NASA's big ideas for the future of flight (photos)
by ZDNet Author | February 5, 2012 5:00pm PST | Image 1 of 9
Previous | Next
NASA has some pretty lofty goals for the future of commercial aviation, and in working with some of the aircraft industry's biggest players this past year, the space agency is hoping to create partnerships that will lead to cleaner and greener ways to fly.
In the future, NASA wants flights that will burn 50 percent less fuel than aircraft that entered service in 1998, release 75 percent fewer harmful emissions, and minimize the radius of airport noise pollution by 83 percent.
At the Green Flight Challenge this past year, NASA's Centennial Challenges program asked builders to create ultra efficient personal flight vehicles, finding new ways to use the layers of uncluttered 3D space above us to get around, and now, NASA is working toward a better future for commercial flights, too.
In the future, NASA wants flights that will burn 50 percent less fuel than aircraft that entered service in 1998, release 75 percent fewer harmful emissions, and minimize the radius of airport noise pollution by 83 percent.
At the Green Flight Challenge this past year, NASA's Centennial Challenges program asked builders to create ultra efficient personal flight vehicles, finding new ways to use the layers of uncluttered 3D space above us to get around, and now, NASA is working toward a better future for commercial flights, too.
Just In
NASA's going to waste billions of dollars trying to lower so-called "harmful" emissions when they should be working towards getting Americans back into space. What will end up happening is Americans getting it in the backside...again. The result of all of this "research" will only serve to jack up the cost of flying and we, the American people, will end up paying for it all and gaining nothing.
The final SST is almost a carbon copy of the SST design from the late 60s/early 70s that was supposed to blow the Concorde away. But, as then, I continue to be a bit surprised that the Pegagus design proposed by the late Phillip Bono and Kenneth Gatland remains ignored/forgotten. NASA seems to like wings (cf. the Shuttle) because flying is sexy (?) but adding the weight especially if you're looking for re-useable orbital vehicles or rapid intercontinental passenger travel doesn't make that much sense...
Humm, appears Northrop Grumman is borrowing from their previous B-2 Spirit design.
Which relied on the B-35/b-49 of the 1940's@CobraA1
Those tired designs. They need to look into new propulsion systems and try to get rid of that old jet propulsion technology.
Thanks to our current leadership the only big ideas are old technology. NASA no longer exists as I knew it 40+ years ago. Our only hope for NASA now is new maverick leadership. White shirts, skinny ties, pocket protectors, and bold ideas again.
... secrete flights going on. No sound, no exhaust, no "combustion motor" to speak of.
It's called, Gravity repulsion.
.
Now don't that sound repulsive?
.
It's called, Gravity repulsion.
.
Now don't that sound repulsive?
.
So NASA is showing off some decades old technology? The space shuttle was 1930's technology and they still claim the SR-71 to be the fastest flying aircraft. More than 2/3rds of NASA is about programs and technology you'll never know about. Now they dangle some aged garbage in front of us.
NASA! What's really going on? Tell us! We can handle it.
NASA! What's really going on? Tell us! We can handle it.
I seem to recall that I have been seeing these designs at least a decade ago. Instead of reuse these ideas over and over again, I hope these so-called geeks better start coming up w/ new innovative ideas and designs but putting back politic games in the closet. Those guys who used the i386 in the space shuttle better get retired; otherwise, they still mooching on tax payer's money just like the rest of the current crop of corporate lobbyists.
Remove the tail. The elevators on most aircraft are attached to "wings" there only to create "negative lift" - that means part of the power is helping gravity keep the plane down, not up. Going to an all-lift body design would give an immediate improvement. Canards are sexy, too! Some of those "age-old" ideas need to be revisited, but you'll have to go back farther: the Wright brothers got so much of it right the first time.
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
