Blended-wing Airliner

... a px sitting about 20 feet from the centerline
[would] experience a third of a g max.

A third of a g is what the forward acceleration of a jetliner is.

Imagine that vertically, up and down and down and up, as the plane banks
into and out of a turn.

What do building elevators do?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I chose a third of a G on a pretty arbitrary basis -- but you'd agree
that amount is much more noticable in the local vertical direction --
a direct sense of increased weight or more importantly the sense of
growing lighter -- than into the back of the seat as a PX experiences
during takeoff.

My goal was to get a sense of how realistic the issue of Gs induced by
rate of change of bank was, and have concluded (a rebuttable
conclusion) it's not a problem for realistic airplane operations. Your
comments tend to support that.




tarOn Oct 19, 11:32 pm, Jose wrote:
... a px sitting about 20 feet from the centerline
[would] experience a third of a g max.

A third of a g is what the forward acceleration of a jetliner is.

Imagine that vertically, up and down and down and up, as the plane banks
into and out of a turn.

What do building elevators do?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

and have concluded (a rebuttable
conclusion) it's not a problem for realistic airplane operations. Your
comments tend to support that.

Actually, my comments are not intended to support this. I think people
would have a problem going up and down and down and up at a third of a
g. It would feel like a roller coaster ride.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote in news:mmfSi.60532$YL5.26439
@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

and have concluded (a rebuttable
conclusion) it's not a problem for realistic airplane operations. Your
comments tend to support that.

Actually, my comments are not intended to support this. I think people
would have a problem going up and down and down and up at a third of a
g. It would feel like a roller coaster ride.


Wouldn't be as much as that in practice and you get g from the airplane
rotating around it's pitch axis when you sit in a cigar tube anyway!


Bertie

The point I was making, Jose, was that it took quite an extreme action
to induce that 0.3 Gs, so in terms of effects on PX the G induced
forces due to how fast the airplane banks into its turn are
unimportant. That effect was offered as one objection to a blended
wing flying machine: another, px discomfort because of their distance
from the windows, seems to have been muted as well.

Other issues, like pitch induced Gs, shouldn't be worse than those
experienced in existing airplanes and may even be better if the width
of the blended wing airplane leads to a shorter overall length.

It'll be interesting to see if such a machine reaches the market in
the next couple od decades.




On Oct 20, 6:06 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jose wrote in news:mmfSi.60532$YL5.26439
@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

and have concluded (a rebuttable
conclusion) it's not a problem for realistic airplane operations. Your
comments tend to support that.

Actually, my comments are not intended to support this. I think people
would have a problem going up and down and down and up at a third of a
g. It would feel like a roller coaster ride.

Wouldn't be as much as that in practice and you get g from the airplane
rotating around it's pitch axis when you sit in a cigar tube anyway!

Bertie