Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
6 Comments
StukaFoxsays...There's a major problem with this design that was just glossed over in this video: the windows aren't there for you, they're there for the pilots and flight crew to see what's going on outside the plane in the event of an issue. You can have all the cameras in the world on that thing, but no civilian pilot is going to get on a plane without being able to see what's outside it themselves.
Also, watch this video that explains why no one designs new prop engines and why we're still using a basic engine design from the 1950s. Now take these basic issues and them multiply by billions of dollars. This idea is a total all-or-nothing for Boeing/Airbus and there's no chance in hell that management would ever go that far out on a limb.
https://youtu.be/_k1TQGK3mZI
siftbotsays...Moving this video to eric3579's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
eric3579says...Weekend content *promote
siftbotsays...Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by original submitter eric3579.
noimssays...Really interesting. Like @StukaFox I was thinking about the window issue. I've heard that one reason window shutters need to be open at take-off and landing is so emergency crews can look in as well as cabin crew looking out.
One funny point of wording too. At 13:24 when talking about sensor failure he says how redundancy in design is so necessary. In light of this I found it funny that his conclusion regarding pressure vessel structure at 22:37 was that having a hardened skin around an arched pressurised section is a waste because it makes the internal section entirely redundant. OK, so I agree with him on both points, it just made me smile.
Drachen_Jagersays...You mean THIS design from 1938 Popular Mechanics?
https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/a33955602/flying-wing-of-the-future/
We've been told this design is the future for closing in on 100 years now. This is not innovative unless you're Amish, and even then you won't use it because you'd be Amish. Also you wouldn't be on the internet... because you're Amish.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.