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

121–130 of 189 posts

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#121

Post by nordsieck »

tengbretson wrote: post #90
nervousvarun wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "problem" goes away if you just have one of the feeds in the seat-back entertainment system be a wing mounted camera view no?

If that were true, why would the person be on the plane in the first place? Couldn't they just watch a movie of their destination or zoom call the person they were visiting from home?

> If that were true, why would the person be on the plane in the first place? Couldn't they just watch a movie of their destination or zoom call the person they were visiting from home?

It can be the case that both:

* watching a video of the plane moving through the air is an effective way to mitigate some of the discomfort of flying

* meeting face to face with someone is valuable enough that it's worth taking the flight

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#122

Post by jcampbell1 »

dr_orpheus wrote: post #50
jcampbell1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> There is some crazy public belief that it is more fuel efficient There are a number of engineers at NASA and Boeing working on the X-48 who would disagree with you on this one. The main advantage of the blended wing body is to reduce the skin friction drag [0] of the aircraft relative to the typical fuselage and wings. You have less surface area in contact with the air relative to the amount of internal volume. The…

Skin friction drag is a drop in the bucket compared to parasitic and lift induced.

I’m willing to accept that a gold bullion transporter can look closer to a flying wing, but with any reasonable cargo density you are back to the standard design.

Trying to intuitively explain CFD results is apparently just as hard as dispelling the Bernoulli nonsense about airfoils.

I’m right and high aspect ratio wings are a harder materials science and design challenge than blended wings. There is a reason 10000x as much engineering effort is going into folding carbon fiber wings for passengers/cargo. The folding is to increase fuel economy through aspect ratio and fit in terminal box.

Everything I have said is trivial to prove with CFD and experimentally. I get that popular science articles need to entertain the masses.

Let me ask you this, why is the tail of passenger aircraft upward sloping?

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#123

Post by jcampbell1 »

jdhendrickson wrote: post #111
jcampbell1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ?

No. The points made seem to be like asking if it is a good idea buy something that costs 25% more when you have a 5% coupon.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#124

Post by naijaboiler »

abeppu wrote: post #83
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, I hate flying if I can't see out the window. Like, really really hate it.

I get this, but also peering out a narrow plane window at a view which is often at least substantially blocked by wing is not always fun. I would like airlines to put a 360 degree camera system mounted to the exterior, and pipe through the feed either to a channel in an in-seat screen, or make it available to passengers wearing a VR headset. Imagine one of these much wider planes where many more seats are middle seat…

I'm claustrophobic. Having the window there and next to me is essential for me. Mentally, i need to feel like there's an exit i can jump through if things go awry. Of course, thats not realistic. But some artificial screen doesnt give me the same comfort. Looking out and see the outside for myself is the only thing that does it

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#125

Post by kortilla »

nunez wrote: post #103
hindsightbias wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

can't speak to aeronautics of it, but from a pax perspective, the md80 was a fantastic jet. probably the last vestige of what flying "used to be like" since they were too old to retrofit for "efficiency". also its planform looked AMAZING; retro-futuristic even closest modern aircraft to it is the 717/MD90, which Delta is still flying, but not for much longer iirc

md88 was shit as pax if you didn’t like cold and loud.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#126

Post by ikrenji »

tengbretson wrote: post #90
nervousvarun wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "problem" goes away if you just have one of the feeds in the seat-back entertainment system be a wing mounted camera view no?

If that were true, why would the person be on the plane in the first place? Couldn't they just watch a movie of their destination or zoom call the person they were visiting from home?

? people go on planes to get to places not to experience flight itself per se. i don't mind sitting in an enclosed room for x amount of hours while it gets me half-way across the world for cheap

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#127

Post by jcampbell1 »

runarberg wrote: post #56
jcampbell1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 see. So this is why a flock of geese flies in a single file, rather then, say, a V shape.

Goose wash is the problem with single file. Goose V takes advantage of the up current you get from the neighbors lift. Geese and evolution clearly understand areo better than current HN.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#128

Post by georgeecollins »

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.

you could also put the passengers more towards the middle and the fuel / cargo on the tips. Doesn't solve the problem and balance would be tough I imagine.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#129

Post by CrazyStat »

Someone wrote: post #40

FTA: “NASA in June launched a competition for U.S. companies to design and build a full-scale demonstrator. The rules require entrants to target planes around the size of a Boeing Co. 737 that can carry 150 passengers. The agency wants a prototype that could fly as early as 2027 and be ready for mass production in the next decade.” How does that fit in NASA’s mission? Also FTA: “Entrants to the NASA competition had t…

> How does that fit in NASA’s mission?

That first A there in NASA stands for Aeronautics. Advancing aircraft design and technology is part of NASA's mission. It's even in their official mission statement:

> NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.

Re: Engineers are exploring radical new designs for commercial planes

#130

Post by q-big »

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…

> 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 is a problem that a market can easily solve: make the more central seats more expensive than the outer ones. If the pricing is right, the demand for the various kinds/positions of seats will be balanced.

P.S. I can actually imagine that there do exist people who prefer the outer seats because they like the acceleration that makes the flight feel more like a carnival ride. :-)

Post reply on HN