Next - The Northrop B-2 Airliner?, page 1

Following a challenge from NASA, Northrop has designed a passenger carrying development of the basic concept of the B-2 bomber. The intention was to build a 737 sized demonstrator of it but funding cuts have caused that to be shelved, here is an image

One thing that may have a chance, however unnecessary it may be, is a military cargo model, shown below, to replace the C-5 over the next 20 years or so. Now, a question I would ask is would you be flying a large transport in skies where stealth is needed to avoid interception? If so, what for?

Any thoughts?

www.flightglobal.com...

reply to post by waynos

---

Eh dont mean to be rude, BUT WHERE IS THE US AIR FORCE GOING TO GET THE MONEY TO BUY IT

reply to post by downunderET

---

Not rude at all. The answer is, I have no idea. Maybe t could be a joint venture with Japan and India?


I was asking primarily for thoughts on the concept, my own view is that it would be pretty pointless, but I wonder what others think.

I cant actually see the commercial version ever getting anywhere near being built, you can't even get a window seat, unless your flyng it

reply to post by downunderET

---

Blank check from the treasury dept.
Like always.

reply to post by haven123

---

That's why there are transponders in commercial aircraft.

2nd.

I would imagine that this concept has little or nothing to do with stealth and pretty much everything to do with fuel economy.

A flying wing is FAR more aerodynamically effecient then a conventional airplane. This translates to less fuel usage.

While such a plane would still be expensive, for an airline this cost might be mitigated by the long term fuel savings over an airframe lifetime of 20 to 40+ years.

One of the biggest costs on the B-2 is the radar absorbant materials and coatings used to construct it. If you don't need that for stealth (incidently, the airframe of a flying wing is stealthy in and of itself without the exotic materials and coatings). A flying wing airliner makes sense. Flying wings go back to WWII (the Horton brothers in Germany and Jack Northrop in the 50's, primarily for the effeciency). Biggest problems then had to do with stability and control. Fly by wire takes care of this today.

Incidently, a stealthy transport version would make a great delivery system for Airborne Forces, making their delivery that much more of a surprise. But as a previous poster state the cost would probably be prohibative at this point(at least with all the stealthy materials).

Anyways, don't knock the idea, especially the commercial side. With fuel prices only likely to rise, this would be one way to cut consumption.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by zoso28

---

Exactly.
www.truthorfiction.com...

Boeing to take on Airbus with (1000 seat) giant 797 Blended Wing plane

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 Centre.The mammoth plane will have a wing span of 265 feet compared to the 747's 211 feet, and is designed to fit within the newly created terminals used for the 555 seat Airbus A380, which is 262 feet wide.The new 797 is in direct response to the Airbus A380 which has racked up 159 orders, but has not yet flown any passengers.Boeing decide to kill its 747X stretched super jumbo in 2003 after little interest was shown by airline companies, but has continued to develop the ultimate Airbus crusher 797 for years at its Phantom Works
research facility in Long Beach, Calif.

The Airbus A380 has been in the works since 1999 and has accumulated $13 billion in development costs, which gives Boeing a huge advantage now that Airbus has committed to the older style tubular aircraft for decades to come.There are several big advantages to the blended wing design, the most important being the lift to drag ratio which is expected to increase by an amazing 50%, with overall weight reduced by 25%, making it an
estimated 33% more efficient than the A380, and making Airbus's $13 billion dollar investment look pretty shaky.

High body rigidity is another key factor in blended wing aircraft, It reduces turbulence and creates less stress on the air frame which adds to efficiency, giving the 797 a tremendous 8800 nautical mile
range with its 1000 passengers flying comfortably at mach .88 or 654 mph (+-1046km/h) cruising speed another advantage over the Airbus tube-and-wing designed A380's 570 mph (912 km/h) The exact date for
introduction is unclear, yet the battle lines are clearly drawn in the high-stakes war for civilian air supremacy.

Alot of benefits to a flying wing design.

reply to post by waynos

---

So, Nortrop has us talking about a super-sized B-2? Interesting isn't it, how it almost looks like--but not performs like--the mysterious, so-called black triangles. Can any reasonably minded engineer accept that they can simply enlarge the B-2 plans tp make a larger version? That is not a plane in the sky, it is a pie in the sky!

One thing you can't do is to take a relatively small aircraft and simply make a hugely bigger version. The physics of the matter simply won't allow it.

It is fairly commonly understood by followers of the triangle business that all three major aircraft manufactures, Boeing, Lockheed and Northrop are jointly building the triangles someplace. They would be itching to get those things out into the commercial arena for the huge profits to be made. And of course, it will eventually must happen, once the secrecy is lifted one way or another..

This PR crap about a huge, commercial B-2-type of aircraft is an attempt to bridge the gap between the B-2s, the closest, existing large delta-winged craft, and the true, massive triangles.. The true difference, of course, is similar to an apples and oranges example, but the public won't care.

I know, I know, most of you tend to not think about what is being force-fed you nor do you stop to think for yourself about what must be going on in the background as our government builds fleets of these the triangles. In a way, that's OK. There is very little that we can do to alter the situation anyway...except maybe to think about it.

Originally posted by Aliensun
reply to post by waynos

---

So, Nortrop has us talking about a super-sized B-2? Interesting isn't it, how it almost looks like--but not performs like--the mysterious, so-called black triangles.

Not nearly as much as the B-2

Can any reasonably minded engineer accept that they can simply enlarge the B-2 plans tp make a larger version? That is not a plane in the sky, it is a pie in the sky!

If you read the linked article they did not "simply enlarge the B-2" - they designed a concept for an airliner flying wing.

It is as much a "simple enlargement of the B-2" as the concept of the B737 is a "simple shrinking of the B-52"

Drones to the rescue ~ Repairing local economies in Ohio, coming to your State soon!
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags

Amazing video of 747 lifting in place in extreme wind conditions
  Posted 3 days ago with 11 member flags

Unmarked Chinese 747 rolls through SFO (San Francisco International airport)
  Posted 14 days ago with 10 member flags

Eerie Second World War RAF fighter plane discovered in the Sahara
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags

Stealth chopper based in Nevada
  Posted 18 days ago with 4 member flags

HIFiRE Scramjet Research Flight Will Advance Hypersonic Technology
  Posted 17 days ago with 2 member flags

My CAF (Canadian armed forces) friend and his work on the TRS-2
  Posted 1 days ago with 2 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: