Boeing's fuel-efficient aircraft design wins $425 million award from NASA

UPI ^ | JAN. 18, 2023 / 4:05 PM | By Matt Bernardini

[Red Badger]

Aviation PING!.......................

[HamiltonJay]

I assume the main gain here is that the top of structure wings allow for them to be thinner as the structural attachments are now handled by the supports, rather than being integrated into the wing itself the wing, and therefor produce less drag.

Who knew the flying boxcar design would get applied to planes on this scale.

[Magnum44]

High wing design provides more lift thank conventional wing design.

Also provides a more stability, which is just fine for a commercial aircraft (not a fighter).

Large turbofan engines are already very fuel efficient, but new materials, etc, will help eek out some additional efficiencies.

Everything here makes good monetary sense except the stupid comment about getting to net zero. That wont happen unless we just stop traveling.

[Red Badger]

Also more lifting surface................

[isthisnickcool]

Boeing can pay for their own stuff....

[nascarnation]

Looks like it will make a kickin’ private jet....

[UNGN]

Just don’t fly it in winter.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Those seats staring at the loud underwing engine and strut are going to be real desirable.

[1Old Pro]

"NASA is working toward an ambitious goal of developing game-changing technologies to reduce aviation energy use and emissions over the coming decades toward an aviation community goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050," said Bob Pearce, NASA associate administrator for the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate.

What is NASA doing sticking their nose into this? And shouldn't we be at all concerned with the failing FAA computer technology?

[ProtectOurFreedom]

How does a maybe 5% improvement in fuel consumption make something “sustainable”? If we’re were going to run out of fuel in 100 years, this improvement means we get an extra 5 years before running out. That is not truly “sustainable.” It’s a small life extension for man.

[Red Badger]

They’ll be electric..................😜😉

[nascarnation]

It’s middle class welfare for engineers and technicians and fabricators. Not all bad.

[Red Badger]

Air Force One......................

[NorthMountain]

High wing IS conventional ... for military transport.

With the wings on top, they may be able to use even higher bypass ratios without doing stupid things like making oval intakes.

This may well be a good idea. The wing loading will be much higher than has historically been normal for commercial aircraft. They’ll have to account for that in both design and maintenance.

“Net zero” is just bullcrap.

[NorthMountain]

The first “A” in NASA is for Aeronautics.

Fixing the FAA is not Boeing’s or NASA’s problem. And we can do more than one thing at a time.

[Chode]

wi a wing cord like that, it’s all engine keeping it aloft...

like to see the glide ratio

[cgbg]

“That is not truly “sustainable.”

I detect the use of math in your calculations.

Now you know why math is racist.

The elites do not want you analyzing their latest scams.

[1Old Pro]

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is America’s civil space program and the global leader in space exploration. The agency has a diverse workforce of just under 18,000 civil servants, and works with many more U.S. contractors, academia, and international and commercial partners to explore, discover, and expand knowledge for the benefit of humanity.

Oh, O.K. I thought their primary focus was on diversity.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Yeah, those skinny wings just scream “overload me!”