Over the coming decades, could we see a fundamental change in the way in which aircraft are constructed? NASA and the United States Air Force, in cooperation with Boeing, have unveiled a prototype they are calling the X-66A, an experimental X-plane that the US military hopes will help it achieve its net-zero goal for aviation greenhouse gas emissions and serve as a model for future commercial aircraft.
NASA And Boeing Introduce X-66A – The Future Of Commercial Flight?
The National Aeronautic and Space Administration’s (NASA) Sustainable Flight Demonstrator project was started “to engage with industry, academia, and other government organizations to identify, select, and mature key airframe technologies – such as new wing designs – that have a high probability of transition to the next generation single-aisle seat class airliner.”
The centerpiece of the project is an experimental airplane, previously simply called an X-plane, that Boeing and NASA are working to construct that services two goals. First, it must achieve fuel consumption and emissions reductions. Second, its development is not solely for military or space purposes, but as a future commercial single-aisle transport aircraft.
According to NASA’s ambitious timetable, the new aircraft type will take to the air in 2028, laying the groundwork for the next generation of single-aisle jets in the 2030s.
NASA Administrator Bill Nelson explained:
“At NASA, our eyes are not just focused on stars but also fixated on the sky. The Sustainable Flight Demonstrator builds on NASA’s world-leading efforts in aeronautics as well climate. The X-66A will help shape the future of aviation, a new era where aircraft are greener, cleaner, and quieter, and create new possibilities for the flying public and American industry alike.”
An X-plane differs from the sort of aircraft that flies today in that it has longer and thinner wings stabilized by diagonal struts, a design Boeing calls a “Transonic Truss-Braced Wing.” Rather than require a wholly new aircraft design, Boeing is testing whether this technology can be integrated onto existing aircraft, much like we ahve seen scimitar-style winglets pop up on older jets.
Boeing and NASA have worked on experimental aircraft together since the 1940s (at that time NASA was called the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics or NACA).
CONCLUSION
NASA, the USAF, and Boeing have unveiled a specific prototype called the X-66 that it hopes will lead to improve efficiencies and reduced carbon emission. NASA explained, “With this experimental aircraft, we’re aiming high to demonstrate the kinds of energy-saving, emissions-reducing technologies the aviation industry needs.” Time will tell whether the prototypes we are seeing today will indeed be the aircraft of the future.
image: Boeing
From the looks of it, it might be a competitor with the A220 but we’ll see as more details get released over the next few years. Have a feeling that KL might be interested in this when this fully launches for commercial use due to their green commitment and replace their old 737s.
Good to know the US Military is razor focused on the real threat: climate change. Such a lovely use of money.
Hope you don’t have any real estate in Florida, because it will probably be uninsurable in 5 years because of…climate change. Of course it’s a massive threat to the US and the whole world- just the direct costs already are severe, and the future costs from instability in other parts of the world will be probably bigger.
It’s the job of the research arms of the Department of Defense to be forward looking. This was a minor little project they started in the late 60s. Turned out to have some value.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET
When the ChiComs start including “sustainability” in their military strategy and doctrine then maybe I will consider it.
Until then the military’s focus should be on optimizing ways to break things and kill people.
I do have property in Florida, right near the beach actually, and in my 38 years on this planet I have heard the same lies from dumb morons like yourself that Florida will be underwater AD NAUSEUM. Let’s you and I get together in 5, 10, and 20 and discuss how I’m still insuring them and that the ocean hasn’t gotten a single inch closer.
Climate. Change isn’t real wake up ,Al Gore is making money hand over fist with his lies . We were told in year 2000 nyc and Florida would be under water. And they keep taking pictures of Antarctic closer and closer to its hottest day to show there fake proof wake up dummies. Get your heads out of the clouds
With Boeing’s modern timetables, expect to see the first flight in 2039, then actual delivery in 2047 after they iron out the SNAFU/pay off FAA?
Also on a more serious note I’m a bit sad that Boeing’s NMA (or unofficially 797) seems dead in the water
The military that has fuel is the one who will win wars – conservation of fuel win wars. Logistics win wars and conserving fuel and using it efferently is part of that. A jet fighter uses about 1,200 gallons of JP8 and hour, and a gallon of JP8 weighs 7 lbs.
Just saving a small percentage of fuel on cargo, reconsance, AWACs and other aircraft means fewer tons of fuel that NATO needs to fight. Bullets and bombs win battles, but logistics win wars, The opening days of the Russian-Ukrainian war was all about fuel – Russia lost momentum it it lost equipment because they could not get the fuel to the tanks. The Russian Special Forces Spetsnaz inability to capture the airfield near Kiev meant a major supply of fuel was lost to their campaign – saving fuel and using it well matters. And, even capturing an airfield matters because much miliarry equipment CAN run on kerosene which is what J-8 is ist kerosene..
Want to guess how much CO2 makes up the atmosphere? Most people guess between 5% to 15%. Umm, no. It’s 0.04%. What happens if it drops below 0.02%? Plant life can’t survive. How much of climate change is due to human activity? There is no consensus among scientists. Meanwhile, China, with 1,000 coal fired power plants, had as of the end of 2021, 350 more planned or under construction. India gets 80% of its electricity from coal. They said screw the Paris Accords but everybody got angry at the U.S. instead, the only country that has measurably reduced carbon emissions in the last ten years. Further, there is no third world country that even has climate change on its radar, let alone in their top ten priorities. Maybe we should instead be focusing on ways to adapt rather than ensuring that the poor get poorer and everyone else is required to adopt window dressing so-called cures such as using a reusable shopping bag or buying only electric vehicles which don’t achieve an energy neutral affect until approximately 60,000 miles of driving. Oh, and to get an energy grid to provide the electricity isn’t possible by adding wind or solar. Nuclear would help a lot, but try to get consensus on that!