Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeings - New Flying Wing Jumbo  
User currently offlineN768DH From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 23 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2055 times:

hello I just found out that boeing has given the green light to make the next Super jumbo. as you might all ready know it's called ( BWB ) I've listed two websites to where you can learn more about Boeing new super flying wing jumbo.

http://members.home.net/rebid/bldwing.htm

http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/BWB.html

this is the aircraft that will be going head to head with Airbus new A3xxxx aircraft



27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWidebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

So basically, Boeing have decided to go ahead with this design, despite the fact they have stated on their website that they don't see a need for more than 330 aircraft with 500 seats or more over the next 20 years........despite the fact they have slated Airbus for investing 12 billion to develop the A3XX, when a BLB design could cost many, many billions more to research and certify....despite the fact they have only last night updated their web page with new pictures and details of the 747X and 747 Stretch...............

Makes absolutely no sense to me.........either someone is having a laugh or Condit is taking too much medication........


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1892 times:

This is a design idea. We won't see this aircraft in the next 20 years or so. Imagine all the changes at the airports and so on, and so on.

BTW, Boeing really would have to fire the entire marketing department and hire the Airbus marketers  


Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineTeahan From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 5294 posts, RR: 61
Reply 3, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1867 times:

Gerardo, the BWB could still use existing runaways and taxiways. Here is a picture of it superimposed over the B747 400:



Jeremiah Teahan



Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
User currently offlineWatewate From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 2284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1857 times:

It's going to be a tough sell in the beginning. People are just too used to the conventional design. But if people start embracing it and the design offers significant advantages over the conventional design, it'll do fine.

User currently offlineDeltaAir From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1836 times:

The BWB is a design........not a specific aircraft. Boeing is developing several models from 100 Seats-800 Seats. Now look who has a family.

User currently offlineWorldTraveller From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 624 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

With a wingspan of approx. 100 meters, the BWB will occupy 2 parking positions.

It's wise to go ahead with such a design, but we won't see it flying for the next 15 years, that's for sure. It'll also cost a least $20 billion to develop and I doubt Boeing will risk that now (basically, they can't afford it right now).

Regards
the WorldTraveller


User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1823 times:

Maybe Boeing could ask the EU to fund the development...they seem to like doing that stuff for manufacturers...

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineBoeing747-400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

I don't think this is Boeing's certain answer to the A3XX. It is a design, and it will probably fly, but I think the 747X Stretch is closer to flying than it is. Who knows?

User currently offline#-B777-# From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1767 times:

The BBW will fly and if not in commercial aviation they will build it as a "super tanker" for the air force! Imagin the cargo volume! Read in Flug Revue earlier this year!

best regards, josef


User currently offlineP&M From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1757 times:

That would explain where the money comes from. Simillar to the 747 back in the sixties.

User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1567 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1719 times:

It will take the A3XX programme 15 years to break even if all goes well. Boeings long term strategy is becoming obvious.
When the A3XX is too far down the track to halt, and the money is spent, then my bet is that Boeing will launch this. In the interim Airbus will not have the resources to spend on other technologies, and European aerospace will be a generation behind.
I know it sounds paradoxically wrong, but the best thing for Europe is to NOT launch the A3XX, and instead develop it's existing families, and wait for the next technology breakthrough ie BWB.
My 2 cents worth.
Ruscoe


User currently offlineWidebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1705 times:

15 years? Pulled out of thin air I think.....Airbuses profitability is sales based, not time.....370 aircraft for it not to be a financial disaster, 564 aircraft to be happy with it......Boeing have predicted the need for 330 aircraft with over 500 seats over the next 20 years.....why are they even bothering talking about the market, when they have already expressed their lack of interest in it.....as far as technologies go, I don't get your point....the A3XX will be the most technologically advanced when it flies, the BWB will be when it flies and so on down the line.....it'e the way evolution proceeds......if we all waited for technology, then we'd have got nowhere......gravity generators could be around the corner another 15 years after the BWB, but you won't see airlines holding off for them.........

....what I find interesting though as you said is the Boeing stategy....clearly, they have changed their tune and believe there will be a market for a VLA........unfortunately though, while deciding, the A3xx has, and is going to eat up a sizable portion of the market.....what I'd wonder is if the A3XX will have eaten up such a portion of the market that the BWB will have so to speak been too much too late......

........don't forget the A3XX is the start of a range of aircraft.......with cockpit commonality all the way up along the line.....the 747X/Stretch and the BWB will have absolutely nothing in common.....so the choice will be between a single type rating for your 500-1000 seater fleet, or two completely different aircraft, that probably won't even have the same flying/handling characteristics by the nature of the design, coupled with the fact that the A3XX will have had a 10-15 year old lead........you talk about new technology, as far as I'm concerned, if the BWB was any good, this type of design would have been introduced many years ago.......as well as this, we've all seen the 737 improvements in technology over years, how about an A3XXNG?

I see where you're coming from about the Boeing policy, and a few years ago, it probably may have been the right choice, but to be honest, Beoing's actions recently have semed a little jittery, and I'm beginning to sense some worry in the Boeing camp......



User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1701 times:

While the Blended-Wing Body (BWB) design has a lot of advantages over conventional airliners, there are some issues we need to resolve:

1. Will passengers accept such a weird design with very few windows to look out from? (Mind you, that can be compensated by giving every passenger a PTV display.)

2. What kind of jetwalk design will we need to accommodate the BWB? You certainly can't use the jetwalks now used by Boeing 747-400's.

3. How do you load and unload baggage and cargo on this plane?

One potential worry is that the very large wingspan of BWB may cause problems with ground handling at many airports. Mind you, this is relatively easy to solve; have the wingtips fold up during ground operations so the wingspan will be the same as today's 744's, so the only time the wings are fully extended is during takeoff, flight and landing.


User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1690 times:

We'll see if this flying wing gets made now or not. Probably by somebody. As early as the 1950's Northrop actually filmed a commercial to get the public used to a flying wing; showing the stewardess, happy passengers etc... this at just about the time the 707 and Comet were brand NEW!!! A series of crashes (some mysterious) of the military prototypes, combined with politics, killed any hopes. But the basic idea, if not for circumstance and chance could have been explored long ago. By the time Boeing, Airbus, the combination or anyone else gets involved, this thing could be half space plane utilizing the upper atmosphere etc.

User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1567 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

The A3XX may be the most techologically advanced concept of current technology, but the BWB concept can leapfrog this. This is the problem for Airbus.

IMHO Boeing do believe there is a market for Super Jumbo's and they are positioning themselves very skillfully to do major damage to their main rival.

By using current albeit advanced current technology Airbus are leaving themselves severely exposed to the risk that a competitor will introduce a generational change.

Further we know that NASA and Boeing are both working on this.

AS far as using current gates is concerned, the drawings and models I have seen, have a forward fuselage not unlike the current 747, so I don't percieve a problem.

The BWB will also be substantially shorter than to-days large aircraft, and as Ray states the wings can fold.

With 3 big GE 115's sucking air over the top of the fuselage it may be possible to get acceptable field performance without using expensive and heavy high lift devices.

I speculate that Boeing will build this in conjunction with one or two major partners, one American and the other Japanese.

Ruscoe


User currently offlineWorldTraveller From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 624 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1667 times:

If Boeing goes ahead with the BWB they won't develop a NLA like the A3XX, that's for sure.

This would mean the A3XX will have a monopoly for around 15 years, like the B744 and will be VERY profitable for Airbus.

BTW, Airbus has BWB concepts on the drawing board, too.

BWB will be the future, but don't forget that we won't see such a plane till 2015 at least!

Regards
the WorldTraveller

P.S. If NASA also is working on a BWB, and Boeing might be asked to develop a BWB tanker for the USAF first, we know where the money comes from.....right from the US goverment!  


User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10747 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

I doubt passengers will like it. Screens a not windows. And airports won´t like it too should it be built as a 500 pax-bat. So I don´t give it to many chances especially in the Jumbo-size market. The Northrop project about 50 years ago was a big failure too (very instable in flight). And how will you evacuate such a thing?

User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1654 times:


The BWB concept was looked at seriously when Boeing and Airbus were developing an NLA jointly (difficult to imagine those days now!). AFAIK after that Boeing and Airbus (separately now) looked at doing a BWB in cooperation with the Russians, but eventually Boeing wound up with 747x and Airbus with A3xx - BWB apparently does not have much of a business case.

One issue might be price. If it takes USD 20+bn to develop this, and since build costs are unlikely to be even remotely as low as today's inherently stable, easily pressurized shapes, the price tag might simply be too much. People are already clamouring of how big a risk it is to make A3xx! Getting the r&d paid for by the US government would obviously be an advantage though, be it throught Nasa or the military.

If we move to a hydrogen economy and planes wind up needing much more tankage space BWB might become very relevant. Somehow I think the futuristic planes Airbus touted were more reasonable - more lift, less wingspan, more room.



User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 19, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1648 times:

#-B777-#: If you read the Flug Revue article you see, that there is one major disadvantage in this BWB: You can't just stretch or shronk this design, as you can do with the A340 or B777 or B767 for example. So, any new version would need a whole new wing and fuselage design. So much for the family concept.

Add to that the changes on the airports, which were already mentioned and the "non existing market of VLA's" and you get an economical failure.

The A3XX is the technically most advanced aircraft, when it enters service. In 15 or 20 years we will have a new most advanced aircraft. Perhaps it will be Boeing, perhaps Airbus. It could have revolutionary engines or wing design or whatever else. But a radical new change in just only one step is rather impossible.

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1837 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1640 times:

Some people here I cannot believe. Ruscoe, for example, believes that the A3XX will take 15 years to be established.

OK, fair point.

BUT THEN, he goes on to say that Boeing would then launch the BWB, which, from his posts, sounds as if it would take zero time to go from launch to full orders.

I doubt it.

The BWB would take at least 20 years from launch to be accepted (if you take the A3XX at 15) because the design is so new and has yet to be proven.

Personally, I think the only market is for a freighter.


User currently offlineSia772er From Singapore, joined Aug 2000, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1632 times:

Hi all,
i got this link from this forum too. There are similarities between airbus and boeing VLA, except that there 4 engines on airbus a/c. I guess you'd like to take a look at it.
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/FRH0101/FR0101e.htm
regards,
sia772er


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1611 times:

Actually, one potential HUGE advantage of the BWB over the A3XX is the fact that because the plane IS a flying wing, if you apply the right moving surface design to the plane the BWB could end up with quite a bit shorter takeoff and landing distance than the A3XX. After all, the flying wing has lots of natural lift and could accommodate large spoilers on the top of the wings to quickly bleed off speed at landing so there is less dependence on reverse thrust from the engines.

This means the BWB won't need 12,000 ft. runways like the A3XX does now--it could probably get by with runways as short as 8,500 feet fully-loaded.


User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1563 times:


RayChuang:

What is the benefit of having a shorter takeoff length with a BWB? All airports that can even remotely be thought to support a 744 already have runways that can land/launch an A3xx.

Besides, people seem to think Boeing would be offering this new plane to airlines, which is not the case. I didn't even find anything about it on their website. I'd categorize this along with the supersonic passenger jets - both Boeing and Airbus are looking at them but not with very much resources.


User currently offlineLeigh pilgrim From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2000, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

Hi

Not to keen on this new design, i preffer the origional design for boeings aircraft

LP


25 Ctbarnes : I'm intrigued by the design. I'll be curious to see if anything comes of it. As for the design challenges, as some have said above, they are not insur
26 Britishmidland : I will throw this pipedream in the same basket with CalWings and Ceilidh. No annoucement from Boeing? That is strange... usually there is some big pic
27 Post contains images Hmmmm... : I went to the same website as did Teahan to bring you this shot. I love the blended wing idea. It is an inherently superior design over cylindrical fu
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Flying Wing Bypass 787/350? posted Sat Sep 10 2005 06:36:03 by RedFlyer
New A346 Wing? posted Fri Jun 24 2005 04:41:51 by Trex8
New Flying-over-US Rule: How Many Flights? posted Fri Apr 22 2005 23:34:20 by Timz
Flying Wing posted Thu Mar 31 2005 19:00:49 by TedTAce
NW, The Airline Flying Classic Jumbo Trans-pacific posted Fri Oct 29 2004 23:51:40 by Ktachiya
Flying Wing posted Sun Jul 11 2004 17:01:41 by Skibum9
True/False-Boeings New 747? posted Thu Jun 10 2004 20:34:23 by Psa53
New Avation Wing Of The Smithsonian posted Wed Dec 3 2003 18:39:24 by EI A330-200
Boeings New HQ posted Thu Mar 22 2001 12:04:11 by LBA
Old Passenger Flying Wing Film posted Tue Feb 27 2001 08:32:08 by Stratifier