Follow this blog:
RSS

NASA-MIT ‘greener’ airplane could use 70% less fuel

By | May 17, 2010, 4:42 PM PDT

MIT has presented NASA with two new airplane designs as part of a $2.1 million research contract to create more environmentally friendly planes. NASA wants planes that are quieter and can take off from shorter runways. It also wants planes’ emissions of greenhouse gasses (nitrous oxide) cut by 75 percent.

The first design, called the “D” or “double bubble,” would use 70 percent less fuel than a Boeing 737, according to MIT. Note the long, skinny wings and the small tail.

Although the plane would fly 10 percent more slowly than a 737, it has a wider body, so passengers should be able to get in and out of the plane faster and maybe shave a few minutes off flight time, MIT hopes.

From MIT:

“The engineers conceived of the D series by reconfiguring the tube-and-wing structure. Instead of using a single fuselage cylinder, they used two partial cylinders placed side by side to create a wider structure whose cross-section resembles two soap bubbles joined together. They also moved the engines from the usual wing-mounted locations to the rear of the fuselage. Unlike the engines on most transport aircraft that take in the high-speed, undisturbed air flow, the D-series engines take in slower moving air that is present in the wake of the fuselage. Known as the Boundary Layer Ingestion (BLI), this technique allows the engines to use less fuel for the same amount of thrust, although the design has several practical drawbacks, such as creating more engine stress.”

The other design, the H, would replace the Boeing 777 for international flights. It’s closer in design to current planes and would burn 50 percent less fuel.

Again, from MIT:

“…a larger design is needed for this plane to carry more passengers over longer distances. The MIT team designed a triangular-shaped hybrid wing body aircraft that blends a wider fuselage with the wings for improved aerodyamics.  The large center body creates a forward lift that eliminates the need for a tail to balance the aircraft.

The large structure also allows engineers to explore different propulsion architectures for the plane, such as a distributed system of multiple smaller engines. Although the H series meets NASA’s emissions-reduction and runway-length goals, the researchers said they will continue to improve the design to meet more of NASA’s objectives.”

Plane designs can’t get too far ahead of today’s planes because current airports have to be able to accommodate them, although the FAA’s Carl Burleson says that even the Double Bubble shouldn’t require any redesigning of airport gates.

MIT’s team is competing against teams from Boeing, GE Aviation and Northrop Grumman, which also worked on subsonic commercial jet designs. Boeing and Lockheed-Martin, meanwhile, have designed supersonic commercial jets.

NASA will pick two of the six teams to move forward, probably within the next few months. The agency is looking far ahead — these planes won’t be ready to fly until 2035. By that time, says MIT’s chief designer, Professor Ed Greitzer, air traffic will have doubled.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Deborah Gage

About Deborah Gage

Deborah Gage was a contributing editor for SmartPlanet in 2010.

Deborah Gage

Deborah Gage

Contributing Editor, Technology

Deborah Gage has written for the San Francisco Chronicle, Minnesota Public Radio, Baseline and various magazines and newspapers. She is based in San Francisco.

Follow her on Twitter.

Deborah Gage

Deborah Gage

I pride myself on being an independent journalist. My reporting and writing are not influenced by any financial holdings, and I have no business affiliations with companies other than the publishers I write for as a journalist.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

7
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
RE: NASA-MIT 'greener' airplane could use 70% less fuel
I am not airflow genius, but doesn't using air in the 'wake' to power the engines making the plane more sensitive to turbulance?
Posted by smankinson
18th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: NASA-MIT 'greener' airplane could use 70% less fuel
@smankinson:
I'm not an airflow genius either, but I am a private pilot. I dont think it will make it more sensitive to turbulance - The wake they're talking about will be the wake of the plane itself, not the wake of another plane or something else that would cause turbulance. The "Boundry Layer" they're talking about is the airflow that is adhering to the aerodynamic surface and creating the lift. Theoretically, I believe that this layer should be very stable in fact, and very predictable because as long as the plane is making lift, there should be a BL to take advantage of.
Posted by 172pilot@...
18th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
cool beans
work smarter, not harder
Posted by shadfurman
18th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: NASA-MIT 'greener' airplane could use 70% less fuel
"Blended wing" (wing and body as a single continuous aerodynamic shape was a "hot topic" back in the early 1970s. Fundemental problem then as now is that a BW aircraft is vastly different from our "wing and tube" designs and thus requires a very different, and thus more expensive, production process. Building airliners is a high-risk business as it is; a couple of extra Billion for a totally new factory would almost certainly kill the economics of such a new design.

The idea of "engines in the tail" as a radical new design element is kind of a laugh. Appearantly nobody remembers the BAC-111, DC-9 or B727.
Posted by rsmcrffl2
18th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
Doubtful that air traffic will double by 2035.
In my view, 25 years from now, I see more people avoiding air travel than ever. Airport security procedures are becoming more and more hostile toward passengers. High bandwidth communications is becoming better and better. I see more business people avoiding air travel and choosing video conferencing instead by 2035. Even vacationers are avoiding air travel in favor of driving these days. I don't see that trend changing.

I'll give you an example of why it's only going to get worse for airlines. I started driving up to 5 hours to a lot of destinations and I'm arriving at the same time I would have arrived by flying thanks to insane security lines which require arriving at the airport hours before your flight. Plus, if I drive I can bring as much baggage as I want. My vehicle is far more comfortable. I'm never trapped next to a crying baby or somebody who is coughing or sneezing non-stop. I'm never stuck in the middle seat. I control the air quality, temperature, food, music, and every other aspect of the travel environment. Why would I fly?
Posted by BillDem
19th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: NASA-MIT 'greener' airplane could use 70% less fuel
That 70% undoubtedly refers to a cruise condition. Practically, a large portion of fuel used is in taxi, takeoff and climbout, where these designs offer little help The blended wing dates back to the 30s.
Besides aerodynamics, engine improvements are possible.
I have to agree that air traffic may well not double as predicted. Besides the problems mentioned, personal air travel may take up some of the load. GPS makes possible completely autonomous flight, possibly following existing interstate routes. A four place 200 mph at $50000 is feasible using smaller general aviation airfields. A rental bass, combned with rental car on the other end. Flights of less than 800 miles would save time and money.
Posted by dixon757@...
19th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
What about Turtle airships?
I saw an article about Turtle airships a while back.
Is there any credibility or feasibility to this alternative?
Could you investigate and maybe do a follow up story?

Ttyl, Gary
Posted by martian@...
21st Jun 2010
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet Community and join the conversation! Signing-up is free and quick, Do it now, we want to hear your opinion.