Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

All Aboard, and then you get loaded onto the plane!!

  • 27-11-2015 9:32am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭


    Airbus are planning detachable modular cabins, so pax can board the cabin, and be seated, before the aircraft even arrives at the gate!!
    then when the aircraft arrives at stand, one cabin will be lifted off the plane, while your cabin is then loaded on board, and secured before take off.

    All in an effort to reduce turnaround time at gates, and therefore make the airlines more profitable!

    Airbus Cabin

    diagram of said patent

    a step too far? too ambitious?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 958 ✭✭✭Bussywussy


    Yea and all the extra work connecting it up and testing when it's loaded,not even decent lower deck crew rests out there without being butchered on removal/installation


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 993 ✭✭✭737max


    patent it now even if you don't ever intend to use it. don't give competitors a free hand to innovate.

    I can see applicability of containers to the freight market but I don't see how it will work for the passenger market.

    In the future you could see (relatively) inexpensive single motor freight drones with containers that will kill the market for pre-owned market for passenger jets which are too old to be passenger jets anymore.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭dogmatix


    I'm surprised Ryanair did not come up with this idea as part of their annual free publicity stunt - it's just the thing they would propose (remember the pay toilets, standing seats etc...).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    dogmatix wrote: »
    I'm surprised Ryanair did not come up with this idea as part of their annual free publicity stunt - it's just the thing they would propose (remember the pay toilets, standing seats etc...).

    They've been busy elsewhere..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭dogmatix


    Ahh - its not the same sadly. There was real malicious humour behind the old ryanair stunts. And then Mick discovered the commercial advantages of trying/appearing to be nice. You'd almost miss the old Ryanair.

    Back on point though - I think airbus might be in a legal battle with Gerry Anderson productions in the future as i'm convinced I saw a similar concept on one of his sci-fi shows back in the 70's - might have been "UFO". But since he is dead now perhaps his 'patent' if there ever was one expired with him.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,781 ✭✭✭amen


    737max wrote: »
    patent it now even if you don't ever intend to use it. don't give competitors a free hand to innovate

    Depending on the country Patents generally last 15-20 years and then expire. After that anyone can take the patent and manufacture the item and sell the item.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭dogmatix




  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,278 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Somebody's been watching Thunderbirds again:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,549 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Anything removable adds weight. Weight is bad.
    737max wrote: »
    In the future you could see (relatively) inexpensive single motor freight drones with containers that will kill the market for pre-owned market for passenger jets which are too old to be passenger jets anymore.

    Can these relatively inexpensive single motor freight drones go transatlantic, or Far East to Europe? Thought not!

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,315 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    737max wrote: »
    In the future you could see (relatively) inexpensive single motor freight drones with containers that will kill the market for pre-owned market for passenger jets which are too old to be passenger jets anymore.
    In the future, you'll have pre-owned passenger jets with no crew, and flying with drone technology.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 6,524 Mod ✭✭✭✭Irish Steve


    So, living dangerously, let's take this concept just a little further, thinking of what might need to happen if oil (or an alternative) is not as freely or cheaply available as it is now, (and Global warming is not the only reason why oil might not be so easy to get ) and introduce the possibility of taking a module, complete with passengers and bags, (so that immediately reduces the number of lost bags, and bags to remove because the passenger is missing) and being able to move the module by either road or rail from the airport.

    Suddenly, we have a new concept of transportation that might be relevant in the future, where airborne links may be used only where alternatives cannot be used (mainly over long water distances) and road or rail could be used to get the module to and from the runway location. Means (for example) that if an airline didn't want to use airport facilities, they could load a module 50 miles away from the airport, and then take it to the runway and connect it up and go. Same offloading, they could take module and bags to their own remote terminal that's away from the runway for processing. OK, there are some specific security and customs type issues to tease out, but it makes the concept of an Air Bus even more specific.

    Same could be done with a rail type link, and the potential for longer distances at high speed is suddenly very thought provoking.

    Then there's the possibility of being able to customise the modules for services, and catering, and entertainment, and all manner of other services, depending on the user, and the distances involved. While there are a lot of technical issues that would have to be looked at in detail, it's not quite so strange as it first appears to be.

    Shore, if it was easy, everybody would be doin it.😁



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 993 ✭✭✭737max


    the_syco wrote: »
    In the future, you'll have pre-owned passenger jets with no crew, and flying with drone technology.

    The technology change will be disruptive and old planes will be equivalent to horses once cars became commonplace.
    Even given away for free there was little market for horses once cars took hold from 1915 onwards.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,129 ✭✭✭eviltimeban


    All it'll take is for one pod to detach mid-flight, and that'll be the end of that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 993 ✭✭✭737max


    Anything removable adds weight. Weight is bad.



    Can these relatively inexpensive single motor freight drones go transatlantic, or Far East to Europe? Thought not!
    A plane which doesn't need pilots and isn't carrying human freight can take its own sweet time to traverse a broad stretch of water.
    As modern engines are highly durable/reliable the only limit is the amount of fuel in the tanks.
    If a fraction of a fraction of a percent don't reach the destination then the manifest is insured against loss.
    The major ports of the world are cut out of the game and product is delivered closer to the point of consumption.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 993 ✭✭✭737max


    All it'll take is for one pod to detach mid-flight, and that'll be the end of that.
    We'll just have a man out the front walking and waving a red flag.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    All it'll take is for one pod to detach mid-flight, and that'll be the end of that.

    Could be a positive safety feature,
    Mechanical issue, the plane is going down so the pod detaches and parachutes down to ground/water.

    parachutes on large jets was unfeasible due to the massive weight, a pod minus the engines/wings/main fuselage would be a lot lighter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    737max wrote: »
    A plane which doesn't need pilots and isn't carrying human freight can take its own sweet time to traverse a broad stretch of water.
    As modern engines are highly durable/reliable the only limit is the amount of fuel in the tanks.
    If a fraction of a fraction of a percent don't reach the destination then the manifest is insured against loss.
    The major ports of the world are cut out of the game and product is delivered closer to the point of consumption.

    exactly, a freight drone doesn't need to travel at 500 knots, a steady 120/150 would do, still a lot faster than ships.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 993 ✭✭✭737max


    Only immediate application I can see is in the military where the military owned and operated plane can be re-tasked to carry both supplies and troops depending on which module is loaded.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    737max wrote: »
    Only immediate application I can see is in the military where the military owned and operated plane can be re-tasked to carry both supplies and troops depending on which module is loaded.

    Thats a good start, as most modern civilian tech has origins in military use.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,129 ✭✭✭eviltimeban


    Could be a positive safety feature,
    Mechanical issue, the plane is going down so the pod detaches and parachutes down to ground/water.

    parachutes on large jets was unfeasible due to the massive weight, a pod minus the engines/wings/main fuselage would be a lot lighter.

    Will a parachute work at cruising altitude? Wouldn't it be a bad thing if the pod landed on a school?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    Will a parachute work at cruising altitude?

    probably not, so you would deploy a drogue to slow the pod down somewhat, then chutes would deploy at about 10,000
    Wouldn't it be a bad thing if the pod landed on a school?

    probably no worse than a full plane landing on a school.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Lucena


    737max wrote: »
    A plane which doesn't need pilots and isn't carrying human freight can take its own sweet time to traverse a broad stretch of water.
    As modern engines are highly durable/reliable the only limit is the amount of fuel in the tanks.
    If a fraction of a fraction of a percent don't reach the destination then the manifest is insured against loss.
    The major ports of the world are cut out of the game and product is delivered closer to the point of consumption.

    Assuming that it doesn't crash into a built-up area, infrastructure or the like.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,592 ✭✭✭donkey balls


    exactly, a freight drone doesn't need to travel at 500 knots, a steady 120/150 would do, still a lot faster than ships.

    Unfortunately with manufacturing and a global supply chains using JIT to cut down on warehousing etc,Everything is about speed and connectivity along with up dating the customer on the whereabouts of their shipments.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    Quite a good video of how a type of pod could be used as a safety measure.

    https://www.facebook.com/Trustmeiamamechanicalengineer/videos/642196882588585/


Advertisement