WWTBAM Bored

And no, I'm not talking Apple vs. PC operating systems here.

This is from an Airbus patent application. (Of course, consider the source -- a Boeing-friendly newspaper likes to get in a dig at rival Airbus at any opportunity.)

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/boein ... 596374.php

Concept -- move the pilots to the tail area and use viewscreens instead of windows (making more usable space, a more aerodynamic nose, and saving weight from the glass for the pilots' windows.)

Uh huh. Of course, this is right up there with some aviation patent application a few years ago (don't recall if it was an airline or a manufacturer) that replaced the seats on a plane with suspension harnesses so they could cram in 20% more passengers in a given space.

SpacemanSpiff wrote:Concept -- move the pilots to the tail area and use viewscreens instead of windows (making more usable space, a more aerodynamic nose, and saving weight from the glass for the pilots' windows.)

I don't understand your problem. If it's good enough for Jim Kirk and the Enterprise . . . . --Bob

SpacemanSpiff wrote:And no, I'm not talking Apple vs. PC operating systems here.

This is from an Airbus patent application. (Of course, consider the source -- a Boeing-friendly newspaper likes to get in a dig at rival Airbus at any opportunity.)

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/boein ... 596374.php

Concept -- move the pilots to the tail area and use viewscreens instead of windows (making more usable space, a more aerodynamic nose, and saving weight from the glass for the pilots' windows.)

Uh huh. Of course, this is right up there with some aviation patent application a few years ago (don't recall if it was an airline or a manufacturer) that replaced the seats on a plane with suspension harnesses so they could cram in 20% more passengers in a given space.

How about the Japanese plan to have everyone fly standing up --- sort of? They'd lean back a bit on a contoured panel. That would double the capacity.