Re: Food for Thought

Date:         10 Jul 97 17:46:13 
References:   1 2 3
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

[Moderator's note: Poster's name withheld at the request of the poster.]

Don Stokes <> 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.