Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MIT Team Designs Airliner That Uses 70 Percent Less Fuel

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:00 PM
Original message
MIT Team Designs Airliner That Uses 70 Percent Less Fuel

MIT Team Designs Airliner That Uses 70 Percent Less Fuel


Massachusetts Institute of Technology researchers recently released a concept aircraft design that could use 70 percent less fuel than current commercial airliners. The simple secret, they say: Optimize the aircraft for modern, efficient jet engines.

Jet engines these days burn much less fuel at slightly slower speeds than the original designs that influenced the swept-wing designs of the ’50s and ’60s. One of the main problems is that most airliners still use leftovers from those designs even though the older jet engines they were designed around haven’t been used by most airlines for many years.

Today’s modern jet engines are much bigger in size, and much more efficient and quieter, says professor Mark Drela, the lead designer on the MIT team.

“From a purely design viewpoint, they’re really mismatched; the big engines want to go slower, which means the airplanes really want to have less wing sweep,” Drela says. “That’s one of the things we took advantage of.”



Read More http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/efficient-new-airliner-design-slows-down-to-match-jet-engines/#ixzz0pdZpy2q2


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cool. Score one for the fact-based Pointy Head peeps - sort of the anti-TeaBaggers
Edited on Tue Jun-01-10 04:18 PM by SpiralHawk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Definitely the anti-Teabaggers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. Roughly the 787
Boeing had tried to go to a faster, smaller plane, but their customers told them they wanted more fuel efficient. Airliners have been crusing a tad slower for a while, but as the article suggests, most legacy airliners hadn't been optimized around these speeds. I'd be curious to know if they are comparing their calculated efficiency against the 787 or the 737.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. I'm still amazed at 70 percent less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. Does it fly or do they just plan to park it on top of a building instead of a car this year?
I still haven't figured out how they get a car up there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LastLiberal in PalmSprings Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. This one uses no fuel at all --


Unfortunately, it takes three days to wind it up for a trip from New York to London.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. where is the air intake?
on the underbody somewhere?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC