71–80 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But do you need to pressurize it? Only the crew space needs that which could be a small/short tube in the middle right behind (and including) the cockpit. The fuel tanks don’t care. They’re not pressurized on a normal design. The cargo may not need it either.
Don't some fuels like gasoline evaporate more quickly under lower pressure?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boeing was a very very different company then. I’m bullish on blended wing body, but I would have much more confidence if it were Lockheed or someone emulating the SpaceX, rapid development cycles working on this.
As someone in industry, I can assure you Boeing is still a disaster. I know a fuckload of good people who have turned down working there because the culture is shit and management is braindead even by defense contractor standards.
A tanker is a good fit for a blended wing body. Fuel efficiency is important for that mission, fuel tanks can be easily adapted to the odd shape (compared to cargo), and fuel doesn't care about the bobbing up and down in turns that comes from the wide hull shape (compared to passengers who don't like about that). Reconnaissance would work too.
> fuel doesn't care about the bobbing up and down Maybe the fuel doesn't care, but the flight crew certainly will care about a large oscillating mass constantly changing the aircraft's center of mass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would only work for cargo and would have other issues. Almost all commercial planes are for both cargo and passengers, and you’d have to bank really slowly if that was full of passengers.
... full of paying passengers. Soldiers can just be strapped down in the dark and you can hose the decks down after landing.
They say there's a lot more volume, but would it carry more weight, and where would the weight have to be placed? Why isn't this design used commercially?
While presumably military transport does involve moving very dense things, Some of the things the air force is called upon to transport have high volume but low weight. Like helicopters, for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but I'll bite: The 747 MAX that killed 346 people in two separate accidents and was grounded for nearly two years and cost Boeing 10's of billions of dollars in fines, cancelled orders, etc.? It is perhaps not the best example of modifications to an existing design.
All because they didn't want to completely redesign the landing gear, to give it a higher ride height, which would allow the engines to be put at a normal position under the wing, thereby permitting a normal center of thrust axis. Just to keep the existing faa certification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> fuel doesn't care about the bobbing up and down Maybe the fuel doesn't care, but the flight crew certainly will care about a large oscillating mass constantly changing the aircraft's center of mass.
Wonder how much a computer can dampen/remove/counter these sloshing events by constantly adjusting the control surfaces. super interesting stuff.
I agree the computing tech should help a lot! Seeing what experiments were done with the ground effect RC project (what’s his name, cool YouTube vids) indicates the software exists or will soon for a large craft. Especially because this will be generation 3 of a flying wing!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe working off an existing design is harder than greenfield?
If that were true why did we get the 737 MAX?
I live by a major cargo hub airport with occasional military traffic. The occasional C-5 Galaxy doing a few touch and go practices, a pair of F-18s or trainers. The airshow is this month and I’m lucky to be at a waypoint for the aerobatic demonstration team. Last year Super Hornets at 500 feet for 3 days. Heaven!
Can you imagine how gorgeous the photo would be of this refueling a B2? Or dust off the last up to it Sr71 and buzz Ukraine and Crimea for an afternoon. Yes it is all ridiculous but most military might is proverbial dick waving in the first place, so might as well add some confetti and glitter to the mix.