Groundbreaking ‘blended-wing’ demonstrator plane cleared to fly

  • Thread starter Thread starter Astronuc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Aircraft
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the recent clearance for JetZero's blended wing body demonstrator plane, Pathfinder, to conduct test flights. Participants explore the implications of this new aircraft design in the context of reducing carbon emissions in aviation, comparing it to existing aircraft concepts and addressing potential challenges in control and safety.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the significance of JetZero's achievement in the context of the aviation industry's need for innovation to reduce carbon emissions.
  • There are comparisons made between the blended wing design and Northrop-Grumman's flying wing, with some arguing that the latter presents greater challenges due to its lack of vertical control surfaces.
  • Concerns are raised about emergency evacuation procedures for the new fuselage design, with humorous remarks about the design of the doors.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the feasibility of computer-assisted control systems in aviation, referencing past issues with the Boeing 737 MAX and questioning the reliability of such systems in commercial aircraft.
  • There is a discussion about the complexities of aircraft control, noting that steering introduces inefficiencies that could affect performance.
  • Participants express mixed feelings about the potential of the blended wing design, with some believing it could be a good idea while others remain critical of the hype surrounding it.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, with multiple competing views on the practicality and safety of the blended wing design, as well as differing opinions on the effectiveness of computer control systems in aviation.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions touch on unresolved technical challenges related to aircraft control and safety, particularly in relation to emergency situations and the reliability of automated systems.

Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
22,521
Reaction score
7,481
A seismic shake-up is about to take place. An entirely new aircraft shape has been cleared to take off into California skies. At the end of last month, Long Beach-based JetZero announced that Pathfinder, its 1:8 scale “blended wing body” demonstrator plane, has been granted an FAA Airworthiness certificate and test flights are imminent.

As the industry desperately looks for ways to reduce carbon emissions, it faces a somewhat tougher challenge than other sectors precisely because its core technologies have proven so hard to move away from. It’s a ripe time to innovate.
https://news.yahoo.com/lifestyle/jetzero-groundbreaking-blended-wing-demonstrator-095758254.html

It occurred to me that the flying wing concept has been successfully demonstrated by Northrop-Grumman, and one could certainly build a scaled craft to test a concept.

Both Boeing and Airbus are tinkering with the idea, and JetZero’s new milestone brings it a little closer to its ambitious goal of putting into service a blended wing aircraft as soon as 2030.

“We feel very strongly about a path to zero emissions in big jets, and the blended wing airframe can deliver 50% lower fuel burn and emissions,” Tom O’Leary, co-founder and CEO of JetZero, told CNN in August 2023. “That is a staggering leap forward in comparison to what the industry is used to.”
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
Astronuc said:
https://news.yahoo.com/lifestyle/jetzero-groundbreaking-blended-wing-demonstrator-095758254.html
1712238710664.png
 
Astronuc said:
It occurred to me that the flying wing concept has been successfully demonstrated by Northrop-Grumman, and one could certainly build a scaled craft to test a concept.
IMO, Northrop-Grumman's flying wing is a lot harder than the blended wing in the OP because the flying-wing has no vertical control surface at all. Lateral control is more complicated. Some military airplanes have had lifting bodies for a while. I think that the OP is more about commercial use of a blended wing than about the blended wing itself.
 
Too soon to invest my life savings?
 
… I will be very curious about how they handle emergency evacuations from that fuselage.
 
Flyboy said:
… I will be very curious about how they handle emergency evacuations from that fuselage.
The skylights have explosive bolts... :wink:
 
Is this a bad time for a Boeing quip?
 
Reply
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and berkeman
FactChecker said:
IMO, Northrop-Grumman's flying wing is a lot harder than the blended wing in the OP because the flying-wing has no vertical control surface at all. Lateral control is more complicated. Some military airplanes have had lifting bodies for a while. I think that the OP is more about commercial use of a blended wing than about the blended wing itself.
Yeah, on many military planes if you lose your computer-assist you pretty much just immediately eject. I don't think that will.....um....fly on a commercial plane.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker and berkeman
That press release was...um...sufficiently rich in organic material that it could itself be used as a renewable fuel.

First, the problem with carbon emissions has been solved: the rich jet off to Davos where they lecture the rest of us to cut our carbon. :wink:

Fundamentally, the issue is that aircraft are controlled by forces other than just lift and thrust, You want to steer the plane, and you introduce "inefficiencies", which simply means energy used to steer the plane rather than propel the plane.

"But wait!" you say. "We can control this with a computer", It's been tried, with e,g, the 737max and MCAS. Experience shows this is easier said than done.

Don't get me wrong - this may well be a good idea and an excellent plane. But the text cries out "If you can't do hypersonic, at least do hype."
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Astronuc, Dale, russ_watters and 1 other person
  • #10
russ_watters said:
you pretty much just immediately eject. I don't think that will.....um....fly on a commercial plane.
Had someone been sitting next to the door plug on the Alaska flight, that's pretty much what would have happened.
 
Reply
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #11
Flyboy said:
… I will be very curious about how they handle emergency evacuations from that fuselage.
They get Boeing to design the doors.
 
Reply
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
"But wait!" you say. "We can control this with a computer", It's been tried, with e,g, the 737max and MCAS. Experience shows this is easier said than done.
We better not open that can of worms. There were so many fundamental control law design violations there that I am sure the important decisions were made by management, not CLAW engineers. That was not a difficult problem for a properly designed flight control. My understanding is that the basic flaws have been corrected, but I do not know that for sure.
 
  • #13
FactChecker said:
We better not open that can of worms.
Well that's a mean thing to call the passengers in the fuselage....near a pull-tab door plug.

Anyway, MCAS sucked but wasn't even really needed to make the plane flyable. It just would have had weird handling in some parts of the envelope without it. For a flying wing like a B-2 or even an F-16 or F-117 (probably others), the computer control is required otherwise the plane is completely unflyable.

That said, manual/direct control did not save Air France 447 from a really bad pilot.
 
Reply
  • Like
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt, Bystander, Flyboy and 2 others

Similar threads

Failure of Sparcraft Wings on my Aerobatic Aircraft
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
15K