Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 189 posts

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#111

Post by jdhendrickson »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #16
alexpotato wrote: post #5

Interesting historical note on the blended wing design: One of the main arguments against it was that designers weren't sure if people would be ok with sitting towards the center of the plane. The thought was that passengers wouldn't be comfortable without being able to at least see outside (even a little, looking at you 3/4/3 widebody planes). I mention this b/c there is a quote in Mary Roach's Flying to Mars. She m…

The main argument against it is that it increases fuel consumption. Plowing your cargo area through the air sideways is just idiotic. There is some crazy public belief that it is more fuel efficient because the public doesn’t understand physics. These things keep getting getting publicity because even Hacker News folks don’t get it. Long high aspect ratio wings and streamlined body are how you get fuel efficiency. Th…

I'm curious if your thinking on this matter has changed based on the replies you have received ?

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#113

Post by thot_experiment »

hindsightbias wrote: post #76
thot_experiment wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure this tracks, I think turbulence powerful enough to cause passenger discomfort is usually so big that it affects the whole plane pretty uniformly. I think it's exceedingly unlikely that you'll spend enough time on a shear line to induce a large roll. At least it's never happened to me, but I am only a passenger.

I've been in turbulence with high roll rates and even as a pilot unbothered by moderate chop, it will cause me to sweat. I've been in the last rows of a 777 and watched the fuselage flex in chop. A blended body would be pretty rigid and have a very low wing loading because it's basically all a wing. So it would be pretty uniform. It would work if all turns were managed via controls to be a 1/4g, otherwise riding the…

Good to know, I'm aware that high roll-rate turbulence is possible but presumably quite rare?

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#114

Post by gcanyon »

HPsquared wrote: post #47
thot_experiment wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure this tracks, I think turbulence powerful enough to cause passenger discomfort is usually so big that it affects the whole plane pretty uniformly. I think it's exceedingly unlikely that you'll spend enough time on a shear line to induce a large roll. At least it's never happened to me, but I am only a passenger.

In a typical plane in turbulence, you can see the wings bending up and down. Perhaps a blended wing would be stiffer, though.

When I was younger, watching the wings flex up and down in turbulence was one of my favorite things about flying, like an amusement park ride. Over the years my perspective has changed.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#115

Post by rootusrootus »

chrisBob wrote: post #23
nicktelford wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bigger problem with blended wing designs is actually for the people on the peripheral. When the plane banks, passengers further from the axis of rotation will feel a more significant change in their altitude. You literally feel like you're "falling", as the plane banks to your side. This also applies to existing aircraft, but the amount you drop/rise is limited by the your distance from the axis of rotation, which…

The issue isn't the bank angle exactly, it is the acceleration of the roll. Pilots will need to be careful not to throw people or drinks around, but I think it would be doable.

I think that would be tough. Out in relatively empty airspace, sure, the pilot can make pretty slow turns. But major airports with multiple runways, other airports in the vicinity, military bases, etc, all put hard requirements on the flight corridor. Sometimes the pilot has no choice but to make pretty sharp turns, and that means a pretty fast roll acceleration.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#116

Post by dublin »

horsawlarway wrote: post #28
blamazon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience as a frequent flyer is that First Class is the most likely cabin to have all windows closed for 100% of the flight. It's baffling to me, people will even keep closed the window facing New York on the approach to LaGuardia which should be a crime. Also Boston, Salt Lake, Hawaii, and really pretty much all places except like Dallas and Cleveland types totally perplex me when the window is closed and I'm n…

I see this more and more everywhere across the plane these days. I remember flying as a kid/teen and nearly every window was open during takeoff and touchdown. Last 3 to 5 years and almost every flight has had less than 10% of the windows open. I don't get it - I also want to see it. We're fucking flying, for god's sake.

And once upon a now long time ago, when I was a boy, the food was actually hot, quite tasty, prepared by actual chefs, and served on real china dishes with metal silverware. (Even in Coach - it was many years before I travelled enough to get a few upgrades to First Class!)

Modernity and MBAs have stolen the elegance and service that flying (or the train, to an earlier generation) used to have when America was great. I remember marveling that as expensive as such flying was, it was really not a bad deal to get a great meal served by pretty young women looking over such amazing vistas, with fast, smooth transportation thrown into the bargain!

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#117

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

nicktelford wrote: post #15
alexpotato wrote: post #5

Interesting historical note on the blended wing design: One of the main arguments against it was that designers weren't sure if people would be ok with sitting towards the center of the plane. The thought was that passengers wouldn't be comfortable without being able to at least see outside (even a little, looking at you 3/4/3 widebody planes). I mention this b/c there is a quote in Mary Roach's Flying to Mars. She m…

A bigger problem with blended wing designs is actually for the people on the peripheral. When the plane banks, passengers further from the axis of rotation will feel a more significant change in their altitude. You literally feel like you're "falling", as the plane banks to your side. This also applies to existing aircraft, but the amount you drop/rise is limited by the your distance from the axis of rotation, which…

I wouldn’t want that on a red-eye, but it would add some entertainment to a one-hour flight.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#118

Post by moffkalast »

fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #117
nicktelford wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bigger problem with blended wing designs is actually for the people on the peripheral. When the plane banks, passengers further from the axis of rotation will feel a more significant change in their altitude. You literally feel like you're "falling", as the plane banks to your side. This also applies to existing aircraft, but the amount you drop/rise is limited by the your distance from the axis of rotation, which…

I wouldn’t want that on a red-eye, but it would add some entertainment to a one-hour flight.

Would legit pay extra for the fun ha

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#120

Post by flaviut »

hindsightbias wrote: post #76
thot_experiment wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure this tracks, I think turbulence powerful enough to cause passenger discomfort is usually so big that it affects the whole plane pretty uniformly. I think it's exceedingly unlikely that you'll spend enough time on a shear line to induce a large roll. At least it's never happened to me, but I am only a passenger.

I've been in turbulence with high roll rates and even as a pilot unbothered by moderate chop, it will cause me to sweat. I've been in the last rows of a 777 and watched the fuselage flex in chop. A blended body would be pretty rigid and have a very low wing loading because it's basically all a wing. So it would be pretty uniform. It would work if all turns were managed via controls to be a 1/4g, otherwise riding the…

Not a pilot, but I've flown in the MD-80 once, and I've found it much more unpleasant than most planes due to the engine noise in the cabin.

But on the other hand, I've never experienced turbulence that's made me more than barely uncomfortable in any plane.

Post reply on HN