L
Lee
Guest
I always thought this was a good design, but Boeing insisted in sizing it for ~300 passengers, which I admit, was what the proposal called for.
The variable sweep wings would have allowed about 60% less thrust for takeoff and approach and the engines were originally designed for cruise thrust, not takeoff. This was a first for the commercial industry. As long as the engine pressure ratio was high enough at 70,000-80,000 ft, the plane would have had minimal fuel consumption for that class of aircraft up to that time.
I admit I never could figure out why they needed all that fuel when smaller engines would have made for a much lighter plane and the same speed at altitude.
"Supersonic Airplane Variable-Sweep Integrated Airfoil system"
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT3447761
You can also download this patent for no extra cost at:
www.pat2pdf.org
Enter the patent number on the search line with no commas.
Here's the followup design, also by Boeing:
"Supersonic aircraft and Method"
http://www.google.com/patents?id=P0gkAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4
The variable sweep wings would have allowed about 60% less thrust for takeoff and approach and the engines were originally designed for cruise thrust, not takeoff. This was a first for the commercial industry. As long as the engine pressure ratio was high enough at 70,000-80,000 ft, the plane would have had minimal fuel consumption for that class of aircraft up to that time.
I admit I never could figure out why they needed all that fuel when smaller engines would have made for a much lighter plane and the same speed at altitude.
"Supersonic Airplane Variable-Sweep Integrated Airfoil system"
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT3447761
You can also download this patent for no extra cost at:
www.pat2pdf.org
Enter the patent number on the search line with no commas.
Here's the followup design, also by Boeing:
"Supersonic aircraft and Method"
http://www.google.com/patents?id=P0gkAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4