Lingque and other next generation Chinese Airliner

PiSigma

"the engineer"
:eek: OMG Mace that's so Ugly It doesn't need lift the Earth just rejects it on principle! ;)View attachment 38206
That brings us to another reason for Top mounting engines. Size of the Engines. Each new generation of Airliner Engines has increased in Diameter over the last Almost to the point today where the Engine Nacelles are about as big around as the Fuselage! As this happens Airliner designers have to compensate by building larger landing gear and finding ways to mount longer heavier landing gear. by moving the engines above the wing and into the Air the landing gear no longer becomes and issue.
Only because all engines are hung under the wings. If its blended wing with engine inside, won't be a problem. Pain in the ass for maintenance but allows you have larger engines
 

MwRYum

Major
Winged body design is still not the future yet I think? Unless something that change the current pervailing market model back to the dominance of wide-body jumbo jets. When 3-4 hour hops is the common deal, workhorse like the 737 and perhaps somewhat larger units will still be the mainstay.

Unless we begin to talk about new airlift platform.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Winged body design is still not the future yet I think?
NASA aims a series of X plane Demonstrators for it's Ultra-Efficient Subsonic Transport Thrust some time between now and 2021 but those would be demonstrators not likely to see actual implementation until the late 2020's early 2030's. European venders are looking into it as part of there Clean Sky initiative. The Airbus concept aims into 2050. The Lockheed Transport to the later half of the 2020's.
Basically all of it is in the late 2020's soonest. It's mostly a tech and technology readiness study with the aim of spinning technologies and designs off into reality. like the Sikorsky X2 demonstrator chopper that spawned the Raider and Defiant Programs. or the Boeing 7E7 program.
Unless we begin to talk about new airlift platform.
I think Comac's civil arm is looking at NASA and the Clean Sky programs and is trying to show they can play to, The Concept model would be in my opinion based on a 2030's era replacement for the ARJ21. The Critical though for them is to look into how these concepts can feed into future products like the finalized 929 and the (If) 939.
 

delft

Brigadier
Küchemann wrote an article in the mid-fifties in which he showed that in the mid nineteenth century people in England mostly married people who were born within two hours train travel and that later that century it became the lesser distance of two hours bike travel. That's why he wanted to develop aircraft that would travel in two hours from England to Australia. And what about being at the airport three hours before departure? :D
I think we should maintain the current cruising speed for short and mid range aircraft. In current large aircraft many passengers are already unable to look out and I see no objection to passengers looking at a video or using the built in screen as their computer monitor and so BWB aircraft of one kind or another can well be built without windows. But only if the tickets are significantly cheaper.;)
For the long distances flying will remain boring unless passengers are able to walk around and possibly sleep confortably. The way to reduce fuel consumption and avoid CO2 production is then the a liquid hydrogen fuelled airship. Flying at 200 km/h a flight from England to Australia will take not two hours but four days. But the fuel fraction for such a flight would be less than 3 %!
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
I think these exotic designs will never first appear on any passenger liners. If they show up they will first show up on some military transport project, or some executive jet, then wait 20 years and then they will appear on a passenger liner.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
It's a hard sell for passenger airliners to accept blended wing models since the ones seated at the fringes are going to see a massive incline as the plane turns which becomes safety headaches for the flight attendants.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
It's a hard sell for passenger airliners to accept blended wing models since the ones seated at the fringes are going to see a massive incline as the plane turns which becomes safety headaches for the flight attendants.
Basic physics problem this time. The incline will not be any larger or smaller than on a conventional airliner since the incline is measured as a degree deviation from the center axis. But the vertical displacement (vertical distance moved) will be slightly greater at the wing roots, which is not any more dangerous or unpleasant at all. You should probably stop trying to look smart by "picking apart" basic design flaws on concepts that multiple countries are trying.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
It's a hard sell for passenger airliners to accept blended wing models since the ones seated at the fringes are going to see a massive incline as the plane turns which becomes safety headaches for the flight attendants.
That more depends on the design, and If the interior matches the external structure. I think what would move forward are the hybrid wing bodies for Airliners these would have a conventional nose, tail and passenger cabin profile. The Blended space would be mostly utility like landing gear, Avionics, batteries, Fuel and cargo/freight.
The more not conventional machines would I think be more specialized to dedicated Cargo roles Where They don't really care about the shape.
For the long distances flying will remain boring unless passengers are able to walk around and possibly sleep confortably.
We have already seen larger class Aircraft like the 747-8 and A380 adopt more snooze friendly features for premium seats 747-8 bisclass.jpg
And adding bars and lounges. Those are for the uppermost tier Long Haul liners. Not for the regional hops.
The way to reduce fuel consumption and avoid CO2 production is then the a liquid hydrogen fuelled airship. Flying at 200 km/h a flight from England to Australia will take not two hours but four days. But the fuel fraction for such a flight would be less than 3 %!
but 4 days on such means 4 days of food, 4 days of being trapped in a Carbon fiber gondola 4 days of being stuck with your fellow humanity in tight quarters. It would demand a Hindenberg style accommodations but the inefficiency of speed and such makes it dubious. Where an Airship might shine is in more remote reaches for Short hops in my opinion. Where in It's S/Vtol means it can land in far out places like remote villages or islands. where people want or need to travel but the closest Airport is hundreds of miles. parts of Alaska/Canada, China, Russia, Pacific islands. places where the next destination is close but unreachable without air or boat yet lack the space for a major airport or Harbor. Imagine flying to Hawaii landing on the large Island then hoping a Airship ferry to one of the smaller less crowded islands, the flight might be slow but they could make up for it with breathtaking views.
This also comes to Clean Sky as another interest in that program is Tiltrotors. Which can move more aviation to smaller less used fields for more efficiency based regional and local trips.
I think these exotic designs will never first appear on any passenger liners. If they show up they will first show up on some military transport project, or some executive jet, then wait 20 years and then they will appear on a passenger liner.
The Key driver for these is to reduce Fuel consumption ( IE COST ) to make a more efficient airframe. The Cheaper the flight the Cheaper the ticket, The more passengers will buy the cheaper the ticket. the more passengers flying the more the Airlines would be willing to buy Airframes Which feeds the industry bottom line.
Current commercial aviation has to find new ways to evolve, The Hub system is getting over worked and inefficient.
 
Top