- Joined
- 26 May 2006
- Messages
- 38,288
- Reaction score
- 20,425
hesham said:Hi,
the Boeing fighter had low aerodynamic drag and
lower radar signature.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=P7shAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=AVIATION+WEEK+airplane&num=100#PPA1,M1
CFE said:hesham said:Hi,
the Boeing fighter had low aerodynamic drag and
lower radar signature.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=P7shAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=AVIATION+WEEK+airplane&num=100#PPA1,M1
Looks like it's related to Boeing's ATF design, prior to the teaming with Lockheed & GD.
Triton said:[0008] Virtual vision screens could be used in place of the windows, particularly on the side of the passenger cabins adjacent the liquid fuel tanks.
fightingirish said:Multi-path inlet for aircraft engine
Link: http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=QDzGAAAAEBAJ
Also seen at Ares blog.
An airplane comprises a twin-deck fuselage in which an upper deck support structure is utilized for carry-through of a mid-mount main wing box. The main landing gear of the airplane is mounted to the fuselage and is stowed in a non-pressurized area below the main wing box (enabled due to an optimized wing box geometry). A pressurized passageway/cargo/galley complex separates the main landing gear box and the main wing box. The upper deck is continuous, while the lower deck is separated by the wheel wells into two distinct fore and aft areas (for either cargo or passengers). The airplane further comprises an integrated vertical fin and an aft-extended pressurized deck area for reduced double-deck wetted area. More specifically, the double-deck pressurized fuselage structure is extended to form a blending structure to which a structural box of the vertical fin is attached.
fightingirish said:Why would Boeing design a mid-wing, twinjet, double-decker 747?
By Stephen Trimble at flightblogger
A nice idea as a non BWB successor for the Boeing 747 / 777.
memaerobilia said:As to Boeing flotation bags in Post #71. Here is a USMC Boeing F4B-4 with bags being tested.
hesham said:pometablava said:Patents taken out by random inventors/lunatics are too far off topic in my opinion.
I agree with Overscan
The last patent is totally lunatic and has no interest to this forum
And I agree with you,but not all patents are imagine projects,
such as that project from Boeing,who can say it was really
or not ?
That design appears to be the 763-165 which was one of the 100+ NLA/VLCT/747-X designs planned back in the 1990s.Sorry for this double post,
and anther boeing patent.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=PH...boeing+design+for+an+airplane&num=100#PPP1,M1
Having copies of a series of Boeing heavy bomber design studies from the 1941-43 period - and many of them are VERY odd - I have no doubt that all the above designs were ideas that Boeing engineers put to paper.
AlanG