It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

X-48B BWB Prototype to Fly in 2006

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Boeing and NASA will flight test the X-48B, a 21 foot wingspan, 8.5% scale blended wing body (BWB), in 2006 at the Dryden Flight Research Center

The vehicle will be remote-controlled and powered by three turbojets. Boeing is developing the BWB in co-operation with the US Air Force Research Laboratory who sees it as a possible multi-role military aircraft.



Source:
Boeing Press Release

Related ATS Topics:
ATS: NASA and Boeing successfully fly a BWB inside a wind-tunnel
ATS: USAF Long-Range Strike Options Considered
ATS: Worlds first silent aircraft plans unveiled




posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 07:37 AM
link   
looking good


The new Transport aircraft anyone



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Good news!
Its always nice to see new shapes in the sky, hopefully this will lead to a full sized aeroplane and also give Airbus a kick up the arse as their own BWB seems to have been forgotten in all the A380 hoo ha.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Good news!
Its always nice to see new shapes in the sky, hopefully this will lead to a full sized aeroplane and also give Airbus a kick up the arse as their own BWB seems to have been forgotten in all the A380 hoo ha.



And also good for this thread somethimg NEW to talk about.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 08:47 AM
link   
I know what you mean, new stuff comes along so rarely in these high tech expensive days, I wish it could be like the pre war days when a completely new aeroplane appeared every week!



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Haven't seen you in a while intelgurl
Nice to see you again.

The BWB was being plotted in the Boeing gearheads for some time now, but definitely got lost in the rush about the A380 (Which in my opinion will get beaten out by the 777 and the 787 anyway).

There's only one problem with this otherwise beautiful plane.

Remember the problem with the 747 when it was going to airports? The guys had to widen the airstrips and runways to accomodate the monster wingspan. This thing looks even wider. How's it supposed to fit on a runway like that?

I also have to question the air force using it as a multirole. It is incredibly similar to the B-2 Bomber in shape. However, the B-2 was made for the role of bomber, and excels in it. But this one is being made for a civilian purpose. Now I wouldn't be surprised if it went into military duty as a bomber and such, like they militarized the KC-135 Stratotankers from... whatever they were before. DC-9's, 737's I think, 727's, I dunno. Something around that.

But yeah, I am happy that Boeing is making a (well, somewhat of a) competitor to the A380. But I stand by my opinion that the 787's and 777's are the way to go.

EDIT: Also, one more thing. How the heck is this thing supposed to fit into those itty-bitty gates at the airports? Folding wings, maybe, but thats where the passengers can sit, ain't it?

[edit on 11/27/2005 by Darkpr0]



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:27 AM
link   
What will this plane do in the future if they decide to continue the developing...?? Multirole military aircraft, you mean like fighter/bomber or...



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Intel, is this a new UAV project?

Looks good though



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Intel, is this a new UAV project?

Looks good though



No , its a passenger aircraft (or will be)

www.globalsecurity.org...



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
Also, one more thing. How the heck is this thing supposed to fit into those itty-bitty gates at the airports? Folding wings, maybe, but thats where the passengers can sit, ain't it?


The picture the Intelgurl posted is a good one, because it shows (by color) where the passengers will sit. So no, they dont sit in the wings.
I'm not sure about what their dimensions will be...if it ever goes commercial.
I believe any airport that can handle a 747, will also be able to handle the BWB.

heres it super imposed over the 747.


C-Thru


Most of the renderings and wind tunnel tests i've seen have 3 engines on the back...but some have had 2 or 4 engines, and a few rare(r) ones actually have the engines under the little stubby wings...which I'm sure wont be where they would be placed.




posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
If you think about it though the airports are making modifcations for the A380s so im sure that if this plane isn't "too much" different that not to much taxi way work or gate reconstruction would have to take place.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Actually with the engines mounted on top it also (however slightly) helps keep the beast in the air.

Anything causing air to move faster under the wings (the whole plane here) will actually deter it's (again however slightly) lift.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Somewhere in the afterlife Jack Northrop has little tears of joy in his eyes. This was his original vision for the commercial flying wing design.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by CyberianHusky
Somewhere in the afterlife Jack Northrop has little tears of joy in his eyes. This was his original vision for the commercial flying wing design.


I agree Jack would indeed be happy to see this. Atleast he did find out about the B-2 before he died.

This design still has some of the same problems Jack faced such as not many window seats for passengers. Thats not really a big problem IMHO but some people have issues with that. I think Jack toyed with windows in the roof and even the front in his designs.

I guess now you could even make video panel windows that showed a picture of the outside even though there is no window really there just a camera.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 04:05 PM
link   
This design has many advantages over conventional commercial airliners. It can carry a drasticaly greater cargo and passenger capacity per gallon of fuel, it has tremendous lift cabaility, it is very efficient and then again, its also much more stealthy for military. This is a very good design, one of the best ever put into testing.

I'm wondering if they would ever implement the engines into the airframe like the b2 for a military role?

Train



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigTrain
This design has many advantages over conventional commercial airliners. It can carry a drasticaly greater cargo and passenger capacity per gallon of fuel, it has tremendous lift cabaility, it is very efficient and then again, its also much more stealthy for military. This is a very good design, one of the best ever put into testing.

I'm wondering if they would ever implement the engines into the airframe like the b2 for a military role?

Train


One big difference with conventional design (tube with wings) is when you roll, people seated most outboard will get motion sickness, far more than with the conventional tube design.

Also, far less people will have access to a window (ok, you will tell me that they can look outside thru a monitor screen, but it is not the same thing).

Also, for a manufacturer point of view, it make it far more difficult to elaborate a strength version (adding two circular tube plug before and after the wing, to keep the balance).

For all those reasons, industries (and the public probably) will be relunctant to adopt this.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by PopeyeFAFL
One big difference with conventional design (tube with wings) is when you roll, people seated most outboard will get motion sickness, far more than with the conventional tube design.

Also, far less people will have access to a window (ok, you will tell me that they can look outside thru a monitor screen, but it is not the same thing).

I've never known anyone who gets motion sickness on a plane from there slow gradual turns.
The very large majority of people wont mind it one bit.

It will have less windows...but hopefully the windows it will have are bigger, like the 787's, except even larger then them.


and by the time this thing comes to frutition moniters on the back of every seat will be the norm, so it would be nice if there were cameras on the outside of the plane pointing in every direction, so the people in the middle can at least have something. Also, a more "dream-ish" type of layout would have a "look-out" area near the front, where people can walk up to while in flight and look out an area with a LOT of BIG windows.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   
I once haed a boeing exec talking about this project. He stated the their biggest problem wee the amount of windows that would be available.

He said they havent figure it out yet but they contemplated several solutions includins giant windows on top among other features



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Actually, what I heard from an engineer on the project was that the people sitting further out, would have a higher angle in any turns, and the trays would slide. I never heard anything about motion sickness. They were working on ways to make level turns to alleviate this issue though.



posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
It would be cool to have hige ceiling windows...during night, not day, during the day you want to look down, not burn your retinas.


As for the side-2-side movement.
Just put a wall/divider in the middile of the aircraft.


as for meals and drinks and the ride comfort, it wont matter, since the airliner will do its sharpest turns on take offs & landings, at which point you either will be done with you drink, or not have gotton one yet.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join