0

I know that the MAIN reason Boeing and Airbus are held back on this is the development costs. It costs a lot to even develop a slightly new design, let alone mass manufacturing it. But that's the thing: the plane needs to be manufacturable before anything else. Also, the two persisting problems associated with BWBs (cabin pressurization and low-speed control) must be solved. What are the other things that will need to be done to make this a reality? I'm starting to get bored of the classic TAW.

My question is different in the sense that it asks for ways to actually make it happen, as I'm a firm believer that it can be done.

Ahmet Y. Arslan
  • 1
  • 2
  • @user3528438 "bombs"? BWBs are supposed to be more comfortable with their larger cabin width. Also, you guys should check out https://www.facebook.com/disruptaviation/ please contribute! – Ahmet Y. Arslan Nov 16 '17 at 16:30
  • No we should not. Aviation is not to be disrupted because we want to keep it safe. Disruption is to an extent carried out by military aviation. – Koyovis Nov 16 '17 at 16:34
  • @Koyovis Who says aviation can't be safer with a new design? There are still crashes happening around the world every year. There definitely is a room for improvement for safety. – Ahmet Y. Arslan Nov 16 '17 at 16:39
  • @AhmetYeseviArslan Sorry I was interrupted when I was writing the comment, but my concern is, to implement BWB it might be necessary to add a lot of support structures into the cabin divide the internal space badly, the more blended the worse. For a bomber or tanker this isn't a problem because bomb is dense and fuel can flow so they can be stored around the support structures easily. – user3528438 Nov 16 '17 at 17:18
  • @user3528438 Yes, they might require more structural weight PER unit length, but since the length of the plane is almost going to be cut in half, it might require only the same amount of support structures, if not less, than TAWs. You don't need to make it too wide either. I'm thinking converting single-aisle planes with passenger capacities of 100-150 to having the same width as a wide-body is a good start. Also, sorry but I don't really get what you mean by your bomber explanation. Can't you store your fuel inside your wings, just like how it is done currently? – Ahmet Y. Arslan Nov 17 '17 at 02:40
  • Frigate Ecojet has a large body. This concept lies somewhere between BWB and standard cylindrical fuselage, since it provides quite a significant amount of lift at high angle of attack ( take off & landing ) – user721108 Nov 18 '17 at 13:03
  • @qqjkztd that's really cool! I didn't even know about this. But why don't they make the fuselage in a way that provides lift on cruise as well? – Ahmet Y. Arslan Nov 18 '17 at 21:23

0 Answers0