NASA planes that could transform air travel by the 2030s
- Thread starter fholbert
- Start date
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
That’s the future Boeing 737 MAX 11
I've always liked the Boeing truss braced wing concept, from back when it was called the SUGAR. Finally time for someone to start developing a new clean sheet narrowbody design to replace the endless lipstick that's been put on the pigs that are the current generation aircraft. I'm also a big fan of the DC-9 derivative fuselage since it's less middle seats in the system.
I do see one potential issue which is wingspan. X-66A will have a wingspan of 145ft, or 44m. That's slightly more than a 757 with winglets. The majority of gates around the world that currently accommodate a 737 or A320 are pitched for 118ft / 36m wingspan which is the limit for ICAO Code C. Many airports worldwide have entire terminals and ramp areas sized out for Code C aircraft. So a complete replacement of the 737 fleet with a truss braced wing narrowbody seems difficult, running into the same problem that FedEx was having looking to replace the MD-11 with a 777F. In order to make this work, my "conspiracy theory" is that it's going to have folding wingtips, although the almost full length slats on the rendering seem to suggest otherwise. If you look at the 777X the only thing that gets folded is pure structure outboard of the aileron. Folding wingtips was originally proposed on the original 777-200 design but with a folding point inboard of the aileron and it was scrapped because it proved too complicated to fold the structure and associated systems and mechanization. I have a hunch that they're just now starting to get enough data on the performance and reliability of the folding wingtip system from 777X flight tests that they've decided to green light this project with the intention of making this work thanks to that technology. It's possible that the production models will have a significantly different outboard wing design to allow folding.
Back of the napkin math says they'd need to fold around 4m from each wing. That's just slightly more than the 3.5m currently folded on the 777X but a larger percentage of the plane's overall wingspan, so they may have to figure out how to fold associated systems with it this time. That's still easier than rebuilding most of the world's airports.
I do see one potential issue which is wingspan. X-66A will have a wingspan of 145ft, or 44m. That's slightly more than a 757 with winglets. The majority of gates around the world that currently accommodate a 737 or A320 are pitched for 118ft / 36m wingspan which is the limit for ICAO Code C. Many airports worldwide have entire terminals and ramp areas sized out for Code C aircraft. So a complete replacement of the 737 fleet with a truss braced wing narrowbody seems difficult, running into the same problem that FedEx was having looking to replace the MD-11 with a 777F. In order to make this work, my "conspiracy theory" is that it's going to have folding wingtips, although the almost full length slats on the rendering seem to suggest otherwise. If you look at the 777X the only thing that gets folded is pure structure outboard of the aileron. Folding wingtips was originally proposed on the original 777-200 design but with a folding point inboard of the aileron and it was scrapped because it proved too complicated to fold the structure and associated systems and mechanization. I have a hunch that they're just now starting to get enough data on the performance and reliability of the folding wingtip system from 777X flight tests that they've decided to green light this project with the intention of making this work thanks to that technology. It's possible that the production models will have a significantly different outboard wing design to allow folding.
Back of the napkin math says they'd need to fold around 4m from each wing. That's just slightly more than the 3.5m currently folded on the 777X but a larger percentage of the plane's overall wingspan, so they may have to figure out how to fold associated systems with it this time. That's still easier than rebuilding most of the world's airports.
Soku39
Well-Known Member
Let's just assume the tech will get better ya? Pretty much the only option when the world is on fire.
Im not buying any of that being 'transformative'.
When I was a kid, the Concorde was old, established tech and a commercial derivative of the National Aerospace Plane was basically a foregone conclusion.
When I was a kid, the Concorde was old, established tech and a commercial derivative of the National Aerospace Plane was basically a foregone conclusion.
touch-n-go
Well-Known Member
Phew...survived this one. My first concern was that it would be autonomous, hence no pilot. Looks like pilot jobs might still be secure with these developments. Hopefully they won't try to certify them single pilot.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
I do remember an AOPA pilot from the 80s that talked about side sticks, large flat screen displays and moving maps, though, and it looked positively sci-fi in those days.... and it all came true!
Skåning
Well-Known Member
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
If bowling for soup recorded 1985 today, it would be titled 2004.
chrisreedrules
Master Blaster
By 2030 you say?
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
To shreds, you say?
Flyinthrew
Well-Known Member
It was '85. Why does it have to be black and white? Oh wait, did you just take a pic of the sim in B&W mode on your phone? Can you do sepia?
Also, super sad there is no flux capacitor to be found.
Flyinthrew
Well-Known Member
If Back to the Future were made today, Marty would go back to '93. Yeah...ready for the urn, I am.
The future was supposed to be marvelous!
But it became "Attack of the Accountants" and innovation didn't make money.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
The article was in regards to GA, and the concept cockpit they illustrated looked a hell of a lot like what Cirrus ended up doing with Avidyne.