Date: 10 Jul 97 17:46:13 From: email@example.com References: 1 2 3 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
[Moderator's note: Poster's name withheld at the request of the poster.] Don Stokes <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >The wording of the patent was: > > "We claim: > The ornamental design for an airplane, as shown and described." > >The patent has drawings of the now-familiar shape, although with a much >smaller and hump with an obvious crease between the cockpit and the rest >of the fuselage, looking more of an afterthought than on the real thing. > >The date was 29 Oct 1968, valid for 14 years. Yes, it is an actual patent. It was patented partly because of the corporate annoyance at having to pay a license fee to some no-name French airplane company for every 727 built (no, it wasn't a lot of money, but that isn't the point is it?). So, now Boeing will patent just about everything relevant to a new airplane design. You just never know when it will come in handy... :-) >On the subject of patents, does anyone know why Boeing did not patent the >use of engine nacelles on pylons to get the engine airflow away from the >airflow over the wing? According to local legend, the podded engine concept (like the yaw damper) was explored and implemented on the B-47 first, and therefore ineligible for a civil patent. Too bad, can you imagine what a lovely patent the yaw damper would have made? Every jet transport has one! The capitalist in me just drools.