Archives for the month of: September, 2025

Full Circle Moment

The 2009 IATA Biofuels commitment turned out to be a full circle moment. The commitment did not introduce legally binding quotas on members, but instead made a landmark industrywide commitment to pursue sustainable aviation fuels as a core strategy for decarbonization. This included a pledge to achieve carbon-neutral growth from 2020 onwards (no increase in carbon dioxide emissions from a 2005 baseline) and to cut net carbon emissions in half by 2050 compared once again to a 2005 baseline.(73rd IATA Annual Meeting 2010)

The pledge kickstarted global SAF adoption and over 400,000 commercial flights have used SAF since then (World Economic Forum 2022/ GE Aerospace 2022). The 2009 commitment led to 2021’s ‘Fly Net Zero’ initiative, targeting net-zero emissions by 2050.

This piece looks at not just biofuels but other options as well.

Note the smoke pollution coming off this amazing looking Convair 880. Pic Credit Larry Pullen

The Background

Aviation Turbine Fuel (ATF) has the following strengths. The first is the ability to operate  at low ambient temperatures,the second is to have a high calorific value, this is measured by the heat produced by a specific quantity, measured as J/kg (1 Wh/kg = 3600 J/kg). The third is volumetric energy density that is the amount of energy that can be stored within a given volume and is measured as Wh/L and ATF with a volumetric energy density of 35 MJ/L has high density. A flashpoint of 49 degrees centigrade obviously makes it combustible and needs to have safety protocols while being handled. Lastly ATF is cheap to manufacture at approx $1.0 per liter. (Aviation Fuel Wikipedia)

By the mid 2000s aviation was under intense scrutiny for its contribution to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Aviation was responsible for approx 2-3% of all carbon dioxide emissions, and was projected to grow rapidly. (expected to be over 25% by 2050).

While other forms of transport (road,rail,sea) had multiple forms of green propulsion coming up mainly dominated by electricity. Aviation had yet to see any move in the direction of decarbonizing. While the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Conference emphasized sector specific emission reductions there were other contributory incidents as well.

The 2008 financial crisis led to oil spiking at $147/barrel in July of that year and this only drove the point home to airlines, the need to hedge against fossil fuels. Biofuels did offer a hedge against this dependence, potentially stabilizing costs, Giovanni Bisignani of IATA emphasized that fuel innovation was key or else fuel would account for over 40% of airline costs by 2020 ( Reuters Factbox 2008, multiple sources)

By 2009, airframe and engine manufacturers had validated biofuels performance & safety and Virgin Atlantic flew the first flight with a SAF blend in 2008. Furthermore biofuels did not require any aircraft or engine modifications unlike electricity or hydrogen.

Growing calls from countries & private bodies like ICAO further influenced IATA to work on emissions reductions. Aviation was included by the EU in its emission trading system (ETS, a cap and trade policy that sets a cap on the total GHG emissions from specific industries) and added financial incentives/penalties for decarbonization. The commitment preempted stricter regulations through self regulation and fostered collaborations like the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Users Group that was launched in 2008 and united producers, airlines & NGOs to ensure biofuels met sustainability criteria.

SAF

The roots of the idea of SAF can be traced back to the mid 20th Century with the 1940s Fischer-Tropsch (FT) Synthesis. The process which has its roots back in the 1920s was developed by German scientists Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch to convert coal or biomass into liquid hydrocarbons, including kerosene like fuels (ATF is kerosene). While originally developed to overcome wartime shortages, FT synthesis laid the foundational work of producing jet fuel from non fossil sources.

The Oil shocks of the 1970s further spurred global interest in developing alternative fuels. In 1974 Brazil started the ProAlcool program which produced bioethanol from sugarcane for road transport vehicles. This program demonstrated the scalability of biofuels and catalysed interest in bio-jet fuels.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol further heightened global focus on GHG emissions. Aviation, which then contributed about 2% of global carbon dioxide emissions, was growing rapidly with no alternatives to ATF came under scrutiny. Initial studies focussed on adapting ethanol and biodiesel processes,  but jet fuel’s need for high calorific values at low ambient temperatures shifted focus to hydrotreating (process of removing impurities such as sulphur and improving fuel quality) & FT synthesis.

Recognizing that biofuels were the path to decarbonizing, with minimal changes to aircraft & infrastructure, the concept of drop-in fuels gained traction. The SAF concept crystallized in 2005 as the quickest solution and was adopted by IATA in 2009 using 2005 as a baseline.DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) took specific interest in this project.

The newfound synergy between all the stakeholders resulted in the first tangible steps. Honeywell UOP partnered with DARPA to develop the renewable jet fuel process. Boeing collaborated with airlines, fuel producers & research facilities to further explore the practical application of bio jet-fuel.

SAF is produced through multiple refining processes that convert feedstocks into drop-in fuels. These processes or pathways convert diverse raw materials such as waste oils, biomass or captured carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons that mimic fossil based jet fuel while reducing lifecycle GHG emissions by 80%.

HEFA (Hydrotreated Esters & Fatty Acids) uses feedstocks of waste cooking oils & animal fats removes oxygen from triglycerides & fatty acids ( fat the human body stores, remember this is from cooking oil)producing paraffinic hydrocarbons (linked carbon and hydrogen atoms, found in fuels and known for their clean burning, high energy density properties)via hydrogenation.Simply put it is gather the grease, remove the oxygen, make fuel like molecules by adjusting the molecular chains or makes fuel from unwanted oils. This process produces top quality SAF. HEFA competes with bio diesel and has limited feedstock availability. However this is still the dominant process and accounts for 80% of all current SAF production. (companies : Neste)

The FT Synthesis uses biomass such as agricultural & municipal waste as feedstock. The biomass is gasified into syngas (carbon monoxide & hydrogen), then catalytically converted into liquid hydrocarbons, which are then refined into jet fuel. While feedstocks are flexible which translates to potentially high volumes, the high capital costs & energy intensive nature of gasification plants are obstacles to the adoption. While certified in 2009, the FT synthesis process is still niche.

Synthesized iso-Paraffins (SIP) / Direct Sugar to Hydrocarbon (DSHC) uses sugars such as sugarcane or corn syrup as feedstock. Fermentation converts sugars into farnesane, a hydrocarbon, which is then hydroprocessed into jet fuel. While this process produces high density fuel, it is a niche pathway with a limited blend ratio and is expensive to produce. (companies: Amyris)

Alcohol to Jet (ATJ) uses ethanol or isobutanol from biomass as feedstock. Alcohols are dehydrated (water is removed), oligomerized (smaller molecules for more efficient & cleaner burning) & hydroprocessed (refined using hydrogen under heat and pressure)to form jet fuel hydrocarbons. Certified in 2016 this process leverages existing ethanol infrastructure and uses versatile feedstocks, however this process is complex and multi-layered, leading to higher costs. (companies: Gevo, LanzaTech)

Power to Liquid (PtL) / Synthetic Fuels (e-SAF) uses carbon dioxide captured from the air directly  and green hydrogen (from electrolysis using renewable energy) as feedstock. The carbon & hydrogen are combined using FT or methanol synthesis to produce synthetic hydrocarbons which are refined into jetfuel.While this is still an emerging process, it is an extremely niche method & energy intensive,it is reliant on cheap renewable electricity. The RefuelEU is an aviation initiative that requires 1.2% e-SAF by 2030.

There are multiple other emerging pathways such as Hydroprocessed Hydrocarbons (HH-SPK) that use algae oils, this is not scaled as it damages ecosystems. Catalytic Hydrothermolysis (CHJ) that converts oils/fats under high pressure & temperature. Lignocellulosic (plant biomass) pyrolysis is the fast pyrolysis (decomposition through high temperatures) into bio-oil, this is an experimental process that upgrades bio-oil to jet fuel.

HEFA dominates at the moment because of its maturity & cost effectiveness, but PtL & ATJ are growing fast. Current global SAF production is at 2.5 bn liters/year ( IATA , Jun 2025 press release )of the total global ATF requirement of 300 bn liters/year.

Neste is the world’s leading SAF producer with operations in 14 countries. Its strategy is centered around HEFA technology using its patented NEXBTL technology to produce high quality SAF. It has the early mover advantage and has been helped by EU policy ensuring a ready market for its SAF. Neste prioritizes 100% waste and residue materials such as cooking oil and animal fat waste. It avoids food competing crops such as palm oil (phased out in 2020). Neste produces 25% of global SAF with three refineries, supplies over 20 airlines and airports and uses logistics partner skyNRG for blending & distribution.

SAF continues to face challenges such as limited waste oil supply, and it costs between 2-3x(World Economic Forum, “The cost of sustainable aviation fuel: Can the industry clear this key hurdle?” July 2025). that what ATF costs, however global policy shifts ensure this fuel is the quickest off the blocks in the decarbonization race.

Note: Could not avoid the chemical terms, have tried to explain them succinctly 

Hydrogen

Hydrogen has always featured in aviation almost from the beginning. Starting with the early 20th Century when it was used for buoyancy on early airships such as the Zeppelin LZ1 as far back as 1900. Hydrogen is known for its high energy density by weight and is seen as a potential fuel due to its zero carbon emissions.

During the 1930s German engineers conducted turbojet experiments using gaseous hydrogen laying the groundwork for cryogenic (hydrogen needs to be stored at -252.8 degrees C for storage efficiency and maximize payload and range. Cryogenic LH2 tanks, though insulated and complex, enable aircraft to carry sufficient fuel for long flights). Gaseous hydrogen would require impractically large tanks, reducing payload or making the aircraft design unfeasible. This was followed by Sikorsky Aircraft proposing liquid hydrogen as a fuel. By the 1950s liquid hydrogen production was scaled for rocket applications. The USAF’s ‘Project Bee’ began with a Martin B-57B Canberra bomber becoming the World’s first airplane powered by liquid hydrogen. Skunk Works led by Kelly Johnson developed the CL-400 Suntan as a reconnaissance aircraft that ran on P&W’s model 304 hydrogen engines. The project itself was cancelled but advanced liquid hydrogen’s production & tankage for the space program.

Between the 1960s-80s both the US & Soviet Union ran tests on passenger airliners using liquid hydrogen as propulsion. Lockheed looked at 130-140 passenger transports with ranges between 2700 – 9300km and the Soviet Union used a Tu-155 with a Hydrogen fueled engine. Both the programs highlighted storage and boil off challenges.

By the 1980s aerospace research considered hydrogen a clean and promising fuel for long range aircraft because of its high energy content and low emissions. Messerschmitt Bölkow Blohm (MBB) , the company that included the historic Messerschmitt Aircraft Company, was heavily involved in hydrogen research. The company was acquired by Deutsche Aerospace AG (DASA) which in turn would be acquired by Airbus. In November 1989 a major European Colloquium was held in Strasbourg, Germany. The main topic of the Colloquium was the future of supersonic & hypersonic transportation systems, here a paper on hydrogen as a propellant was presented. While MBB was a major player in the hydrogen space in Europe, there were others as well.

By the late 1990s the Hydrogen Cell Era had begun and between 2000-2002 the Airbus led the Cryoplane study which was funded by the European Commission had assessed liquid hydrogen configurations for biz jets and widebody airliners, it emphasized safety and infrastructure transitions.

In April 2008 Boeing’s fuel cell demonstrator , a modified Diamond DA20 eclipse became the first manned aircraft to fly solely on a hydrogen fuel cell (HFC). It was powered by Intelligent Energy’s 24 kW Proton Exchange membrane (PEM) system (the PEM is key to splitting hydrogen molecules, the electrons are stripped and forced into the electrical circuit generating electricity, while protons head to the cathodes)  reaching 1,000 meters altitude at 100 km/h for 20 minutes.

Over the next decade multiple organizations such as The German Aerospace Centre, Boeing, AeroVironment etc would make advances in the field of hydrogen flight endurance, altitude,storage pressure (hydrogen being gaseous needs to be cooled and stored cryogenically to maximize fuel), fuel cell architecture. These advances set the ground for the next decade.

The decade of the 2020s has seen increased activity with Airbus announcing its ZEROe project with four hydrogen (combustion & fuel cell) concepts targeting the aircraft in the 100-200 passenger range. While most of the aircraft are conventional there is a Blended Wing Body being tested as well. Airbus targets 2035 for its first first craft with zero emissions.

ZeroAvia is a British/American Hydrogen aircraft developer. In 2020 they tested a hydrogen powertrain on a retrofitted Piper M-class and completed their first eight minute flight. The testbed crashed in 2021  at Cranfield during a power system test, nobody was hurt.Since then ZeroAvia has procured two Dornier 228 . One flew in 2023 for ten minutes with one of its engines powered by hydrogen electricity. ZeroAvia has partnered with Textron Aviation, the parent of Cessna, to develop a hydrogen powered Cessna Grand Caravan.

Universal Hydrogen is yet another company in the field, converting an ATR72-500 & Bombardier Dash 8-300 to hydrogen using hydrogen conversion kits to be retrofitted to flying aircraft. There are multiple other companies in the field focusing on different types of aircraft.

Over the next 25 years expect to see the commercial viability & scalability of hydrogen fuel established in multiple aircraft segments. Airbus definitely heads the area, but there are developments happening across multiple companies and aircraft types. What is critical are the proving flights of today.

Electric

The biggest challenge that electric aircraft face is their energy density. Current lithium-ion batteries have an energy density of 250 Wh/kg which is below ATFs 12,000 Wh/kg. This clearly limits range (once again range anxiety), furthermore batteries add significant weight while reducing payload capacity. Nonetheless, short taxi services are still very much in the picture.

Joby Aviation plans to launch commercial taxi services in Dubai & Los Angeles. They plan to have electric vertical takeoff & landing (eVTOL) services. In 2023 they delivered their first eVTOL aircraft to Edwards AFB and have flown their S4, a four rotor electric eVTOL vehicle in urban settings such as New York. Interestingly the S4 can also be converted to hydrogen and has flown a record 523 miles in this form! They have a couple of interesting acquisitions. The first is XWing which they acquired in 2024. XWing focuses on autonomous aircraft and in a capacity constrained aircraft, autonomy means extra space to sell. The second is Blade Air Mobility’s ride share business. Blade Air Mobility is an urban air mobility platform.

The biggest hurdle to Electric propulsion is battery density and weight. Density is expected to reach approx 400-500 Wh/kg by 2030, this clearly helps with range.

Electricity is definitely on the cusp of revolutionizing urban air mobility and this is predicted to be a $1 tn market annually by 2040. The next generation of batteries are expected to be in the 500-1000 Wh/kg range and this definitely improves range and enables larger aircraft.

Hybrid electric aircraft such as the Airbus E-Fan X bridge the gap between current technology and full electric systems, offering a path to decarbonize larger aircraft using electricity.

The Future

As of today the aviation industry is midway through its decarbonizing journey. The progress is accelerating as is seen from the advances in the last ten years. SAF has scaled from 0.1% of total ATF in 2020 to approx 0.3% or 2 billion liters.Over 400,000 flights have flown using ATF blended with SAF. By 2030 we can expect to see aircraft using 100% SAF. (Robb Report Apr’23)

Hydrogen is still in its infancy, however flights such as ZeroAvia’s 19 seater demonstrator prove feasibility. With almost a dozen aircraft in development, hydrogen powered aircraft should enter service by 2030. By 2035 we can see hydrogen powering about 15% of short haul flight below 1000 km. (ZeroAvia, McKinsey, Decarbonizing the aviation sector, Jul 2022)

Electric aircraft are on the cusp of revolutionizing VTOLs. Companies such as Joby & Archer aviation are planning commercial services by 2026.With rising battery densities , we expect aircraft applications to only increase from here. By 2050 expect eVTOls to handle 13% of all urban mobility trips rising from 5% in 2030. (Icct2020 Jul 2020)

Together these technologies are plugging critical gaps to meet the 2050 net-zero target. This means reducing aviation emissions from one billion tons per annum in 2025 to near zero. SAF with proper blending will account 65% of this with production reaching 450 billion liters by 2050. Hydrogen will complement approx 20-25% of SAFs targets by powering regional flights of below 2000km. Electric aircraft will dominate the short range (below 500km) with 20% of urban trips & 10% of regional flights covering a total of between 10-15% of total flight segments by 2050.

Collaboration & Continued Innovation is key…

For more deep dive easy to read articles please go to https://theaviationevangelist.com do keep scrolling down, and do share

Follow me:

LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-aviation-evangelist/

X : @ManiRayaprolu

Reddit : r/theaviationevangelist

Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61583497868441#

https://www.instagram.com/theaviationevangelist?igsh=ZjA5YXI3MWd3OGZs&utm_source=qr

The BWB is Born

As J W Dunne was conducting his early flying wing tests, there were  developments happening across the Atlantic in Europe. For the very first time, engineers were thinking of using the insides of the wings. A design philosophy was born.

The JetZero Z4. Pic Source: JetZero Website

The Pioneers

In 1910 Hugo Junkers of Germany patented a cantilever tailless wing design. It was an all metal construction (almost all aircraft until then were fabric and wood construction). Such a design & construction would be without any external wires or braces. Furthermore the wings could be hollow and the space used to house passengers, cargo and fuel. His designs were used by the Germans in WW1 and later in WW2 (he was ousted from his company in 1933 by the Nazis). 

The G-38 of 1929 was a major innovation of his blended wing concept and was for a time the largest landbased aircraft in the World. The passengers were seated in the wings which were 5 feet 7 inches thick at the root. The leading edges of the wings had sculpted windows giving passengers a panoramic view as they flew. There were three 11 seat cabins,in addition to smoking & wash rooms. The wings had a gangway through them that allowed mechanics to work on engines while inflight, a first. There were two operating aircraft and flew through to 1941(both flew until 1936)  before the final one crashed.

The G.38 schematic . Pic Source : Wikipedia

The Mitsubishi Ki-20 was based on the Junkers G-38. Six were built as heavy bombers between 1931-35. During WW2 they saw active combat. These aircraft were considered secret and their existence only made public in 1940.

Nicolas Woyevodsky was a Russian Aerodynamicist who filed a 1911 patent called ‘Aircraft’. Here’s where the patent gets interesting. It was filed in the United States in 1911 and granted in 1921 ( how and why did a Russian file for a patent in the USA and why did it take so long?). Not much else is known about this path breaking scientist other than his name, country of origin and patent.

The patent spoke of a continuous airfoil section integrating the fuselage and wings, what we now call the BWB. The patent further described a triangular shaped body with pterygoid (triangular) aerofoil sections that enclosed the engines and passengers. Such a construction would reduce drag and weight enhancing lift. This was considered revolutionary as most aircraft were biplanes with separate fuselage and wings.

The Westland Dreadnought. Pic Source: Wikipedia

Woyevodsky’s 1921 patent led to wind tunnel tests (probably in Russia & Britain) and validated his theory which led to designer GTR Hill of Westland designing and building the dreadnought. GTR Hill was already experimenting with the Westland Pterodactyl. The Pterodactyl was a revolutionary flying wing and flew through the 1920s & 30s in the hunt for a safer aircraft. The Dreadnought unfortunately crashed on its very first flight. After an initial stable take off and stable flight the Dreadnought stalled at 100 feet altitude and crashed, seriously injuring the pilot. The design was abandoned at the time, however It is recognized and appreciated by history.

The British further tried to pursue the BWB airliner design in the late 1930s & 40s through the Miles M.26 & M.30. The data was useful, however a full scale prototype was never constructed.

The BWF (Blended Wing Fuselage)

The timeline between the 1940s & 1990s is a BWB gap (very similar to the flying wings but longer, aviation development had moved rapidly in the direction of conventional aircraft ),except for the military applications between the 1950s – 1980s when the BWF was used. The A-12 Oxcart and its successor the  SR-71 pioneered the BWF design. The BWF integrates the fuselage and wings in a smooth aerodynamic transition, however the fuselage continues to be a distinct structure. 

The SR-71 schematics. The fuselage chine clearly visible. Pic Source : Wikipedia

Such a design used the fuselage as a lifting body, and the chines around the body contribute between 15-30% of total lift generated. The design used Area ruling and mitigated parasitic & wave drag through smooth transitions.

In the 1970s the Rockwell B-1 introduced variable geometry to the BWF. The wings pivoted on 6 ton hinges which are buried inside a wide fuselage. The BWF of the B-1B contributes approx 15-20% of the total required lift. 

The B-1B Lancer & The Tu-160 Blackjack. Note their similarities. The BWF clearly visible on both. Pic Source: Wikipedia

The Tu-160 which has a very similar design to the B-1 has an even larger BWF. The BWF contributed approx 18-25% of the total lift in supersonic flight.

All the aircraft mentioned had variable geometry inlets of various types (spikes / ramps).

The BWB Evolution

The Generation 1 BWB’s commenced in the 1990s and ran through to the 2010s. They represented the ‘ High Risk High Reward’ approach to BWBs where they envisioned extra large 800 seat BWBs with maximum aerodynamic efficiency. This meant Boundary Layer Ingestion (BLI) of the engines and integrating them inside the airframe. This proved to be difficult to accomplish & certify.

The NASA/McDonnell Douglas Studies were funded by NASA between 1993-96. The studies included wind tunnel tests of tailless BWB concepts at 1-6% scale. Models tested had the centre body contributing between 31-43% of total lift and exhibited between 6-8% fuel savings. 

NASA BWB-17 was tested between 1997-2000. With a 17 foot wingspan, the 6% scale RC model was built by Stanford University for NASA. The model demonstrated low drag and had centrebody lift of between 30-40%. The model proved BWB flight handling with a tailless design. The BWB-17 had stability issues and needed artificial stabilization to correct. The model further highlighted scaling & control issues on larger aircraft.

The BWB-17 by NASA. Pic Source : NASA

Boeing Phantom Works BWB studies ran between 2000-2007. Post the McDonnell Douglas acquisition of 1997, Boeing continued to build on the earlier program that ran between 1993-96. 

Part of the program was to construct the 35 foot wingspan X-48A demonstrator in 2004, however the program was cancelled before construction began. In 2005 a 12 foot wingspan BWB model was constructed to study transonic aerodynamics in a wind tunnel. This model exhibited a 15-20% drag reduction and lift to drag ratio of 20-23. As the project was for 450 seat passenger airliners it highlighted manufacturing complexity & airport compatibility issues.

The Boeing X-48B program ran between 2007-2010. It was a 8.5% scale 21 foot wingspan model that was powered by three jet engines and flew between Mach 0.3-0.7. The centrebody contributed 35% of the lift and had L/D improvements of approx 20% over conventional designs. The X-48B continued to have challenges with yaw handling and full size scaling. Furthermore engine out control and stall characteristics were tested and needed improvement. The aircraft needed artificial stability management.

The X-48B. Pic Source : NASA

The Generation 2 BWBs run from approx 2010 to date. Gen 2 highlights a safety first approach to design and has podded engines mounted above the airframe. The realistic path sacrificed potential efficiencies for safety with the approach. The Gen 2 BWBs also explored different propulsion types.

NASA N2A/B/C BWB concepts ran between 2010-2015. The concept was for a 300-450 passenger aircraft. Conducted in partnership with Boeing the N2A had two podded engines mounted on top of the upper surface of the aircraft. Wind tunnel testing was done to study its aerodynamic and acoustic performance at low speeds. The N2B used BLI and had embedded engines. While the N2B showed improvements over the performance of the N2A, the embedded engines increased manufacturing complexity. The N2C was a supersonic concept. The data gleaned from these concepts was to inform the future aviation industry on future design areas.

The Boeing X-48C first flew in 2012. With a wingspan of 21 feet it was a 8.5% scale of a large transporter. The C was focussed on noise reduction and featured vertical surfaces adjacent to the engines.The Modified X-48B had an extended aft fuselage on which the engines were mounted. It completed its 30th and final flight in 2013.

 

The X-48C. Pic Source : NASA

NASA N3-X Hybrid Wing Body that ran between 2013-2018 is a concept design. NASA tests such concepts through computer simulations and & wind tunnels. The research was on advanced technologies and propulsion. Some of the concepts explored included Turbo Electric Distributed Propulsion where instead of large engines, smaller electric fans distributed propulsion across the aircraft. Another concept explored was the Superconducting Power System, where superconducting technology allows for high power density with minimum energy loss. Others included wingtip generators and liquid hydrogen cooling. 

The N3-X can achieve a 70% reduction in fuel burn, significantly lower emissions and noise levels while maintaining performance at the same time.

The Airbus Maverick began development in 2017. With a wingspan of 10.6 feet and a length of 6.7 feet, the Maverick had two engines to the rear with each having a vertical fin on it. The model explored aerodynamic and technical specifications and results were encouraging .

The Airbus Maverick. Pic Source : Airbus

Airbus has further built on its BWB program by targeting 2035 as the first year for a zero emission aircraft. Such an aircraft would use hydrogen combustion or cells for propulsion. Storing Hydrogen is a big challenge in aviation and the BWB is considered an excellent test design. Airbus is further  studying conventional aircraft for its zero emission program. 

JetZero 

JetZero is founded by Mark Page a BWB pioneer. He was part of the seminal NASA / McDonnell Douglas collaboration on the BWB program as technical program manager. NASA concieved the program as a challenge to rethink aircraft design for greater efficiency. The program (although Mark was not part of it after 1996) culminated in the BWB-17(spoken of earlier) the very first BWB of the modern era. It was inspired By Northrop’s flying wings of the 1940s but was a completely fresh approach to aircraft design. The BWB design was co-created with Robert Liebeck & Blaine Rawdon and offered 20-30% better L/D ratios than conventional aircraft. The three of them authored ‘Beyond Tube and Wing’ in 2020 in which they charted the path to the BWB design.

The philosophy was Multidiciplanry Optimization (MDO) integrationg aerodynamics, engines, stability and internal structures to minimize drag and maximize efficiency. Page virewed the BWB as the fundamental reimagining of an aircraft blending wing and body into a seamless flowing structure. In one presentation Page mentioned imagine a Boeing 777 fuselage cut up into three parts and placed side by side. You then stick wings on the first and last sections, the middle one being the longest (with the cockpit) and place the engines on top of the stacked side by side fuselage, and lastly smooth them all together into one fused structure.

Page’s contributions influenced the X-48B/C programs as well. These programs validated the theory of BWBs with subscale models and wind tunnel testing. They sorted out  issues such as space by moving the main landing gear to the rear of the aircraft from the centre, saving space and increasing passenger numbers another example is sorting out pitch stability control issues with belly flaps, every thought had to be out of the box.

Later in 2012 Page co-founded DZYNE Technologies as chief scientist & VP and here he continued to focus on aircraft with high lifting efficiency , but the BWB bug was always there, first as a business jet and later as an airliner. In 2021 Page along with Tom O’Leary founded JetZero to take forward the BWB vision.

Page has mentioned that startups like JetZero are ideally placed to revolutionize the aircraft manufacturing space as they do not have massive legacy businesses that need to transition ex : Boeing & Airbus.

So far it has walked the talk with Alaska & United Airlines investing in JetZero through their investment arms. Delta Airlines is a strategic partner sharing expertize from a customer engagement perspective. In addition JetZero are talking to 14 other airlines and the USAF has awarded a $235 million contract to JetZero to build a full scale demonstrator, but we are getting ahead of ourselves.

The 12.5% scale JetZero pathfinder with its 21 foot wingspan first flew in 2023 and received FAA clearance in 2024. The USAF found the Pathfinder to exhibit similar characteristics to the X-48 program and has given the go ahead to JetZero to create a full scale demonstrator which is to be ready by the first quarter of 2027. The demonstrator is being constructed by Scaled Composites founded by the legendary Burt Rutan who has aircraft/spacecraft such as Spaceship One (won the Ansari X Prize) and Stratolaunch to his credit. Scaled Composites is now part of Northrop Grumman (its amazing the name Northrop is involved here, a doff of the hat to Jack Northrop).

The Z4 is a multirole platform and can be used for both passengers & military applications such as a sky tanker (the USAF is looking at the KC-Z4 as a replacement to its aging KC-135 tanker). To cut down the development & certification runway JetZero will be using Commercial off the shelf (COTS) parts where possible. 

The KC-Z4. Pic Source : JetZero Website

The engine choice is Pratt & Whitney PW2040 each generating approx 43,000 pounds of thrust. These are the very engines that powered the Boeing 757 & the Boeing C-17 Globemaster. While the design of the engines might be almost 50 years old, they are tried and tested and have a solid track record. Delta have provided three engines for the demonstrator. These engines are more than capable of managing the Z4s 5,000 nm range and cruise altitude of 45,000 feet. They will obviously be modernized for the production models. In future the Z4 might be offered with newer engines. Mark Page did note they were not looking for perfect tech, but are more interested in proving the airframe.

The JetZero Z4. Pic Source : JetZero Website

The fuselage ( after the demonstrator)will be made of composites and be manufactured at their Greensboro facility. Some of the other innovations it will have are shorter landing gear to enhance low speed handling, cargo door matching the KC-10 size (USAF applications). The passenger experience stresses comfort & efficiency (the 3D renderings on the JetZero website look stunning).

The personal passenger experience aims to revolutionized by offering larger seats, flexible cabin layout and dedicated overhead bin space (have forgotten what this feels like!). Instead of physical windows JetZero plans on high definition exterior cameras that provide a live view on digital windows. There is a possibility of overhead windows as well in addition to mood lighting.

While the overall exterior design of the aircraft is very sculpted, Page and his colleagues came up with a ‘ T ‘ shaped plug solution to scaling up the aircraft to either smaller or larger capacities, this means the aircraft construction has to be modular in nature almost like ‘LEGO’ !! They did this back in the 90s and the 25 year limit on the patent has expired, in Page’s own words “ I am happy to have it back” !

Page giving a DZYNE Technologies presentation in 2018 where describes the T shaped plugs that sum up the scalability of the BWB. Note their similarities plugs next to the engines. Pic Source : Page presentation off YT

Mark Page emphasizes pragmitism over perfection and this is achieved by delivering on the USAF contract, using milestones to attact fresh funding (the Z4 is expected to cost approx $5-7bn to develop as per Jon Ostrower of TAC) and target the largest market segment for aircraft the 200-250 passenger aircraft market worth over $2.5 Bn per annum. With projected savings of 50%, this will be a no-brainer for airlines future fleet decision making.

BWBs have promises to keep…..

Please be sure to read Part 1 of the two part series which details the evolution of the flying wing in detail at http://theaviationevangelist.com/2025/09/13/the-evolution-of-the-flying-wing-part-one/

End of Part 2

For more deep dive easy to read articles please go to https://theaviationevangelist.com do keep scrolling down, and do share

Follow me:

LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-aviation-evangelist/

X : @ManiRayaprolu

Reddit : r/theaviationevangelist

Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61583497868441#

https://www.instagram.com/theaviationevangelist?igsh=ZjA5YXI3MWd3OGZs&utm_source=qr

Prologue

On June 22nd 2025 seven B-2A bombers carried out strikes in Iran. The total sortie codenamed ‘Operation Midnight Hammer’ lasted 37 hours. They dropped a total of 14 GBU-57 bunker buster bombs on Iran’s Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant & Natanaz Nuclear Facility . 

The sortie only strengthened the B-2’s formidable reputation of striking distant targets unseen & unheard.. 

The B-2 Spirit is a major milestone in the ongoing evolution of the flying wing.

The Pioneers

Before we get to J W Dunne (considered the father of the flying wing) , we need to first acknowledge a couple of important milestones. The first is Sir George Cayley who in 1799 put forth the concept of a fixed wing ‘machine’, one that had separate systems for creating lift, propulsion & control surfaces. He is the first person to understand the forces that act on a flying machine, weight, lift, drag & thrust. Later in 1810 he worked out the importance of having a dihedral angle at wing roots. The upward angle of wings was “the chief basis of stability in aerial navigation”. It needs to be noted Sir George Cayley was more intent on sharing his knowledge rather than patenting them, and therein lies his greatness.

The second is Alphonse Penaud , best known for his 1871 ‘Planophore’ , a rubberband powered model plane. The design achieved stable flight for 40 seconds demonstrating the stability of fixed wing aircraft designs over any others (such as ornithopters). He teamed up with mechanic Paul Gauchot in 1873 and they patented the monoplane flying wing in 1876. The structure of the ‘flying wing’ had a slight dihedral angle which provided roll stability, they had unswept wingtips and a slight arch on the leading edge with elastic trailing edges, this gave the wing better flexibility when dealing with unstable airflow. The patent contained a detailed performance analysis and is an important milestone as it integrated fixed wings, propulsion & control surfaces into a flyable machine decades before powered flight became a reality.

Alphonse Penaud’s 1876 Flying Wing. Pic Source : Wikipedia

Between 1906 – 1913 J W Dunne ran his experiments on ‘inherent stability’. From a military background, Dunne collaborated with Col. J E Capper at the British Army’s Balloon Factory to test early designs of his tailless gliders with swept wings. In 1908 his D.1b glider exhibited stable glides after the earlier D.1 crashed unceremoniously. The D.1b ‘s ‘inherent stability’ was achieved through tailless wing design alone.

The D.5 & D.8 were powered tailless biplanes (flying wing configuration) with sweeps up to 30 degrees. The wings featured a washout (a twist reducing the angle of attack at the wingtips) for enhanced stability. The D.5 demonstrated a hands-off flight while Dunne was reading a newspaper). This was a first in the early days of powered flight. The D.10 saw further refinements with a more streamlined design. Dunne’s use of Elevons (combination elevators & ailerons) is considered a first. His designs definitely helped reduce pilot work load. His work would be foreshadowed for the next ten years.

The Dunne D.5. Pic source: Wikipedia
The Dunne D.8 Pic Source : Wikipedia

In 1910 the same year Dunne filed his patents, Hugo Junkers too filed a patent for a ‘flying wing or Nurflugel (pure wing). It was for a hollow metal airliner where passengers would sit inside the wing structure (an early blended wing). The fuel and cargo would be in the wings too.  Long-term he envisioned transatlantic flights in such airplanes. His designs had structural integrity due to all metal structures with cantilevered wings and small tails for stability. The G38 was an example of his ideology. He was thrown out of his own company in 1933 as he disagreed with Nazi ideologies.

The Junkers G-38 of 1929. Pic Sour : Wikipedia

Between the wars Germany was not allowed to build powered aircraft and this gave rise to a number of glider clubs . Alexander Lippisch worked at Junkers between 1925-27 and this inspired him to take up the ‘nurflugel’ torch. His Storch series of gliders were tailless with swept wings. His Delta series of gliders explored low aspect ratio wings for better roll control. His gliders featured wingtip rudders and elevons. By the early 1930s he had contracted with DFS (Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Segelflug a.k.a German Institute of Glider Research, a Nazi front) for powered prototypes such as the 1931 DFS 40, a rocket powered tailless plane. Lippisch directly inspired two young brothers who would go on to create one of the most fabled aircraft of all time, enter Reimar & Walter Horten and the aircraft they would create the Ho-229.  

The Lippisch, Storch & Delta gliders. Pic source Wikipedia

Mentions: The powered Cheyranovskii BICh-3 Tailless research aircraft of 1926 & G T R Hill’s Westland Pterodactyl series of tailless gliders between 1926-32. Hill would go on to design and construct the Westland Dreadnought, the very first purpose built Blended Wing Body.

The sequence of events mentioned above illustrates the evolution of wings over an almost 200 year period starting with Sir George Cayley. The unveiling of the B-2 Spirit in 1988 was 112 years after Alphonse Penaud’s patent of 1876. During the early years of aviation, patents filed in different countries could be viewed or accessed through scientific journals, world fairs & patent translating offices.  Percolation of ideas was slow and the timespan mentioned above makes the point.

The Horten Brothers

Between the wars in Germany several ‘civil clubs’ sprung up where students trained on gliders under the supervision of WW1 veterans. By the mid-late 1920s, the young brothers, heavily influenced by Alexander Lippisch began experimenting with tailless gliders. Their recollections in later life mention they turned their bedroom, attic & basement at home into a workshop, cluttering their family home in Bonn with airplane models. The home based experimentation was important to their later productions. Their gliders were simple tailless constructions with a cocoon for a pilot integrated into the design. The models focussed on keeping parasitic drag (all objects experience drag through the air) down and had better performance than conventional designs.

By 1931 the brothers had moved their activities to Bonn-Hangelar Field, a gliding club where they had access to mentoring, tools & materials from more experienced aviators. Their first full scale glider was the Horten H-I from 1931 and had a 40 foot wingspan, it was constructed of wood and fabric. The design integrated swept wings & elevons.

By the mid 1930s (1933-1937) the Hortens were further refining their designs at Wassekrupp, Germany’s Mecca of gliding. They too had support from the DFS and constructed their subsequent designs (Horten H-II – H-IV).

Each model kept growing in size. The H-II had a 52 foot wingspan while the H-III & H-IV each had a 80 foot wingspan. The materials used got better with funding from DFS, for example they began using plywood i.s.o fabric. The internal structure moved from wood on the initial models to steel and aluminum in later ones. 

H-III was a motorized version which had a 32hp VW engine driving a foldable propeller. Model H-IV was a high performance pure glider.

The models exhibited a bell shaped lift distribution curve across the wing. It is higher near the wing root and tapers off near the wingtips with a smooth non linear profile. This sort of lift balances efficiency & stability and is essential for gliders with no engine to compensate for inefficiencies. The non-linear curve is important as the bell has a flatter peak and falls off at the tips, meaning optimal lift is maintained for longer. 

The gliders achieved this with swept wings of up to 30 degrees, the wingtips had washout built into them and had variable chord, meaning they tapered toward the wingtips from the wing roots. An example of this lift efficiency is when the H-III achieved flights as long as 300 km. 

Reimar Horten’s focus on lift distribution gave their designs a glide ratio of 30:1 i.e they could glide thirty times their height in distance. The focus on lift distribution is also one of the possibilities of the Ho-229’s ‘ stealth properties’ which we speak of later. Ludwig Prandtl was the scientist credited with presenting the concept of spanwise lift distribution in 1919 , Reimar Horten adapted Prandtl’s insights fifteen years later.

The H-V (1937-1943) was an exception to the materials the Horten brothers used for their gliders. They used experimental plastics. The H-V is considered the very first composite materials aircraft, however the first prototype crashed on its very first flight and Hortens reverted to wood as their material of choice. The H-V had a 46 foot wingspan and was powered by two 79 hp Hirth HM 60 R engines from the mid 1920s, powering pusher propellers. Specs gleaned from wikipedia showed the H-Vb(the second of three built) had a cruise speed of 230 km/h and a landing speed of 70 km/h.

It is just about here we observe the iterative design approach the Hortens took. They alternated each glider model with a motorized version, the H-III had a motor as did the H-V, H-VII & H-IX.

The H-VI (1944) reverted back to pure glider form after the learnings from the H-V and had significant design improvements such as a very high aspect ratio of 32.4 and a 80 foot wingspan. The wings had a sweep back of 20 degrees. The refined control surfaces were drawn from H-V data. The model had extensive stall behavior examination using tuft tests done on it. A tuft test is where strings of yarn (tufts) are attached to the entire wing surface and the aircraft is tested either in a wind tunnel (or in the Hortens case in flight). Attached airflow shows the tufts align smoothly with the laminar airflow. Separated flow is when the tufts begin to flutter erratically. Using this test is important to identify stall onset, control effectiveness, drag data & tip stall mitigation.

The H-VII(1944) was once again the H-V under a new guise. It was powered by two 240 hp Argus AS 10C engines. The V8s powered propellers once again in pusher configuration. The pilot seating was side by side vs the H-Vs semi prone position. Key increments included better control surfaces (elevons, spoilers & drag rudders) and in general a more robust internal structure for longer operations.The H-VII had a cruise speed of 300 km/h and service ceiling of over 21,000 feet. (source wikipedia).

The H-VIII(1945) was an upscaled version of the H-VII. It was sold incomplete to the RLM (ReichsLuftahrtMinisterium a.k.a Ministry of Aviation). It had a 131 foot wingspan and was powered by six pusher propeller engines. Each Argus 10 engine developed 236 hp. It represented a clear step in the direction of military applications and was expected to have a 1000 km bombing radius. The incomplete aircraft was destroyed by the Allies.

The H-IX v3 or the Ho-229 was the aircraft that is responsible for the Horten legend. When the allies got to the Gotha factory they found an aircraft unlike any other they had seen. It had bat-like wings and jets for engines (largely unknown then). The H-IX was a direct evolution of the H-V & H-VII designs. It was powered by two Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines buried inside the wings. Each of the engines generated 1990 lbs of thrust. The H-IX had a 55 foot wing span and the wings had a 32 degree sweep. It could fly at 977 kmph and had a service ceiling of 49,000 feet. This aircraft was beyond anything the Allies had to offer in terms of speed and agility. 

The Ho-229. Pic source : Wikipedia

The tailless wing at such speeds did throw up control related challenges, and in the era before fly by wire computers the aircraft had as many as eight control surfaces for the pilot to manage. The aircraft had a total of four elevons (two per wing), two drag rudders (one per wing) to induce yaw, and two speed brakes to control dives (also known as dive rudders). The v3  was the third in the series after the v1 & v2 and is the only surviving example of the H-IX/Ho-229.

Jack Northrop

Northrop began his aviation journey as a young man in 1916 with the Loughead Aircraft Manufacturing Company. As a mechanical draftsman & engineer, during his first stint there (1916-17) he worked on multiple aspects of the F-1 flying boat. Importantly his work focussed on light weight and high strength structures which would further fuel his focus on efficiency.

By 1917 he was drafted into the US Army where he served as an infantryman, however he quickly transferred to the Signal Corps to analyse Curtiss flying boats. In 1918 Loughead secured his return from the army where he continued his aviation career co-designing the Loughead S-1 a small sports plane that used moulded plywood construction and was known for its  drag reducing streamlined fuselage.

Between 1926-28 after stints with Douglas Aircraft,  Jack Northrop rejoined Loughead Aircraft (soon to be Lockheed) as chief engineer and designed the Lockheed Vega made famous by Amelia Earhart and her 1932 Transatlantic solo flight. The Vega was known for its low drag coefficient of 0.02. His work on the Vega further refined his expertise and focus on lightweight aerodynamic airframes, contributing to his future work on flying wings.

In 1928 Jack Northrop founded the Avion Corporation focussed on developing all metal aircraft with tailless designs and by 1929 he built the Avion Experimental No 1 (Northrop Flying Wing a.k.a X-216H). While it was a flying wing, Northrop retained a twin tail boom, this was for added safety during testing (wings were still being understood). The wing was made of aluminium and was of stressed skin multi cellular construction. Such constructions distribute loads across the entire wing while reducing weight and maintaining structural integrity. The wing demonstrated low Cd of 0.015 but suffered from pitch and yaw instability. Aircraft company consolidation meant that Avion Corporation was acquired by William Boeing as part of UATC (United Aircraft Transport Corporation) and was renamed Northrop Aircraft. At the time Jack Northrop designed the Alpha, a conventional low wing monoplane mail carrier.

Around 1931 the depression played a major role with Jack Northrop and UATC merged Northrop Aircraft with Stearman in Wichita, Jack Northrop refused to relocate and quit. In 1932 with the backing of Donald Douglas, Jack Northrop founded the new Northrop Corporation as a Douglas subsidiary. He developed the Beta, a faster variant of the Alpha and Gamma between (1932-34). The Gamma was a 700 hp mail & research plane. The most famous was the ‘Polar Star” that was transported via ship to Antarctica. This was followed by the Delta which was intended for passengers, however regulations prohibiting single engined aircraft from carrying passengers at night or over rough terrain curtailed this aircraft. Technically it was a success.

Further to these aircraft Northrop’s multicellular wing design greatly influenced the legendary DC-3. By 1937 Douglas was acquired once again and Northrop who yearned freedom to chase his wing designs quit once again and founded the Northrop Aircraft Inc in Hawthorne California.

The N-1M(1940-41) made its first flight in 1940 as Northrop’s first flying wing. It had a 38 foot wingspan and two 65hp Lycoming O-145 pusher prop engines. The skin was laminated wood around a tubular steel frame. It had an adjustable wingtip with a 15 & 30 degree vertical sweep. Its glide ratio was 15:1 and it proved tailless flight stability.

In 1941 the USAF was looking for a new bomber and authorized Northrop to develop the YB-35 flying wing bomber. As a first step Northrop developed the N-9M(1942-45) a one third scale flying wing with a wingspan of 60 feet and two 400 hp O-540 engines. The aircraft had automatic trim, split flaps & drag rudders which were an improvement over the N-1Ms manual controls. The first airframe crashed in 1943 killing the pilot, the reason being pitch control failure, which prompted redundancies to be built into later aircraft. The aircraft had a cruising speed of 320 km/h and a service ceiling of over 21,000 feet with a glide ratio of 18:1. The numbers validated full scale construction of the XB/YB-35.

The YB-35 Dimensions. Pic source : Wikipedia.

With a wingspan of 172 feet and four contra rotating pusher props the X/YB-35 was a majestic sight. The aircraft used four Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radial engines. The contra rotating gear boxes caused excessive vibrations leading to mechanical failure and stress. The engines & propellers were owned by AAF ( United States Army Air Force) . None in the supply chain had checked the engines for compatibility with the Hamilton Standard propellers, furthermore nobody took responsibility for the shortcomings either. The XB-35 flew a total of 27 flights between the two aircraft and only one flight was deemed satisfactory. Of the 14 YB-35s built only one was completed and that flew a total of seven flights for a total of less than ten hours. The YB-35 continued to be plagued by the same engine problems that plagued the XB-35. Reverting the engines to single propellers resulted in the aircraft being underpowered resulting in low speed handling issues. 

Jack Northrop grew frustrated with the engines and attempted corrections, however he had severe limitations as the engines and propellers were owned by the AAF. In the meantime the AAF had turned its attention to jets and ordered two of the YB-35s converted to the jet engined YB-49. By 1948 the troubled YB-35 was terminated, never reaching fruition for reasons beyond its control.

The YB-49 had eight Allison J-35-A-15 turbojet engines, each developing 4000 pounds of thrust.The aircraft immediately hit 40,000 feet and cruised at 587 km/h (wikipedia), however with eight engines instead of four the range effectively dropped to half the YB-35. While the specifications were the same, the YB-49 did have four small passive vertical fins on the wings to help with yaw control. The two wings completed approx 25 flights between them, however both crashed in 1948 & 1950 the first killing all its crew including Captain Glen Edwards after whom Edwards AFB is named. 

The YB-49/A . Pic source : Wikipedia

One more YB-35 was converted to a YB-49A reconnaissance aircraft (with podded engines) however this was never completed either.

Jack Northrop’s dream project was abruptly cancelled in 1950. Northrop himself was deeply anguished to see his dream cancelled and retired in 1952. In 1979 Northrop mentioned the Flying Wing contracts were cancelled because he refused to merge with Convair. Hindsight shows the flying wing program was way behind execution deadlines and over budget, hindsight also shows there was always a place for the flying wing. Alas that was not to be and all the wings were scrapped and none exist today.

The Story of WW2 Stealth Myth vs Reality

The Indiana Jones style discovery of the Ho-229 v3 deep in the German countryside inside a dark deserted hangar created the myth. The fact it looked like no other plane before and was referred to as the batwing only added to the myth, the jet engines solidified it.

The aerodynamic properties of flying wings naturally make them stealthy. The glide ratios of all the powered wings (including the YB-35 & 49) had ratios in the range of 20-28:1 . This compares favorably with the B-2 which has a similar ratio. Physics dictates that all flying wings will look similar and flying wings through the decades attest to this.

The wings were built for speed, their aerodynamics being the enabler. This meant the speed of the Ho-229 was over 75% faster than convention fighters of the time.

The controversial 2009 Nat Geo documentary with Northrop Grumman where a representative replica was made and subjected to RCS tests, showed a 20% decrease in the RCS (Radar Cross Section) properties over conventional aircraft of the time. This combined with the speed of the Ho-229 / H-IX v3 is what would have made the aircraft difficult to counter. Point to note in the documentary was the Northrop Grumman team had difficulty replicating the complex aerodynamic surfaces of the original wing.

A step back from the Horten story tells you this was incomplete. The incomplete H-VIII which was delivered to the Ministry of Aviation highlights the state Germany was in and the increased pace of aircraft iterations (1943-45) along with the H-XVIII Amerika Bomber being just plans on paper point to the incomplete story (much like Northrop’s).

Reimar Horten’s 1983 claim in the book ‘ Nurflugel” about planning for the v3’s successors to be stealthy by mixing carbon in the binding elements & painting the aircraft with graphite sounds opportunistic in view that no hard evidence or documentation was ever found. The Ho-229 did not exhibit any carbon in its adhesives conclusively. The timing of the claim ties in well with the announcement of the B-2 Stealth bomber, and Reimar who for all his achievements was fading into insignificance perhaps wanted to make the best of the reflected glory and renewed interest in the Ho-229. This is the reality.

History finds stories like the Ho-229 irresistible, and there lies the fable.

The B-2 Spirit

By the 1970s military designers were chasing the concept of Stealth. Low RCS is achieved by a cross section of materials, aerodynamic design, electronics & of course masking engine thermal signatures & sound.

By 1979 Northrop’s Tacit Blue program had already proved that stealth was possible and the technology was incorporated in the B-2.

During the 1981 presidential race Ronald Reagan repeatedly dug into Jimmy Carter and his cancellation of the B-1A bomber. In response to this Carter on August 22nd 1980 disclosed the Department of Defence was working on the B-2.

While the development was a black program, the B-2 was less closely guarded than the Lockheed F-117 stealth fighter. The unveiling of the B-2 in 1988 was highly restricted. At least two Northrop employees went to prison for espionage during and after its development.

The B-2 dimensions. Pic source : Wikipedia.

That the wingspan of the B-2 is 172 feet, the same as the YB-35/49 is perhaps a happy co-incidence, however its capabilities are entirely intentional. Its cruise speed is 1010 km/h, range is 11,000 km, and service ceiling of 50,000 feet the numbers are very similar to the Ho-229/YB-49 (except range).

The control issues all the flying wings faced dissipated as computers took over the pilot’s work load and made continuous split second corrections for stable flight.

A very old Jack Northrop was shown a model of the B-2 a few months before his passing in 1981 and he poignantly commented “ I now know why God kept me alive for the last 25 years”.

The B-21 Raider had its first flight in Nov ’23. While it is smaller than the B-2 , it remains just as exciting. 

Epilogue

In the centre of the Udvar- Hazy hall at Smithsonian sits the H-IX / Ho-229 v3. Everyday hundreds of spectators file past its still figure as if paying homage. The aircraft that launched a thousand dreams continues to do so.

The Ho-229. Pic source : Smithsonian. Pic 2 Reddit user

In the skies above it flies the B-2 Spirit protecting a grateful Nation. Thousands of people watch each spectacular fly past. 

Flying wings are pure magic.

Please be sure to read part 2 where the evolution of blended wing bodies is traced in detail. http://theaviationevangelist.com/2025/09/19/the-flying-wing-part-two-the-blended-wing-body/

To be continued….Part Two

For more deep dive easy to read articles please go to https://theaviationevangelist.com do keep scrolling down, and do share

Follow me:

LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-aviation-evangelist/

X : @ManiRayaprolu

Reddit : r/theaviationevangelist

Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61583497868441#

https://www.instagram.com/theaviationevangelist?igsh=ZjA5YXI3MWd3OGZs&utm_source=qr