Airbus Unveils Concept Plane.

The Wired (7/20, Paur) "Autopia" blog reported on the Concept Plane Airbus unveiled on Monday at the Farnborough Air Show. "It's unlikely a real aircraft might look like this. Instead, it reflects what experts in aircraft materials, aerodynamics, cabin design and engines came up with after considering what air transport might look like in 2050." The Concept Plane "contemplates how to make planes more eco-friendly. It features long, high aspect ratio wings, an interesting U-shaped tail and engines incorporated into a lightweight fuselage." It also included energy sources like fuel and solar cells. Charles Champion, Airbus executive vice president of engineering, "says the technologies in the concept are feasible but 'not likely to come together in the same manner.'"

Notes: the bottom picture is an Massachusetts Institute of Technology design. Odd nose for subsonic plane- amphibious? Like all concept designs, the Airbus airplane wears stylish wrap-around shades. Wonder how long that will last...

 

The bottom one I believe could be the future of designs. I've heard lots of hype about the lifting body types of airframes, but the real hurdle is making them a reality. For that structure to be pressurized, and handle the stresses, it's not like it can be just one big open space inside. Probably be very compartmentalized, which at that point would it really be a money saver? Although, advantage of passengers, you might only be stuck next to one or two annoying people, won't have to deal with every idiot in the tube!

 

I understood the cabin(s) to be two tubes side-by-side in there.

 

Lifting body technology is an aerodynamic design technique used in the supersonic speed range originally pioneered by NASA in the early 60s for atmospheric reentry vehicles. Lifting body theory can be seen in the design of the Space Shuttle. The last Space Shuttle flight has already taken place.

I am not sure what MIT is thinking by making the ventral front flat in its airliner, but lift would be a minor reason. Weight savings would be my guess. An airliner cockpit does not need to offer a ton of space to house two pilots and their avionics, so drag created from abrupt curvature permitting, you would want to keep things small to save weight. Engineering is a battle between goals.

The top design has a low aspect ratio wing and stab, these are efficiency features to reduce drag. This would be squared off against greater structural stress so this design would have to be made out of wonderbread unless the materials are darned good. Therefore I guess it is predominantly composite. Composite is the future... no secret at this point.

Buried engines are a great idea but it requires freedom from engine maintenance, so you can shoot that one down. DeHavilland tried it in the early 50s and it worked awfully.

The RayBans on the top one are a joke. Nix that. Bird-repellant windows are the norm. Which one do you want to be behind?

Out of these 3 images I get the message that composite materials are the future- and I agree with that.