It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Boeing 797 Revealed?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 06:44 AM

Originally posted by carcharodon
maybe we are looking at Y3 the replacement for both the 747 and the 777. It is set to begin flying about 2015...

That would be a good posibility for the BWB, probably not for 1000 passenger but in the range of 300-500

Not a mission of it.

It'll be in military service for years before going onto commerical jets. [And I mean more as the proposed transport than as a B-2].

posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 09:46 AM

All i can say is "never say never"

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 12:28 AM

Here is another view i didnt see from you guys.

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 09:07 AM
There will be no BWB 797, most likely, the only 797 to exist will obviously be the Yellowstone 1 (Y1), which is the Scarebus A320 replacement and holds 100-200 people.

Although unlikely, I would love the Y1 to be a really radical design, similar to Boeings "Kermit cruiser concept" powered by Prop Fans or Geared Turbofans. Why? Because I want a break through, I want a new plane not just a cigar with wings. Something with style. Something beautiful. I want to be a pilot when I'm older, and would love to pilot one of these things!

I'm surprised you guys only just created a topic about this. I thought the BWB project was cancelled 6 years ago in 2001? To be honest I never took the BWB seriously, it just seemed like a Sonic-Cruiser to me.

The Boeing Seven-Ten-Seven will most likely be Y3, and be the 777 / 747 replacement. I doubt that will be a BWB too.

If I can be permitted a silly flight of fancy for a moment, imagine 1,000 ejection seats and all those parachutes

LOL! When thinking about the new evacuaction techniques required for the BWB I immediatly thought of that! Nice one.

I also hear people repeatedly bringing up trains overcoming air travel. Sorry, but it's not going to happen. Airports already exist and now all that's needed is lower ticket costs and more planes! A ultra high speed maglev program accross the USA would cost billions of dollars. Meanwhile, 100 seat planes with a fairly nice range, run as low as 20 million dollars each.

[edit on 10-3-2007 by PisTonZOR]

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:34 AM
Good Job on renaming Airbus


on a serious note. Boeing will have to continue using composites. The companies they have providing the parts will be used again for the 797. That will cut down on cost and be efficent. Im sure Boeing wont want to spend more money on a Different AUTOCLAVE.

SOOOOOO most likely no BWB

But since the B-2 bomber was a success. B-2 is composites. there might be a chance later in time for a BWB.. Boeing has to get the experience on making composite passenger aircraft.

just my 2 cents

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:39 AM
I wish they'd get on with it and build a BWB airliner, particularly as they supposedly reduce fuel consumption and can carry more, well, people go on about how polluting aircraft are, so lets make a plane with a higher lift to drag ratio. lets face it, current airliners, while they may be good for the pressurisation, have a massive amount of volume which generates very little lift if any.

A comment posted earlier:

will want to get in something that looks like it will fly

Well, on that basis, BWBs look far superior to normal planes, as virtually all of it produces lift.

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:56 AM

while I agree a BWB would be very economical. Based on the current plans @ Boeing

787-8/9 and maybe 787-10
737 replacement

they have their hands full
we wouldn't want another A380 would we ???

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 12:05 PM
Perhaps not no, but i think the aviation industry could do with something better for the environment.

Although evacuating a BWB would be 'fun'

posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 12:16 PM
While im not a Boeing Analysts.
Here is what im thinking

A 10-15 billion+ R&D will not pay off anytime soon
Will a BWB have a low seat per mile cost
Our airports are having enough hard time trying to cope with the A380
imagine A380's and BWB in the same airports
LAX is gonna have enough hard time with multiple A380's/747/767/777/A330/A320

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 09:54 AM
Boeing X-48 BWB
here is some more BWB info

[edit on 11-3-2007 by skunkworks82]

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 10:41 AM
Now that's what I call 21st Century!

Something about this design makes me think we will see less fatalities in future crashes.


[edit on 11/3/07 by SteveR]

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:43 AM
I know !!!! once i saw the X-48 and Boeing is doing alot of reasearch on the project, i now beleave there will be a BWB. Im gonna go down to the desert by Edwards and see what i can take pictures of. There are supposed to be flying the X-48 this year !!!!!!

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:54 AM
The BWB isn't meant to first fly this year. They are however, testing a model with a wingspan of 11 metres.

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:59 AM

Originally posted by PisTonZOR
The BWB isn't meant to first fly this year. They are however, testing a model with a wingspan of 11 metres.

Look at the site in my last post.. X-48 is set to fly at the begining of 2007

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 10:29 PM
The Model X-48B which has a wingspan of 11 metres.


posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:53 PM
I love the models BUT:

Big problems with:

Security evacuation
Fuel storage
Roll movements on cabin, a 25 degree turn would drop the farthest pax like 8 meters up or down..not acceptable and probably it would feel like a roller coaster....

posted on Mar, 12 2007 @ 02:04 AM

Originally posted by Murcielago

[edit on 24-4-2006 by Murcielago]

I looked all over for that picture. I saw that article in PopSci a couple of years ago. They did some great photoshopping to make those pictures. From what I remember of the article you guys have already discussed. Especially the passengers sitting off the centerline.

posted on Mar, 12 2007 @ 07:54 PM
Putting cargo on the outside of the passenger section would make the aircraft more stable. The way the L1011/Tristar 500 raised up the center engine it allowed the wing engines to be placed farther out on the aircraft. You could add cargo weight as if engines were on the outer wing. This in turn reduced bending of the wings. Also active ailerons were developed because of the larger wings on the T-500. So baiscally if the plane is a giant wing, active ailerons could reduce bending. Now add stable weight to the outside compartments and the aircraft will be more stable in flight.

posted on Mar, 13 2007 @ 02:58 AM
Actually there was one article on The Times about Boeing's replacement for the 737

Mr McNerney said: “We do not have a concept yet, but are going around the airlines asking what capability they want.”

Several options are understood to be under consideration. One is a twin-aisle 737, which would allow Boeing to increase seats without stretching the aircraft too far.

Jim McNerney is Boeing's Chairman...

It seems there are only ideas not much. Boeing has always stated that they are waiting for a new engine before any real design can be made. According to them a new plane with current powerplants couldn't perform that much better than today's model...

posted on Mar, 13 2007 @ 07:04 AM
Keep in mind folks. Boeing is working on perfecting composites in commercial aircraft. This is the first time they are dealing with
Boeing. So maybe once they get the 787 down, deal with the 747-800 and find a 737 upgrade/replacement we might see a BWB

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in