by a few experts as the most evacuable aircraft they've seen.
He also mentioned all of the different variations that could be used (ie military bomber, tanker, airliner, etc.)....one thing was that as a tanker, there would be not much need for major modifications since there is plenty of space within the wing for all the fuel you'd ever need and they could add booms on the tips of the wings (since the wing structure is stronger than normal tube and wing airplanes)....
I am trying to remember more of what was presented....I am on the mechanical side of things, not aerospace, so alot of what was presented was a bit foreign to me
AA54Heavy From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 189 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1583 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 9): The aircraft was quoted by Boeing to carry approximately 800 passengers in 3 class configuration.
The guy who presented also mentioned that they could easily have differnt models that ranged from like 300/400 passengers up to 800 passengers. He showed scematics of the modular design and they have sections to add (making the bwb slightly wider for adding more passengers)
He should many researcfh studies on all the configurations and mentioned that one cruising at MAch .92 would potentially be the most efficient use of the BWB.
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 8): Now I didn't read anywhere about military application, but good point. It would be interesting to see in USAF or other air forces colors.
In the presentation he presented renderings of bombers and tankers which were really cool, I wish I had a copy of the presentation to show you guys.
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1528 times:
Did a quick search in google to come up with some of this info, including a detailed PDF of the BWB:
AeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1601 posts, RR: 52 Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1488 times:
Quoting AA54Heavy (Reply 12): For what its worth (I'm not working at Boeing or anything), about 1 week ago a gentleman from Boeing Long Beach made a presentation to my department (Aero/Mech Engr at Univ of Arizona) regarding this specific project.
AA54Heavy From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 189 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1410 times:
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, RR: 80 Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1266 times:
AA54Heavy is correct, still a Boeing interest here, Cranfield University in the UK are doing BWB concept work for Boeing now, or were very recently.
Perhaps if fossil fuels are, or are forced to be started to be replaced, a decade or two hence, could that be the BWB's moment?
At least on large long haulers, the worst polluters, I'm thinking here of issues around hydrogen storage.
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4181 posts, RR: 30 Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1226 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 4): The actual design is solid, but that one problem when the aircraft banks has put a hamper on the design.
I've never heard that as being a problem (but I'm not saying you're wrong, either). In fact, the only issues I've ever read is that there might be issues surrounding the ease of designing and maintaining the pressure hull since it will be a non-standard shape and, of course, acceptance by the flying public since the design is so revolutionary.
Quoting Halibut (Reply 7): What would be the approximate pax capasity be on this strange looking a/c ?
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 9): The aircraft was quoted by Boeing to carry approximately 800 passengers in 3 class configuration.
Depending on the size of the various designs, I've read from 350 up to 1,000 pax.
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 9): Also, it was meant to be two decks, the top one for passengers and cargo on the slightly smaller bottom deck.
I had heard that cargo would actually be carried on either side of the passenger cabins, which would be positioned close to the centerline. But, I'm not saying you're wrong; perhaps there are multiple configurations under study. Certainly, if the passenger cabins were maintained in the center area, as opposed to spreading them out farther into the wing areas, it would eliminate the banking issue referred to by JakeOrion.
(Note: I refer to "cabins" - plural - because the designs I've seen reflect multiple cabins because of the enormous lateral volume inherent in the design.)
Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 14): You see, this is what the Airbus A380 should have been!
I think if/when Boeing ever takes the plunge into the VLA market this will be the design that they will go with. I doubt they will ever present a conventional airplane to compete with an existing conventional airplane (A380). Whatever they produce will have to be quite a leap beyond whatever Airbus already has, and especially given the maturity level that Airbus' design will have attained by the time Boeing enters the fray.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7695 posts, RR: 5 Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1212 times:
I think Boeing is looking at starting the BWB project probably around 2009-2010 not only as a passenger airliner, but also as a commercial freighter and a replacement for the C-5A Galaxy for the USAF. Imagine being able to fly almost the load capacity of the A380-800F but fly it non-stop between MEM and PEK/PVG non-stop in both directions year-round.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8492 posts, 
From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! 
, 6222 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 3707 posts, 
From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 668 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
