Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

81% Positive

Analyzed from 2277 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#more#windows#window#design#commercial#passenger#wing#body#aircraft#off

Discussion (98 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

iamwil5 minutes ago
What I really want, is a plane that can load passengers like containers--or like a rollercoaster car. Of course, it should be comfortable. I just mean that the passenger compartment should be modular. So you can put your luggage in and get settled while sitting in the airport, and then when the plane comes in, it just side-loads everyone all at once. Once landed, it just slides everyone off, and you can just

I know that the crew uses the typical seating time to refuel and load luggage in the underbelly, but one can dream of not having to wait to get off the airplane.

wxwabout 3 hours ago
Haven't heard of this company before. A good synopsis I dug up in their fundraising announcement:

> JetZero, co-founded in 2020 by start-up veteran Tom O’Leary and aerospace legend Mark Page, is developing the world’s first commercial all-wing airplane. With up to 50% better fuel efficiency and lower carbon emissions compared to existing commercial airliners, JetZero's Z4 will offer the aviation industry a clear path to achieving its 2050 net-zero goals while also elevating the passenger experience. Working alongside the US Air Force, NASA, and the FAA, and backed by decades of investment and research into blended wing technology. JetZero looks to enter commercial service in the early 2030s.

Where an "all-wing" airplane is, kudos to Gemini,

> one that merges the main body and wings into a single lifting surface. This can reduce drag, lower fuel burn, and expand interior space.

xnxabout 3 hours ago
Big screens are an OK workaround for no passenger windows, but they still have to contend with severe structural pressurization challenges, strict emergency evacuation rules, and incompatibility with current airport gates.
briandwabout 3 hours ago
In a conventional aircraft you sit on the roll axis. In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness. Rather than rolling with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, you move up and down when the aircraft banks. Not necessarily a deal breaker, but an additional difference to deal with.
JumpCrisscrossabout 2 hours ago
> In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness

This sounds fixable in avionics and training. (Shallow, gradual banks.)

Note, too, that a larger lifting body needs to bank less to execute the same turn as a craft with more loading.

amlutoabout 1 hour ago
> Note, too, that a larger lifting body needs to bank less to execute the same turn as a craft with more loading.

This is not really helpful for passenger comfort. For a turn to be comfortable, you want the turn to be such that the effective force the passengers feel has no sideways (relative to the passengers) component, and the required roll angle is only a function of the velocity and turning radius. The aircraft design is irrelevant.

The Wikipedia article is mediocre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_flight

deadbabeabout 3 hours ago
Just gimbal the seats.
fugaziboutitabout 2 hours ago
New commercial seating design: Oops, All Pinch Points!
NegativeLatencyabout 2 hours ago
Doesn’t fix translation?
azza2110about 3 hours ago
No way. Looking out the window is one of the joys of flying.

Picking out my house, seeing tiny cars on a remote highway, etc. Even 100+ MP cameras and high resolution screens won't come close to that level of detail.

articulatepangabout 3 hours ago
But are you willing to pay 10-20% more for that joy? I personally would rather pay less money to fly, not get to see out the window, and spend those dollars on, say, a fancier meal at the destination. Or to have an extra day at the destination if my trip length is money-bound rather than time-bound. Or put those dollars towards an extra hour of childcare. Or … I have so many uses for dollars that give me more utility than “see out the window while flying”.

Where that number comes from: they claim 50% reduction in fuel consumption, which sounds doubtful to me, and fuel is about a third of flight costs, and I’m making some generous assumptions around perfect competition.

dzhiurgis3 minutes ago
Personally I'd give up everything for flat seat. Doesn't have to be business class seat - just something barest of the bare, basically bunk beds. My primary destination is Europe <> NZ which is about 24 hours in air.
karmajunkieabout 3 hours ago
it’s cute you think that’s going to show up in lower ticket costs instead of the company’s profit margin.
bruce511about 3 hours ago
Only a small fraction of current flyers get window seats. And the view from the isle seat or middle row is non-existent.

And that's before we talk about night flights when there's nothing to see, flights over water when there's nothing to see and so on.

So yes, I'm sure some people like windows. But the majority have demonstrated that they're just fine flying without them.

noduermeabout 1 hour ago
Not to mention the cretins who put their windows down for the whole flight.
ajuc6 minutes ago
[delayed]
seydorabout 2 hours ago
Skylights, Or floor windows for the freaky
carodgersabout 3 hours ago
Also the screen sizes they are showing have got to be exceedingly heavy.
3D3049742023 minutes ago
I'd wager a bunch of OLEDs will be lighter than built-in windows with all the structural reinforcing necessary to make them safe.
hankbondabout 3 hours ago
I know every gram is accounted for in aerospace but OLEDs weighs so little, especially if you can just heatsink into existing metal structures nearby.
colordropsabout 3 hours ago
I'm fine with not looking out of the window if the seat is comfortable and I can get to the bathroom more easily. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. Window enjoyers such as yourself will still be able to get the window seats.
JSR_FDEDabout 1 hour ago
I don’t know how many people are claustrophobic, but for me this would be a non-starter.

Edit: apparently 12.5% of the population has claustrophobia. If 5% of flyers choose a different airline due to simulated windows that would wipe out any cost benefit from fuel savings.

unsnap_biceps4 minutes ago
I don't think it is that simple. If a route has mixed offerings and the cheaper option is the windowless plane, it's likely to be full and they'll save on fuel costs for the full flight and can charge extra for a normal flight off hours and come out way ahead.
evolve2kabout 3 hours ago
Be nice to not have to deal with that one guy who didn’t close their window when it’s dark cabin time on long multi-Timezone flights; leaving the sun to blare in when you’re really trying to get some shut eye.
Carrokabout 3 hours ago
Just bring a sleep mask.
bathtub365about 1 hour ago
I only travel in classes where I know they will provide one.
rendaw43 minutes ago
What do economy seats look like? I can't imagine they all have wrap-around video...
cheema3319 minutes ago
I imagine they would look similar to what they look now. You will have a 7" monitor in front. You can use it watch movies or look outside.
thadkabout 3 hours ago
Would dropping airplane windows lower radiation exposure somewhat, especially on those polar routes?
jandrewrogersabout 2 hours ago
No, virtually all the radiation with the exception of UV is passing straight through the airframe. The protection an aircraft body offers is negligible.
TEHERETabout 3 hours ago
the biggest challenge would likely be training pilots to a new cockpit and flight profile
zdc1about 2 hours ago
I wonder if it makes more sense to just get the latest batch of people doing the military -> civilian transition and starting them off on these
EGregabout 3 hours ago
No passenger windows is the correct way to go. The screens can actually show anything, not just replace a window.
Bolwinabout 3 hours ago
Jeez way to ruin of the few remaining joys of flying. Lock everyone in a tin can. You will experience reality through screens only and you will enjoy it
EGregabout 1 hour ago
Yes, you will! :-)
rezokunabout 3 hours ago
Infinite ads in econom
koiueo39 minutes ago
With 60hz pwm. And you can't turn it off

Ah... A dream

blowsandabout 3 hours ago
Scott Kirby has joined the chat
CalRobert40 minutes ago
Hell why even travel when you can just see Venice on a screen.
BobbyTables2about 3 hours ago
True - unlike a car, it’s not like one could open a window in a plane.

Just hope they don’t make an “ad-free” window a premium upgrade…

calmbonsaiabout 3 hours ago
Not this again. They’ve clearly hired a new PR firm

Suffice it to say, from stable aeronautics at-edge, jet way footprint efficiency, ground support efficiency, airframe pressurization, cargo & passenger logistics, lifespan, and certification, there are many, many reasons “tube + wings” is the dominant airframe architecture for all non-military aircraft.

Petersipoiabout 2 hours ago
There are many reasons for a lot of things, until you overcome those reasons. That's the point of innovation. There are many reasons not to make a reusable rocket too.
truenoabout 1 hour ago
theres just some serious serious challenges here i dont think any of them are impossible to overcome but it would span so many more years and so much more funding to get thru. fuselage pressurization which they claim to have worked around (sus) is one of the spookiest imo.

traditional looking commercial jets, their designs, their manufacturing processes, their innovations (yes boeing/airbus do innovate and have for a long time even though it doesnt seem that way) have all been shaped heavily by human blood. to some degree a radical new design almost guarantees more deaths at a commercial level there's really no shortcutting this without it.

dont get me wrong im super open to the possibility that something like this is possible itd be better for the whole world, but there's no way we get there without re-experiencing some hard lessons if we want to push it pash some sort of proverbial finish line

ryanjshaw36 minutes ago
> have all been shaped heavily by human blood

This assumes the lessons were specific to the body type and aren’t generalizable?

margalabargalaabout 1 hour ago
If some letters were capitalized it would be easier to read but without this gets downvoted as wordsalad. Almost illegible. Punctuation exists for a reason.
nine_kabout 3 hours ago
Halving the fuel consumption may be worth the trouble with all above.

Novel things always look unviable. First cars, first planes, first EVs all looked like dubious gimmicks sorely lacking the required infrastructure.

shrubbleabout 1 hour ago
An experimental/homebuilt of similar but not exactly the same design, the Dyke Delta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyke_Delta of which about 50 have been built, has its pilots reporting a comfortable ride.
csmoakabout 3 hours ago
Interesting choice to build in Greensboro. That's also where Boom chose to build a factory and it looks massive as you leave the airport. The plan for this company's factory looks like it will be significantly larger.
twoodfinabout 2 hours ago
JetZero’s Demonstrator is on track for first-flight in 2027. The Demonstrator is being built in partnership with Scaled Composites, a subsidiary of Northrop Grumman.

Scaled Composites? Now that’s a name I’ve not heard in a long time…

sixdimensionalabout 2 hours ago
Wow, I blinked and it's been 20+ years since Spaceship One? Yikes, time really does fly.

Presumably we haven't heard as much after Northrop bought them?

I think it's awesome that Scaled Composites is involved... they really have such specialized knowledge of all kinds of aeronautical engineering.

syntaxingabout 2 hours ago
Fluid dynamics is my jam (most of my masters was studying it)! Even in the intro to fluid mechanics book, they spent a good half+ chapter why a flying wing is superior and how you can have it designed similar to movie theater seating. But my professor spent a class explaining why regulation will kill it even though the design is great.
devyabout 2 hours ago
So you think JetZero's blended-wing body (BWB) aircraft design will be killed by regulators? Why?

Btw, it will take hydrogen propulsion for their planes to be zero CO2 emission.

SubMachineGhostabout 2 hours ago
Can you share more on why regulations will kill it please?
JumpCrisscrossabout 2 hours ago
What is their engine? An airframe without an engine is, best case, a drone programme.
a34729tabout 2 hours ago
et tu Boom?
Robdel12about 2 hours ago
This reeks of Vern Raburn and Eclipse Aviation all over again, haha. That failed terribly. SV’s ego is pretty funny sometimes. Eclipse even tried to develop their own avionics.
wnc3141about 2 hours ago
tell me more? I used to live in Albuquerque and always wondered what happened.
Stevvoabout 2 hours ago
Hard to imagine it as a passenger aircraft any time soon, but if they manage to get the demonstrator built it looks like it could make a useful aerial refueling tanker.
Advertisement
alberthabout 2 hours ago
Will this fit the dimensions of a typically airport gate and spacing?
giantfrogabout 3 hours ago
An airplane is not something I would personally want to beta test
DrewADesignabout 3 hours ago
The people they do that have a lot of experience and make a lot of money. Fortunately, most of the world doesn’t have the software business’ cavalier attitude about safety-related things being perfectly safe.
dlcarrierabout 3 hours ago
A few of my Mom's uncles were test pilots. They're… an odd bunch.
blitzarabout 2 hours ago
Move fast and break things.
deadbabeabout 3 hours ago
If they offer free flights to places people want to go they will not have any shortage of testers.
shinycodeabout 2 hours ago
Could these flights prove to people that with their own eyes they can see the earth is not flat ?
jdw6443 minutes ago
The Shape is really cool.
jmward01about 3 hours ago
I wish them all the luck in the world. Aviation is in a massive rut and needs bold new designs and innovation. That being said, what makes this company different from the others that have come before? What makes their path to success more likely? The problem is likely less the technology and more the decade(s?) of burning money with no ability to sell anything because you have to certify everything. That cliff is so bad we got the 737 max instead of a real new design. In an industry where new tech should be bringing us new commercial designs yearly we are instead getting very minor iterations because even the massive players out there can't afford to bring a 'new' design to the table. I -really- want to see this succeed. Good luck.
eightysixfourabout 3 hours ago
> Aviation is in a massive rut and needs bold new designs and innovation.

Why does it need bold new design and innovation? More people (can afford to) fly every year, more safely, and with broadly more consistency than they ever have. The success of the commercial aviation industry as a whole is breathtaking.

mrandishabout 3 hours ago
Looks a bit like Thunderbird 2. I approve.
TEHERETabout 3 hours ago
isn't this just the boeing flying wing
fnord77about 1 hour ago
While Boeing is too lazy to clean-sheet anything new
ares623about 2 hours ago
the cybertrucks of airplanes
blitzarabout 2 hours ago
the OceanGate Titan of airplanes
scottmcdotabout 2 hours ago
Another pointless "up to x% better" specification.
Advertisement
rgmerkabout 3 hours ago
I wish them well but a startup building an airliner seems like an utterly impossible task.
usef-about 3 hours ago
On the plus side, the competition seems a bit lousy lately
divyekapoorabout 3 hours ago
If the numbers are what they claim. They’re going to make it.
dlcarrierabout 3 hours ago
From an engineering perspective, it's a solved task. Designing an airplane is on par with designing a suspension bridge.

From a regulatory perspective, the layers of bureaucracy needed to get approval to build a bridge has nothing on starting up an airline manufacturing company. Once you have a company with a history of approval, you can practically do what you want, but getting to that point is nearly impossible.

DrewADesignabout 3 hours ago
Eh, if SpaceX did rockets… I wouldn’t be surprised if they could be very nimble compared to the big ones.
rgmerkabout 3 hours ago
The difference is that there establishment space launch companies were basically monopolies using ancient technology and processes. That’s not true for commercial aviation, which is subject to pretty relentless cost pressures.
DrewADesignabout 3 hours ago
Seems like that’s what a lot of people say about a lot of legacy businesses though when facing pressure from a startup. Obviously doesn’t always work, but sometimes!
a34729tabout 2 hours ago
Bullshit i cant hear you. Commcercial airliners are sold at a loss and are basically giant jobs programs. Modern jetliners are enormously efficient already; there has been a continuous race over the last century to this end.
freecookabout 3 hours ago
I love it
johnwheelerabout 3 hours ago
looks expensive
chasingabout 3 hours ago
Feels like no windows is almost a deal-breaker? No? Do humans handle small enclosed spaces with no way to look outside well? The mock-up image looks like a small two-or-three seat compartment, which seems like it would be awful. Maybe an open space would be less claustrophobic, but still. Imagining just a normal jetliner today with no windows feels... not great. And I'm not sure having a giant flat screen wrapped around me would solve the problem.
SilverSlashabout 3 hours ago
I don't mind no windows at all if they have "digital windows" as substitutes. You're already 40,000ft in the air I think windows aren't really gonna help your claustrophobia. Not like you can open the door and walk out for a bit.
userbinatorabout 2 hours ago
I get motion sickness when sitting sideways or backwards on a car. People tend to become nauseous when they sense motion but don't see it, or what they see doesn't align with their other senses. Even the small amount of lag that a "digital window" would likely have, will make things much worse.
chasingabout 3 hours ago
Maybe. I think people could survive it, sure. But I also wonder if there's a part of our lizard brain that just for safety's sake prefers to be able to see out of any small enclosed space we might find ourselves in. And that lizard brain is smart enough to know that a flat screen is fake. Again, I just think of flying in a plane today but with no windows and I, at least, am immediately squigged out.

I also feel like a lot of modern air travel is designed around making something that's highly unnatural and inherently terrifying into something palatable for most people. I'm not talking about actual safety, but the perception of safety. Which isn't exactly a logic thing. More about keeping that lizard brain from freaking out too hard.

nitinreddy88about 3 hours ago
Actually no windows doesn't even pass Passenger Flight rules and regulations. In Asia, its mandatory that windows should be opened, visible during takeoff and landing.