NASA reveals what the final X-57 all-electric X-plane will look like
The X-plane program does fundamental research. All military and commercial aircraft have benefited from that research, in the same way WW2 German designs also influenced the world.<p>X-57 is fundamental research, not an effort to create a final product. The closest program similar to it is the X-29, which investigated forward-swept wings, canards and augmented computer systems to control them. (Nobody wants forward-swept wings because a failure in wingtip rigidity or the computer software destroys the structure.)<p>As a commercially-rated airplane pilot and informal aerodynamics student, I think the wingtip propellers are questionable, and the retractable inboard propellers sound like a maintenance and operations nightmare.<p>What&#x27;s weird about mounting propellers at the end of the wing is that you lose half the lift of the propeller wash over the wing, over a normal placement.<p>What&#x27;s misunderstood about wing tip vortices is that regardless of what the loss is, that flow comes from the entire wing producing lift, so is unavoidable. There are already passive techniques like winglets and fences to direct vortices that don&#x27;t require daily maintenance.<p>And we know from the Osprey that complex propeller systems fail too often. A dozen propellers means an order of magnitude more inspections, replacements, ground time (AOG), etc.<p>At $83,000&#x2F;hour to operate, a V22 Osprey is more expensive than an A380. Also, read the section on &quot;Design Challenges&quot;:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey</a><p>Additionally, there is no &quot;urban air mobility market&quot; in the USA, and never will be, due to regulation and insurance requirements. In a showdown between the FAA and Uber, the FAA will always win, and the FAA reserves the perogative to change its mind later, as in drone regulation.<p>To give you an idea, it was easier to start SpaceX than it would be to get the FAA to allow &quot;urban air mobility.&quot; So regulation is the real challenge, not technology.