I have read that Northrop did testing on a B-66 in the 60′s, that showed with a 65% laminer flow, range was increased and fuel consumption was lowered by 1500 pounds per flight.
Related posts:
- If All The Heat Energy In A Car Was Transferred Into Fuel Savings – How Much Fuel Would Be Saved?
- Learn More About Fuel Saving Products
- I Am Going To Buy A New Gas Furnace.how Much Difference In Savings On Fuel Cost Between High And Mid?
- More Deceptive Tactics by Sellers of Fuel Saving Devices!
- Is It Worth The Savings In Energy Cost To Install A Gable Fan For My Attic?
A laminar flow wing is an ideal shape for high speed cruise but not efficient at low speeds.
This would result in unacceptably high landing and takeoff speeds and reduced load capabilities.
Also as Jet doc said…they are very intolerant of contamination (ice/frost/moisture etc)
There is research, at the present, into flight/mission adaptable wings that would change thier profile depending on flight regime.
Give it time!
Sorry, Gimpalong. Good guess, but laminar flow has nothing to do with the fuel in the wing tanks.
Laminar flow wings may be more efficient in perfect atmospheric conditions, but they are very sensitive to ice, dirt or even rain on the wings, and passenger aircraft have to deal with all these things on an almost daily basis. Passenger aircraft also need to be as flexible as possible for weight and balance concerns and for a carrying a variety of loads.
It does great things for aerodynamics, the problem is it requires a lot of extra plumbing in the wings, so that eats into fuel capacity. But the biggest problem seemed to be maintaining it. The wholes are very small in the wing surface and they have to be kept open for the system to work. Just too many man hours for it to be considered cost effective.