Well,to answer my own question,with the aid of other sites...addon | stas'den &scrolllllllll down.
point one: large aircraft often appear overpriced
two: they are often single purpose
three: many worthy designs have been crushed through political pressure
four: there are clearly very many things going on and i lack the brain to simplify it sensibly
five: If enough people answer government we cannot only get the planes but also get a future where there is less pressured&percieved need for their employment in killing.
six:'you-all' are in a good position to organize a better precis for the above,here's a starter;-
seven:Ok guys and gals this is It:my personal curiosity risking the safety of the planet,can enough nations clobber the 'defence industries' into a unified design for a multi purpose far more fuel efficient design to perform along the lines of the uk company 'air tanker'agreement with RAF:where one third are staffed by military for military purposes, one third are shared with civilian airlines on weekdays,final third all-civilian unless emergency measures require military use.please expand at will
particularly if you could post drawings of the losing finalist design for the b-2 which had a diamond wing design,no tail and engines that in theory be repaired in flight and comment on the possibility of a flying boat version.
eight:has this already been done? Thanking You in advance,reject first class.
I'm really not sure what you are asking. Are you looking for a unified design, one that does it all?
Aircraft are extraordinarily expensive, and I understand why. I was preflighting a brand new Boeing 737-800 yesterday. Standing inside the wheel well, I was inspecting the hydraulic plumbing, the landing gear forgings, the hydraulic reservoirs, the flap actuators, and even after decades of doing this, I was in awe at the beauty, precision, and quality of the components. It wasn't an old Chevy pickup.
This quality came via natural evolution in aviation. Society learned through brutal and bloody experience that under-engineered aircraft with low-quality components, and lack of redundancy, tended to fall out of the sky. The fly-by-wire Boeing 777 has (IIRC) no less than 11 electrical generators, any one of which would power the flight controls.
A single, unified design would be jack of all trades, but master of none. Specialization... it's like automobiles. You use a Humvee for rugged off-road use. You can scoot around town in an MG Midget. Each occupies its own niche, and resides comfortably there. It's the same with aircraft.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Perhaps as weapons become more advanced we will see successful aircraft with more of a multipurpose role?
"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."
We've been seeing that for more than 30 years.
Edit: I have almost 1600 posts? What the hell.
Pssh. Not even a post per day. Clearly you need to spend more time enlightening us.
I enjoy being wrong too much to change my mind.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)