
Scale model of 'Flying-V' airplane makes successful maiden flight - tomohawk
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/flying-v-maiden-flight-intl-scli-grm/index.html
======
mywacaday
I do not want to be in one of these planes in the back row 30ft + from the
center of gravity when this thing hits turbulence or is rolling while landing
in bad weather. This was discussed in anther post some time ago about the same
design type but can't find it right now.

~~~
m463
I wonder if there's a way to counteract this with automatic flight controls
that work both tactically and strategically.

tactical would keep the plane level, and strategic would set up for turns to
take them more slowly than current jets.

I think about this because of the Tex Johnston 1-g barrel rolls during the
demonstration flight where the people inside the plane experience "normal" g
force.

------
blunte
As an armchair engineer, I wonder about engine behavior at high angle of
attack. It looks like it could be difficult to feed the engines enough air to
maintain thrust.

I hope they work out all the details, because improved efficiency is a big
deal. Although I also prefer the older Boeing blended wing body since it
seemed to offer great efficiencies and immense interior space.

As I recall, one of the factors in abandoning the idea for passenger planes
was the assumed reluctance of people to sit in a flying room (where they can't
see out and could be more disoriented or uncomfortable).

~~~
dghughes
> As I recall, one of the factors in abandoning the idea for passenger planes

Another was the different forces on passengers depending on where you were
seated. A regular airplane everyone is situated on the same plane (ha pun!)
more or less. But on a V config anyone far from the center would experience
greater forces when the aircraft moved.

~~~
axaxs
That's what I was thinking. I've been on a lot of planes that banked -hard- on
approach. I can't begin to imagine what that would feel like sitting in this
configuration.

~~~
blunte
Presumably the roll rate on that type of plane would be lower than on a
traditional tube-with-wings design. So while the bank angle might still be
high, it won't happen quickly.

As long as the plane is banked at an appropriate angle (relative to the rudder
angle), the passengers shouldn't feel anything other than perhaps a bit more
positive G force.

~~~
axaxs
What about turbulence? I've been in some doozies where it felt like the pilot
was fighting it hard, constant up and down and left and right corrections. I
wonder what effect that fast change in altitude has, if any? Just G Force?

~~~
ncmncm
Pilots do not fight turbulence, hard or lightly. The plane goes where it is
pushed, and you go with it.

A very long (thus widespread) updraft might cause the pilot to reduce power,
but that is very rare.

~~~
axaxs
I'm not refuting you, but now I'm genuinely curious. We all know or think of
turbulence like hitting bumps in the road, shaking, etc.. I was on a
shorthaul, some embraer or similar sized plane, and experienced this only
once. We kept hitting those big 'bumps', then I'd feel the plane dive down or
up quickly. The kind that gives you the feeling in your stomach, like going
over a hill as a kid in a car.

In my head to this day I assumed the pilot was quickly trying to find an
elevation to avoid the turbulence, but your comment implies that's incorrect.
So those quick pitches are also a form of turbulence? It was stomach turning,
and honestly made me a bit uneasy.

~~~
ncmncm
What you call turbulence is really just a mass of air moving at a different
speed or in a different direction, and the plane moved out of one into the
next.

So, e.g., the plane passes into a downdraft near a cloud, and then into an
updraft under the cloud, then into another downdraft, and then out. You feel
four lurches. The pilot might be looking for a path that stays away from
those, but you won't feel anything the pilot does.

------
syntaxing
Flying wing designs have always facinated me and blows my mind how this was
invented in the 1930s. Its fairly well known that flying wing in theory is
more suitable for long term travel. But the biggest issue was ergonomics (as
my professor put it, no one wants to feel like sitting in a movie theater for
over 2 hours) and flight controls. Seems like they're trying to fix the ergo
issue with the double fuselage-like design. It would be pretty exciting to sit
in one of these if the idea picks up.

------
Cthulhu_
Interesting / weird concept. I'm cynical that it'll take off (ha) as a concept
for passengers, given that they'll either be sitting at an angle (in relation
to the flying direction), or they'll have to tilt all the seats making the
internal seating arrangement weird and ineffective. But counter-intuitively,
it looks like a simpler design for planes compared to those with wings.

~~~
dehrmann
There are business class layouts at angles and no one seems to mind.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herringbone_seating](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herringbone_seating)

~~~
GordonS
BA's business class has seats facing backwards too. Never bothered me, and I'm
obviously not alone in that.

~~~
dehrmann
The things that help most for dealing with motion sickness on planes are
having a good perspective view of land and being the one flying the plane.
Those don't work so well for commercial air travel, so G forces are kept
pretty modest and directed down and there aren't sudden movements. Sensitive
people do better around the center, but otherwise, people mostly do OK on
planes, even at a slight angle or backwards. This isn't "Harry Potter and the
Forbidden Journey."

------
arnon
This concept is not new. Lifting bodies have been around since the 20s.

Boeing and NASA have both experimented with this
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_wing_body](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_wing_body)

~~~
Cthulhu_
Nowhere is it claimed to be a new invention. On that page itself there's only
two or three that were aimed at passengers, none of which ended up
commercially viable.

But it also has (or links to) reasons why it's not been developed further for
passengers; to quote:

"Passengers are unwilling to sit in windowless environments." \- not an issue
with this particular design

"Passengers furthest from centerline will be subject to potential discomfort
during wing roll. Extreme discomfort results in motion sickness." \-
Definitely an issue I think.

(on the X-48): "[...] passengers did not like the theater-like configuration
of the mock-up; the design was dropped for passenger airliners" \- Also not
really an issue due to the dual-fuselage design of this one.

~~~
valuearb
NM: I didn’t see the double tube design.

------
bitemealienboi
It looks cool and sounds cool but I doubt it will get popular.

You have entire companies, organizations, groups, standards, certifications,
training and employees built around the current airframes. Its not going to be
easy to change all of those overnight.

Not to mention, current airframes are the way they are because its what works
best. Ever wondered why engines are always on the bottom of the wings, never
on the top, or almost never on the back? Because its close to the ground and
easy to maintain. Ever wonder why the wings are pointed upwards and swept
back? Because those are the most fuel efficient and stable configurations.
Flat fuselages like in the V plane means less heigh clearance which means
passenger planes will have less space and freight planes will have trouble
carrying certain shapes of cargo. All in all, that makes it hard to sell for
any airplane manufacturers that want to make it

The current airframes are the way they are because of decades of incremental
improvements and selections of which designs work and which don't. The entire
industry or even a good enough chunk of it wont just drop that overnight

~~~
fastball
I don't know, the entire rocket industry is having to to re-orient itself
around SpaceX's reusable rockets.

And given current usage, the gains in better rockets presumably pale in
comparison to the potential savings / improvements that could be provided by
new airframe designs.

~~~
coredog64
One could make the argument that prior to SpaceX’s entry into the market,
there was stagnation due to limited market participants, cost-plus contracts,
etc.

Commercial aviation is the exact opposite of this: Since deregulation,
airlines have been operating in a highly competitive market with external
pressures that have forced adoption of new technologies (oil prices => fuel
efficiency, noise regulation => high bypass engines, labor costs =>
replacement of the flight engineer)

~~~
fastball
You're confusing airlines with manufacturers though. We're talking about an
airplane design here, not the operation of it.

Effectively there are only two international long-haul airplane manufacturers
(i.e. producers of planes that would compete with the OP) – Airbus and Boeing.
That seems like "limited market participants" to me.

------
fermigier
Am I the only one disappointed that they didn't make a plane in the shape of a
Gibson guitar?

~~~
myself248
That sounds like a youtube opportunity, go nuts!

------
acomjean
It looks like the Aereon.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEREON_26](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEREON_26)
Which test flew in 1971. There is a book about its development “flying deltoid
pumpkin seed”

Some more info:
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/72142/)

~~~
virtue3
What's interesting is the split tube design. Very different from usual flying
wing designs I've seen. possibilities for more windows?

~~~
LargoLasskhyfv
Who needs windows? Just give them all some AR/VR-Goggles, and have them look
_through_ the plane in any direction, like the helmet in the F-35 allows.

~~~
liability
I think any perceptible latency and turbulence together would probably turn
the plane into a vomitorium. Unless perhaps all the passengers where fighter
jet pilots with iron stomachs..

------
mnw21cam
Photos would help. Anyone have a link to any?

~~~
clouddrover
Yes, and a video:

[https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/flying-v-model-
embark...](https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/flying-v-model-embarks-on-
first-test-flight-with-airbus-support/139999.article)

It's a scale model that flew, not an actual aircraft. It's an interesting idea
though.

~~~
hobofan
Neither article addresses the flaw that always comes up when this design is
proposed: By placing the passengers in the wings instead of the the middle,
the would be exposed to much stronger turbulence (probably at a level
unbearable for the general public).

~~~
vidanay
Forget turbulence. Normal flight characteristics would be unbearable. Some of
the approaches to Chicago Midway airport have ~45 degree bank angles.

~~~
ginko
Why would this be unbearable further outside on the wing? Wouldn't the angle
still be the same for everyone on the plane?

~~~
vidanay
The angle isn't the problem, it's the 40' vertical drop for the passenger near
the wing tips.

~~~
mrfusion
What could be a solution would be the ability to angle the winglets up or down
and use those for your banking instead of the body.

~~~
p_l
The turning will cause banking, or just lead you to a stall unless you have
ridiculously słów turn rate (bad idea)

------
iso1631
These sorts of typos really annoy me

> Dutch airline KLM has agreed to find development of V-shaped aircraft

Do publishers not have any proof readers any more?

~~~
tyingq
To be fair, there are multiple entities taking revenue away from them over the
years. Something has to give.

------
mrfusion
So why this over a delta (flying wing) shape?

~~~
protomyth
Frankly, a flying wing would at least have placement of seats in a non-roller
coaster configuration.

------
flybrand
How is this different from the US military B2 style aircraft?

They look superficially very similar.

~~~
animationwill
The photo in the article is deceptive; better pictures are here:
[https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/flying-v-model-
embark...](https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/flying-v-model-embarks-on-
first-test-flight-with-airbus-support/139999.article)

------
rbanffy
Can the title be adjusted to make it clear it's a scale model?

~~~
stanski
Thank CNN for that. Clearly clickbait. The Flight Global article someone else
linked to has the word "model" in its title and a lot more useful information.

~~~
aww_dang
If there's going to be a change, I suggest just switching to the other link.

------
jacknews
There seems to be a lot about liquid-hydrogen as a fuel for passenger jets
lately.

IMHO, it's totally unsuitable.

Is there another reason it's being pushed, eg it's an output of some other
process that is desired?

------
valuearb
This seems like a useless efficiency, given no passengers would willingly fly
in it, and it’s not good layout for cargo either.

~~~
animationwill
" given no passengers would willingly fly in it,"

Why do you say that?

~~~
vidanay
Because the "cheap seats" further away from the centerline would be like a six
hour roller coaster ride at Six Flags.

The centerline seats would have no windows (doesn't matter to me, but does for
some people).

~~~
imglorp
Motion sickness is much more likely when people can't see the horizon. This
might be mitigated with forward facing monitors for each passenger.

But I'd pay for a six hour Six Flags experience. Turbulence and G's are fun
for some.

