Is this shit real:

Is this shit real:
sciencealert.com/fuel-efficient-v-plane-plans-to-seat-passengers-in-its-wings?__twitter_impression=true

This looks amazing.

Attached: Doomguy.jpg (960x960, 69K)

Yeah uh, I'm not giving your shit website a view, asswipe.

Why didn't you post an image of the plane, OP?

Attached: FlyingV01.jpg (1937x968, 181K)

Whatever will he do without you, you self important cunt..

But what about balance issues? There's a reason we put people and cargo right between the wings.

That was a politically incorrect way of saying "archive your sources and then post the archived link"

No fat people allowed. Rules out Jow Forums.

Would balance really be a problem?

Attached: YB49-2_300.jpg (1468x1166, 245K)

The cockpit is right in the center, no people flying on the wings.

But it still has fuel tanks in the wings right?

>seat mostly americans on one side
>seat mostly europeans on the other
>plane dives and crashes

Attached: 20190613_085028.jpg (1432x1074, 812K)

Yes, but fuel is usually more manageable than people and cargo.

What the fuck is this nasty ass piece of technology?

It's called a cellphone.

Because I'm retarded and suck nigger cock.

Does it fly like a boomerang to make the return trip turnaround time much faster

No, the passengers are only seated in one wing, so as it flies it is constantly corkscrewing through the sky in an aileron roll.

Flying wing airliners never happen due to airports. They would have to redesign all the terminals to fit them, it's cheaper to just keep flying less efficient conventional designs than rebuild airport terminals.

Why does it look like a mod for GTA V?
Also checked.

It's just a render mockup I think, and they haven't built it yet

The article states the wingspan is the same as an Airbus a320. The number of passengers is the same, and the cargo area is the same.

The big question the article doesn't talk about much is stability.

The Nazis experimented with flying wings like this aircraft. They(flying wings designs) didn't get popular because the designs were too unstable. That could change with modern technology. It has to be built and tested.

They've been talking about passenger planes designed like this for years now.

So do most jets...

woah....

Flying wing aircraft already exist it's not just some Nazi experiment.

Attached: B-2_Spirit_(cropped).jpg (1937x995, 899K)

It seems like it needs special equipment to board passengers otherwise it would be really awkward to angle the aircraft in the parking space.
Not all civil airports will have those swiveling gates unless perhaps they make a section that can be wheeled into place and acts like an adapter/extension of the boarding gate.

maybe the fuel could be taken from either side depending on where the weight difference is.

but people on a plane, fat or not, do not weigh as much as 30,000 gallons of fuel.

It's entirely possible they built it as a GTA mod as a quick and dirty way to get a concept demo. You could shoot promo footage that way easily.

probably done as a measure to prevent the cable fraying.

Depends on whether the stability of the plane has rendered any middle weight negligible.
It could be theoretically possible. It could even lead to massive innovation in this industry that creates faster aircraft.
People don't care about the emissions or efficiency unless it's faster and cheaper.

>Cunt is not PC

Attached: 1533793424540.jpg (250x250, 10K)

not if you are going fast enough

The weight is centralised in that pic though.

put all the americans in one wing and the indians in the other. fly in circles until you run out of fuel.

>The article states the wingspan is the same as an Airbus a320. The number of passengers is the same, and the cargo area is the same.
>The big question the article doesn't talk about much is stability.
>The Nazis experimented with flying wings like this aircraft. They(flying wings designs) didn't get popular because the designs were too unstable. That could change with modern technology. It has to be built and tested.
They figured it out recently, the horton ho229 used an unusual lift distribution that prevented adverse yaw when rolling. The b2 had to rely on computers using the rudders to prevent adverse yaw, while the previous US attempts without computers were prone to falling out of the sky.

>clickbait website
>is this shit real?
What do you think, retard?

/Thread. When I was a kid in elementary school in the 90's, my school library had books about futuristic aircraft with pictures of aircraft similar to the one in OP's article. Those books were published in the 70's and 80's.

>literally no photos of flying wing passenger planes that have a chance of working commercially

this design was in a popsci magazine a few years back. It had a working prototype, too. At some point, an airline ran a few polls, and no shit, they said that passenger wouldn't be okay with a ticket price that was less than a third what conventional planes cost if you couldn't see a window from your seat. Seems like bullshit on the airline's behalf to me.

Attached: file.png (650x366, 430K)

>this looks amazing

yeah maybe for the first class
cause the inertia from every movement will make the economy class to vomit on each change of direction

Is that doomguy

>no shit, they said that passenger wouldn't be okay with a ticket price that was less than a third what conventional planes cost if you couldn't see a window from your seat

Wow normies are fucking retarded, a ticket price being chopped by 2/3 but the only drawback is you can't see out a tiny hole which you can't really see unless you are on the window seat, half the time is shut or black because it's night and most of the time all you see is clouds. Why the fuck would you not sign up in a heartbeat?

Last I checked flying wings are unstable as fuck, and that's with the weight still being mostly centered (like the B2). Unless there's been amazing breakthroughs in aerodynamics that are suddenly making this viable, I don't see how it could fly.

With how saturated mobile devices are now I'm sure passengers would care considerably less.

Idk, we’re called Amerifats for a reason.

>plane banks
>people in the wing tips pass out from suddenly being exposed to -8G

All your planes look gay

Attached: Based.jpg (650x443, 42K)

the b2 and the f117 were both revolutionary aircraft but they were revolutionary because they have a low radar cross section. the only reason that we went with those designs was specifically for their radar signature, and had nothing to do with their efficiency or performance. the f117 was actually so bad in that regard we retired it because the one thing we designed it to do wasn't relevant anymore

the b2 has a very complex computer yaw control system they had to design to keep the plane stable in the air without vertical stabilizers, and the only reason they didn't put vertical stabilizers on it was to reduce its radar cross section - there would be no reason to make that design consideration on a commercial aircraft.

Attached: stealth-bomber-1.jpg (400x340, 29K)