Flying V

[Guest]

Interesting concept:

'Flying-V' concept receives funding boost from KLM

• 02 June, 2019
• SOURCE: Flight Dashboard
• BY: Alfred Chua
• Seoul

KLM has signed an agreement to support the development of a 'Flying V' blended wing concept that promises up to 20% better fuel efficiency compared to an Airbus A350.

The concept, developed by Delft Technical University (TU Delft) in the Netherlands features a V-shaped design that is passenger cabin, fuel hold and wings in one, powered by a pair of rear-mounted turbofan engines. Aside from the fuel savings, it is around 15% more aerodynamically efficient compared to conventional aircraft.

A rendering of the Flying-V blended-wing aircraft concept developed by TU Delft

KLM

TU Delft and KLM signed a co-operative agreement on the sidelines of the IATA Annual General Meeting in Seoul to help fund and support the concept.

KLM chief Pieter Elbers declined to reveal how much KLM is funding, but stressed that the airline was supportive of sustainable aviation initiatives.

A flying scale model and a full-size section of the interior of the Flying-V will be presented by KLM’s 100th anniversary celebrations.

Dean of TU Delft’s faculty of aerospace engineering Professor Henri Werij says that in its baseline configuration, the Flying-V would seat about 314 passengers in two classes.

With a total width of about 65m, and a length of 55m, which would allow it to be operated in existing airports. He adds that the design could be easily scaled up or down by inserting or removing modules, and would be well suited to the long-haul market.

In its present iteration, the concept would be powered by existing fuel-efficient turbofan engines, but Werij says it could be tweaked to take into account future developments in engines.

Airbus evidently has a patent on this type of bird.  The following goto provides more information. https://www.tudelft.nl/en/2019/tu-delft/klm-and-tu-delft-join-forces-to-make-aviation-more-sustainable/

[deicer]

Very interesting.

Will this be the next B vs A battleground seeing as to how Boeing has shelved the concept for now?

https://leehamnews.com/2018/04/03/dont-look-for-commercial-bwb-airplane-any-time-soon-says-boeings-future-airplanes-head/

 

 

april 3, 2018, © Leeham News: New airplanes for the foreseeable future are unlikely to look radically different than the tube-and-wing configuration that’s been around since the dawn of manned flight.

Yes, there are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that look very different. Yes, there are the B-2 and B-21 bombers that are flying wings.

Scaled Blended Wing Body airplane. Source: NASA.

And, yes, there is the Blended Wing Body concept that was created by McDonnell Douglas and tested, in scaled-size models, by Boeing, which acquired MDC in 1997.

But don’t expect to see a BWB either as a freighter or as a passenger airplane any time soon, says Boeing’s VP of Product Development and Future Airplane Development.

Nice idea, not very practical

Mike Sinnett says the configuration works. It’s economic. But its very configuration works against the airplane for commercial application, he says.

“The characteristics of a freighter, in general, are you want to be able to use the airplane at airports that aren’t typically as improved as airports are that we use passenger airplanes at,” he told an evening meeting March 28 at the University of Washington in Seattle. The event was organized by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

“Airport compatibility is a really important part of that,” he said.

Mike Sinnett.

“A BWB works great because it’s got [wing] span. It’s got more empty weight than a tube-and-wing configuration for a revenue ton of cargo. It’s going to carry more operational empty weight. It’s got span and it’s got a fair amount of wetted area.

Sinnett said designers will make the weight trade for span when there is a lot of range needed. For short missions, for example, four hours, the weight trade isn’t worth it.

“A four-hour mission isn’t going to work because you’ve got more weight and you’re not taking advantage of that span,” he said. Long cruise segments are required to make the aerodynamics work to their greatest benefit.

Large wing span may also conflict with airport compatibility, he said.

Cargo aircraft also need to be “loadable” quickly, he said. Existing freight containers and cargo loading systems need to work with the BWB.

Required economic improvement

“And, in general, unless it’s more than a 20% improvement over what you have today,” a new airplane isn’t justified. “For more than a 20% improvement, people will make the change,” he said.

Sinnett that that Boeing’s studies have only shown a few cases in which the economics are better than 20%.

Military cargo operations aren’t tied to commercial requirements.

“You can imagine someday where military cargo operations, long-range, where you’re going from hub-to-hub,” he said. But so far, there hasn’t been a customer requirement for which a BWB makes sense.

Passenger requirements

Sinnett said passenger use presents different challenges.

In a BWB, the center wing box is also where the passenger cabin is. The wing box needs to be tall enough to accommodate 95% of the world’s men to be able to stand upright.

Space is required for the carry-on bags. There has to be room above and below the floor for ventilation and systems.

“That means you have to have a certain height. Once you have a certain height, you’ve got to have a certain width for the box to work,” he said. “That translates into a certain span. You’ve got a really big airplane at that point.”

This results in the multiple hundreds of passengers, he said.

“It’s hard to do with a small airplane to get enough height in the center box.”

Another challenge

The design creates another challenge: developing a family of airplanes.

Boeing, as with all manufacturers, like several models of a basic design.

This enables the OEM to create, relatively inexpensively, several sub-types to cover the massive R&D costs and post high profit margins (at least in theory) the longer the program is in production.

With tube-and-wing design, it’s a relatively simple task to stretch or shrink the base design to create a three-member family.

The 737 MAX has four sizes, the MAX 7, 8, 9 and 10. Although there were special challenges to overcome for the MAX 10, the stretch was nevertheless accomplished for comparatively little money.

A BWB, with its unique shape, doesn’t lend itself to a stretch or a shrink, Sinnett said. “You take the most expensive part of the airplane, the non-constant section, and growing it in a non-constant way, or shrinking it in a non-constant way. It’s really hard.”

[Vsplat]

De-icing is gonna be a bear.  I guess no question about fuselage anti-icing, but that is gonna be a lot of fluid going into those engines. I would imagine the 'cold dry snow' case wouldn't matter, can't risk shedding a sheet of ice that big.  Maybe in-wing sensors would be the answer.

Vs

 

[blues deville]

Was thinking of a different Flying V.  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibson_Flying_V

[Kip Powick]

Well I guess window seats would be priced at quite a premium seeing there are none on the "inside" of the wing.

[JL]

The use of high def monitors (8k) as a virtual window installed in dividers between sections in the middle...may do the trick to alleviate the claustrophobic conditions.

[boestar]

Didnt someone do a study some years back on the forces experienced by passengers farthest away from the centerline of the aircraft?  The movement when the aircraft banks is not what is expected and caused Nausea in most of test subjects.  I cannot remember where I read it.

[Vsplat]

Another perspective view

[conehead]

10 hours ago, boestar said:

Didnt someone do a study some years back on the forces experienced by passengers farthest away from the centerline of the aircraft?  The movement when the aircraft banks is not what is expected and caused Nausea in most of test subjects.  I cannot remember where I read it.

Yeah, the poor schmucks in the outboard seats are in for a roller coaster ride.