This application claims priority from RCD EM 002544510-0001 and 002544510-0002, both filed on Sep. 25, 2014, with OHIM/OAMI Reference “StratosLiner”; and also, priority from U.S. Design patent application No. 29520505 filed on Mar. 16, 2015, titled “Backward and forward swept aircraft wing sections in a decagonal box wing configuration”. The USPTO has divided said Design Application into two separate Divisional Applications and granted two Design Patents: U.S. D843,920 S (Mar. 26, 2019) and U.S. D844,538 S (Apr. 2, 2019). Chinese utility (“Invention”) patent No. ZL201580051870.4 has been granted 2019 Aug. 16 (Application Date: 2015 Mar. 24). No. of announcement of grant: CN 107000841 B.
This invention relates to the field of box wing aircraft design, with a focus on novel improvements of some of the features and adding new elements to the prior art in this field. The invention constitutes a new sub-class within Closed Wings (box wing, ring wing, joined wings) in the broader class Non-Planar Aircraft Wings.
The regular, conventional box wing configuration is comprised of a narrow backward swept front wing, a similarly narrow forward swept rear wing and a connecting non-lifting wingtip fence, a side wing, between the wingtips. The front wing root joins the lower part of the fuselage and the root of the rear wing joins the upper part of the fuselage, or the roots of the rear wings are elevated above the aft part of the fuselage using a vertical stabilizer, or two V-tail fins, for structural connection to the fuselage.
Most modern box wing aircraft designs with ambition for good aerodynamic performance have long and narrow wings such as WO 2004/074093 A1 or BG 65998 B1. Some designers reinforce the root of the thin and narrow front wing by using less sweep angle of the trailing edge at the root, for example BG 65998 B1. Other designers employ such an extra triangular area along half of the inboard trailing edge of the front wing, for easy installation of the flaps, such as DE 201 11 224 U1. The claims of WO 2004/074093 A1 focus on the aerodynamic channel between the tail fins and the rear wings. There is a box wing design where the inboard portion of the rear wing is anhedral and the outboard portion is dihedral, namely WO 88/06551 A1. Another design, WO 03/059736 A2, has three pairs of wings with the ambition of using the Coanda effect.
None of the cited prior art seems to show or suggest the combination of differently swept sections of both the front and rear wings. None of these patent documents are discussing the issue of reducing the wingspan of the box wing concept when using narrow wings. None of them are discussing the linkage between the cross-sectional area and the sweep angle of the wings, nor the application of the area rule method for better fuel storage in the fuselage by introducing wing sections with different sweep angles. The prior art seems to not pay attention to the length of the wingtip fence and novel options for structural strengthening of the box wing configuration.
The narrow front and rear wings of a box wing aircraft, together, must provide a sufficient wing area, compared to a monoplane aircraft with the same weight. Thereby, the wingspan of such a box wing aircraft is similar to that of a monoplane aircraft. For several reasons, a smaller wingspan is often preferable. Very large airliners should have a small wingspan to be manageable for our airports. It is desirable for airliners to carry more than a thousand passengers, but such a monoplane is difficult to design, because of the large wingspan.
Such a large aircraft is not easy to design as a box wing aircraft either. The wingspan is still large and the thin wings suffer bending and torsion, especially at the wingtips. The length of the wingtip fence is an important parameter for structural calculations. It may prove that the closed frame structure of the front and rear wings is not sufficiently strong and stiff. There is a risk that the wingtip fence of the regular, conventional box wing configuration must be strengthened a lot and might therefore be too heavy.
One of the general ideas behind using narrow wings is better aerodynamic performance. But airliners must carry a lot of fuel in the huge wings for long distance flights. There is not much place for fuel in the thin wings of a box wing aircraft.
It is necessary to obtain sufficient horizontal and vertical separation between multiple wings because of the aerodynamic interference issue. Otherwise, the box wing configuration is aerodynamically advantageous. The main streamline flow around the box wing aircraft is divided into two channels by the frame of the front and rear wings. There are three stream tube channels when the elevated rear wings and the fuselage are connected with V-tail fins. It would be preferable to have a narrow stream tube as a result of a small wingspan, and the aerodynamic performance would improve having more aerodynamic channels than two or three.
There is a box wing aircraft configuration implicitly disclosed in RCD EM 002544510-0001, a strictly aesthetic design, presented with not less than 12 measured pairs of dimensions with the Golden Ratio 1.618. Furthermore, there are also 13 leading and trailing edges presented with the measured Golden Angle and the angles of the Golden Triangle, as they are generally considered sources of beauty. The reason for these designs was to test the thesis: if an airplane is beautiful, it flies beautifully. The four engines of the aircraft in question form no part of the claimed design but this aircraft is not functional because all the four engines are clearly Ramjet-type engines which need an established airflow of several hundred km/h to start. The present invention is addressing this issue, too.
Furthermore, airport boarding bridges are not designed for a box wing aircraft. This problem must be resolved if the box wing concept is to be used for large passenger aircraft.
As the result of applying several method steps for improving the regular, conventional box wing concept, the preferred embodiment of the present invention comprises an extended fuselage; a pair of backward swept front wings attached to the front bottom of the fuselage; a pair of elevated forward swept rear wings with their roots joined together above the aft part of the fuselage; a highly swept wingtip fence on each side, connecting the wingtips of the front and rear wings; a V-tail, for structural connection between the rear wings and the fuselage; furthermore also a middle wing, extending from the upper middle part of the fuselage.
The front wing is divided into a dihedral root section, swept basically as the wing of a modern airliner, and a more dihedral and more swept tip section. The rear wing is divided into a basically horizontal root section, with a sweep angle similar to the swept wing of a modern airliner but forward swept, and a tip section, slightly anhedral and more forward swept than the root section.
In the preferable embodiment, the middle wing is divided into a basically horizontal or slightly anhedral root section and two tip sections, one forward swept and anhedral, another backward swept and dihedral. The front, middle and rear wings have four tip sections on each side of the aircraft. All the four wingtips of these are attached to the wingtip fence; two are joined to the front portion and two to the aft portion of the wingtip fence.
The root section of the middle wing is a suitable place for engines. If we use two traditional inner engines instead of the Ramjet-type engines disclosed in the above-mentioned design, EM 002544510-0001, the aircraft will be functional because gas turbine engines can give the aircraft the necessary velocity needed for the two outer, Ramjet-type engines to start.
The fuselage of the present invention is area ruled which is a regular design procedure. The result is that a long middle section of the extended fuselage has a wide belly which can contain both landing gears and a large fuel tank. Dividing the front and rear wings into differently swept sections increases the cross-sectional area both front and rear and decreases it along a longer middle part of the aircraft. This novel, distinguishing feature makes a wider fuselage belly and thereby a larger fuel tank possible, the area rule design method still applied.
Another reason for using differently swept sections of the front and rear wings is that the wingtip fence would otherwise have been too long and too weak, especially when the fuselage is long and the front and rear wings are well separated horizontally.
With a middle wing introduced, the necessary wing area is distributed to three narrow wings, which makes a smaller wingspan, reduced by one third, possible. Shorter wings are stronger than long wings. Having a middle wing with two tip sections, both supporting the wingtip fence, is a desired feature if the box wing structure is to be strengthened.
The wings and fins of the regular, conventional box wing aircraft form two, or three, closed frames. Having a middle wing with two tip sections, the number of strong and stiff closed frame structures will be seven, formed by the 14 wing sections, together with the wingtip fences, the two V-tail fins and the fuselage.
These seven frames provide not only novel structural features but distinguishing aerodynamic benefits as well. These seven frames divide the stream tube around the aircraft into seven airflow channels. Using one vertical stabilizer instead of V-tail fins, the channels will be reduced to six. Embodiment with a simple middle wing can result in four or five aerodynamic channels, with one stabilizer or two V-tail fins, respectively.
There are a number of other qualities of the present invention which should be briefly mentioned, where the distinguishing features of the present invention improve, or significantly improve, the functioning of the box wing aircraft as such. These improved functions are flexibility with cargo placement; reduced concerns as regards stalling; good maneuverability and stability in difficult flying conditions; redundant aerodynamic devices in many places that also provide more safety; lower angle of attack as well as reduced speed and less engine power with less noise at takeoff and landing; etc. The invention also makes it possible to build very large, extended aircraft with a manageable wingspan where the distributed load on the three relatively short box wings allows using more composite materials in the wings that are still thin and strong.
Referring now to the drawings, most of the embodiments show a large airliner or cargo plane. The present invention is in no way limited to this type of aircraft; it is applicable to any aircraft of any size, any purpose and application; manned or unmanned; and with any type of propulsion or combination of different propulsion systems for different flying conditions, without any limit as regards speed, altitude or function. The scope of the invention is not limited by materials. Any materials can be used allowing the construction and operation of the invention. Airfoils and other details of the embodiment and structure are established in a way that will be understood by those skilled in the art. Throughout the drawings, the symmetric aircraft parts, one positioned on one side of the fuselage and another on the opposite side, are provided with only one particular reference numeral when it is clear that the numbered item has an identical mirrored counterpart.
The monoplane wing area is basically the same as the total wing area of the box wing aircraft, if the same weight must be lifted. When inventors and manufacturers design their modern box wing aircraft, they use narrow wings, for aerodynamic reasons, and their wingspan is not significantly different from the wingspan of the monoplane they want to compete with.
A significant conceptual difference between the monoplane and the box wing concept is that the large wing volume of a monoplane is generally used to contain large fuel tanks while the thin box wings cannot hold a lot of fuel, and therefore, the wide belly extension 8 of the fuselage 4 is suitable as a fuel tank.
The long fuselage 9 in
The solution provided by the present invention is shown in
In the embodiment shown in
The root of the root section 15 of the forward swept rear wing, in
The wingtip of the backward swept tip section 14 of the front wing and the wingtip of the forward swept tip section 16 of the rear wing are structurally connected with a wingtip fence 21, which is a non-tapered, backward swept non-lifting side wing. The lower front end of this wingtip fence 21 is joined to the wingtip of the tip section 14 of the front wing and its higher rear end is joined to the wingtip of the tip section 16 of the rear wing. All the structural connections between the parts of the present invention are established in a way which is understood by those skilled in the art.
Having a front wing 10 as front as possible and the rear wing 11 as rear as possible as in
Thereby, each of the method steps of (i) extending the length of the fuselage; (ii) moving the front and rear wings longitudinally as far as possible from each other; as well as (iii) introducing angled front and angled rear wings, contributes to obtaining a large fuel tank in the fuselage belly extension, which can contain enough fuel for long range flights. At the same time, the angled front and rear wings shorten the wingtip fence 21, as shown in
The solution is to introduce a middle wing 25, as shown in
This simple middle wing 25 in
The root of the middle wing 25 in
An even more preferable embodiment of a middle wing is shown in
In the preferred embodiment shown in
The wingtip of the forward swept tip section 29 of the middle wing in
The root of the root section 28 of the middle wing in
The root chords of the tip sections 29 and 30 in the preferred embodiment shown in
The reason for this solution, in this particular embodiment shown in
The embodiment in
One closed frame in
The main part of the airflow around the aircraft of the present invention is forced to go through these frames, formed by the wing sections and other structural parts of the aircraft. The stream flow is divided into seven aerodynamic channels at the most, as shown in
As was mentioned, the box wing aircraft configuration implicitly disclosed in RCD EM 002544510-0001 is not functional. All four engines are Ramjet-type and they cannot lift the aircraft from the runway because they need an established airflow of several hundred km/h to start.
The propulsion for the box wing aircraft of the present invention shown in
The box wing aircraft concept cannot be accepted for passenger traffic before a solution for convenient embarking and disembarking is presented. Airport boarding bridges cannot come close enough to the passenger door especially when the front wing is attached to the nose, as in the present invention. However, it is not a law of nature that we must use boarding bridges for embarking and disembarking. Very large passenger aircraft are desired and the boarding bridges are a bottleneck, box wing aircraft or not.
The passenger doors of the box wing aircraft must be located in positions easily accessible for docking with such Airport Shuttle Vehicles; preferably several vehicles simultaneously docked to each passenger deck on both sides of the aircraft. Embarking and disembarking can be quick even for a large box wing airliner with more than thousand passengers, using a fleet of shuttle vehicles. Such an Airport Shuttle Vehicle has simple tasks in a controlled environment which means great opportunity for unmanned, adaptive preprogrammed operation under limited human supervision.
There are similar existing mobile passenger lounges, although without side support legs; as well as catering and cargo load vehicles, with side support legs but without passenger cabins. The patentability of this particular Airport Shuttle Vehicle is therefore limited, but this enhanced large-scale embarking-disembarking system is worth mentioning as an effort to eliminate one of the shortcomings of the box wing concept for large airliners.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
002544510-0001 | Sep 2014 | EM | regional |
002544510-0002 | Sep 2014 | EM | regional |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/SE2015/050349 | 3/24/2015 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2016/048211 | 3/31/2016 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3834654 | Miranda | Sep 1974 | A |
3981460 | Ratony | Sep 1976 | A |
4146199 | Wenzel | Mar 1979 | A |
4365773 | Wolkovitch | Dec 1982 | A |
D275021 | Brzack | Aug 1984 | S |
D292203 | Ligeti | Oct 1987 | S |
D292910 | McGiboney | Nov 1987 | S |
D292911 | Argondezzi | Nov 1987 | S |
D311720 | Butler | Oct 1990 | S |
5046684 | Wolkovitch | Sep 1991 | A |
5503352 | Eger | Apr 1996 | A |
5899409 | Frediani | May 1999 | A |
6098923 | Peters, Jr. | Aug 2000 | A |
6474604 | Carlow | Nov 2002 | B1 |
D486776 | Carr | Feb 2004 | S |
D516994 | Houck, II | Mar 2006 | S |
D594809 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D594810 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D594811 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D595206 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D595207 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D595208 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D595209 | Cazals | Jun 2009 | S |
D598838 | Carr | Aug 2009 | S |
8657226 | McGinnis | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8820673 | Cacciaguerra | Sep 2014 | B2 |
9308984 | Suokas | Apr 2016 | B2 |
20060144991 | Frediani | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20100200703 | Cazals | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20150048215 | McGinnis | Feb 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
002544510-0001 | Oct 2014 | EM |
002544510-0002 | Oct 2014 | EM |
Entry |
---|
Pending Design U.S. Appl. No. 29/520,505 (not published yet), filed Mar. 16, 2015, wherein priority claimed from EM 002544510-0001 and EM 002544510-0002. This U.S. Appl. No. 29/520,505 is one of the priority documents for PCT/SE2015/050349. |
Hernadi, Andras, Design U.S. Appl. No. 29/520,505 (not published yet), filed Mar. 16, 2015, wherein priority claimed from EM 002544510-0001 and EM 002544510-0002. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170297708 A1 | Oct 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 29520505 | Mar 2015 | US |
Child | 29584541 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 29584541 | US | |
Child | 15512546 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 29520505 | Mar 2015 | US |
Child | PCT/SE2015/050349 | US |