Airplanes are the most popular for of long distance travel, due to its speed and comfort level. However, because of this luxury of speed, it is one of the world’s worst offenders of atmospheric pollution. Originally, airplanes were an amazing technology that added a whole new dimension to travel and innovation. However, this also added the problem of finding an efficient way to power these machines. On a small scale, planes are not causing a lot of damage to the environment. Like a lot of things though, the rate and scale at which these things are being used. Compared to comparable forms of long distance travel (i.e. boat, car, train, etc.), the airplane is by far the most polluting. According to the attached article, a typical trans-American flight emits as much carbon dioxide as a an SUV/month. This creates a big dilemma: reduce the use of planes or make them more efficient. That’s where the college students and astrophysicists come in.
NASA and MIT are joining forces to create a greener, more efficient airplane.
The current design of airplanes has the engines placed on the wings of the plane. This creates a large drag on the plane causing a large excess of fuel.
The new design that NASA and MIT have come up with has moved the location of the engines in order to reduce 
this drag dramatically. The engines have been moved to the rear of the plane, on the tail. Due to the new shape of the engines, two partial cylinders, and them being placed side by side, the engines can take in additional, air than the older model was capable of.
The design allows for the intake of slower moving air, which previously would have simply caused drag on the the plane, wasting fuel. This plane will burn about 70 percent less fuel, which equates to about 75 percent less gases emitted into the atmosphere. In addition to the decreased fuel consumption, the plane will be much quieter and will not require as long of a runway for takeoffs and landings. The estimated flight day of this new design is 2035.
Because the new design saves so much money on gasoline, the price of tickets can decrease. Fuel costs can account for an estimated 35 percent of the cost of the ticket. This means that if fuel costs decrease by 70 percent, ticket prices can decrease as much as 25 percent (as long as the airlines decide to pass along savings to consumers…)
It seems that is has taken airlines a long time to update their airplanes to something more efficient and ecological. I really don’t think that this is a recent “discovery” for physicists, they must have known about this for quite some time, but it was very likely that airlines just didn’t want to invest on new airplanes and that’s why there hadn’t been any new design proposals. Maybe there were but I just never heard about them.
I have heard about this or something similar to this before. It’s great to see our country moving to something more efficient and hopefully we the customers will see these effects in plane ticket prices. I wonder though if by the year 2035 this improvement will become irrelevant as other forms of transportation will be in effect that can transport humans and cargo more efficiently and for a cheaper price than the improved plane design.
This is a great development in the aviation field. It has been a long time coming and there hasn’t been drastic changes in the design of more efficient airplanes in recent history, besides for military use. It would be even better if they could incorporate this technology on a supersonic plane like the concord. This in turn would not only reduce emissions, but it would also cut travel times dramatically.
Although I share the desire to see the concord return the idea of supersonic mass transportation is a waste of time. With the advent of video technology anybody who is willing to travel the distance has the time to kill.
The Boeing attempt a supersonic flight nearly bankrupt the company, and was seen as a giant waste of resources. In addition the sonic boom attributed with mach flight was a major issue which prevented the speeds from being attained except while over the ocean due to local noise regulations. As a trans- ocean hub flight it is an interesting proposal, but no company in their right mind would put itself through what Boeing did.
“Will the last person leaving Seattle — Turn out the Lights”
I think this is quite a good step forward for the fuel consumption. Fuel costs make up quite a large portion of ticket prices. Shorter runways would decrease the impermeable area needed for an airport and reduce runoff. I particularly like the idea of a quieter airplane. The engine noise in the middle third of current planes can be extremely loud. This would also benefit property owners near airports.
Any time you can get NASA to work with you the project is going to be of very serious standards. I am curious to see with the advent of the new 787′s and other more forward thinking planes if this trend will continue. Will long distance flights be taken over by massive planes the size of which have yet to see as materials become ever lighter and cheaper. Will high speed rail provide significant service that will rival trains, and or provide local services to augment long distance “hub” flights.
Also with the advent of such ideas will such capital investments be worth fixing a problem that is not really near the top of the list in terms of efficiency problems.
Will the future of Air travel rationalize the creation of such planes, or will an extremely efficient high volume hub based system make this idea obsolete?