TWAtwaTWA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 11661 times:
I recall seeing this image in a Popular Science magazine several years ago, when Boeing was dabbling with supersonic "flying wing" concepts, before the announcement of the DreamLiner 7E7 project.
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
TWAtwaTWA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 11570 times:
here is a site depicting the same plane in your image, Derek1876. The article compares it to the A380 in size and as a counter-attack to Airbus.
"Boeing is preparing a 1000 passenger jet that could reshape the Air travel industry for the next 100 years. The radical Blended Wing design has been developed by Boeing in cooperation with the NASA Langley Research Center."
Of course, this design has been left by the wayside as Boeing is developing the 787 and the 748.
[Edited 2006-06-25 06:32:53]
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
Bohlman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 11538 times:
I've seen that design thrown around for years, as I'm sure most people here have. While I can see them doing something like this for Y3 (on a smaller scale though), I'm fairly certain they will take care of finishing Y2 (which hasn't even been built yet!) and Y1 (which hasn't even begun public development yet!) before they even start considering further butchering their T7 lineups, and pre-emptively butchering their 787-10(11X?)/747-8 lineups.
Not to mention the fact that we've seen the somewhat lukewarm response the A380 has received, there's no reason Boeing would design like the blended wing, especially at a scale that even dwarfs the A380.
Derek1876 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 11429 times:
1000 passengers seems a bit much. Sounds like there is a lot of liability to be found there. Plus with 1000 passengers they would have to be positioned in a way that is not found in today's aircraft which would bring with it an entirely new set of challenges, example being passengers seated out from the longitudinal axis and having more bank angle than a passenger closer to that axis.
JAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1196 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9303 times:
I've seen this too along with a depiction of the cabin layout. The interior passenger cabin has virtually no windows! As a window fanatic (I've got to have a window seat) I would cry if this plane became the standard for aviation!
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11714 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 8556 times:
WSOY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 8298 times:
The same story was also syndicated to a Finnish "science" mag some years ago. I think I kept the issue just for the sake of a number of rediculous (supposedly) flying contraptions. Those fantasy flying barndoor trijets were also accompanied by a multiconfiguration rotating/fixed wing craft that defies all known design paradigms. The names of Boeing and some big American university were also dropped in the article to render an air of credibility.
The main problem with this design, what will happen when the aircraft turn? . If you seat at the window away from the centre, what do you think will happen? They still have to find the solution for this.
Theflcowboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 403 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4869 times:
I heard somewhere that the reason this hasnt been put into production yet is because of problems with pressurization. Typically, airliners assume a circular shape under pressure but the blended wing brought about problems with this.
TWAtwaTWA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2719 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10): Quoting Baexecutive (Reply 8):
Is that Edinburgh in the background?
Nope, its Seattle Embarrassment
Looks like the "future" will also have many non-functional "needle" towers with revolving viewing decks.
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
WSOY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2595 times:
Here's a version that realistically could fly. The body has to be airfoil-shaped, a wing in other words, unlike in the one pictured above. That again will limit the shape of the room for the occupants, but in this age of composites, a solution would be found.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2439 times:
What we will likely see are fuselages that blend more effectivly into the lift-providing airfoil. Think about the B2 bomber, it has a fuselage, but its very effectivly blended to minimize drag and radar return.
Some sort of hybrid would also allow for effective "stretch" models to provide incremental capacity growth.
TWAtwaTWA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2364 times:
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 19): What we will likely see are fuselages that blend more effectivly into the lift-providing airfoil. Think about the B2 bomber, it has a fuselage, but its very effectivly blended to minimize drag and radar return.
Some sort of hybrid would also allow for effective "stretch" models to provide incremental capacity growth.
Good thought.
The hybrid option will also minimize the discomfort of passengers seated further from the center of the plane, as described...
Quoting Derek1876 (Reply 4): passengers seated out from the longitudinal axis and having more bank angle than a passenger closer to that axis.
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 11 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 789 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 653 posts, 
From Norway, joined May 2005, 93 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Malaysia, joined Jun 2006, 33 posts, 
. If you seat at the window away from the centre, what do you think will happen? They still have to find the solution for this.
From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 702 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
