Open up your mind and say, ahh...

Planes are standard in the aviation industry. It’s how you outfit these planes–from design to service–that makes a fleet an airline.

So in 2009, TAM Airlines approached design studio Priestmangoode with a particular challenge. The Brazilian airline wanted to establish itself as an international carrier every bit as prestigious as its competitors. The redesign included seats, galleys, cabin architecture, and even the UI of the video consoles. But in the realm of international travel, the first-class cabin is of paramount importance. It’s the ultimate litmus test of a carrier’s glitz (as well as a vital means to increase the margins of an otherwise uniform ticket).

The cabin’s theme was Home Away From Home. “The design moves away from hard finishes to create a softer, luxurious cabin more in keeping with high-end contemporary interior design,” Priestmangoode designer/director Luke Hawes tells us. Inspiration was struck in Brazil’s contemporary interiors, home trade shows, and the studio’s work in major international hotels like Marriott, IHG, and Accor. That’s probably not so surprising–my first reaction to the space was, this looks like a very nice hotel lobby. But while soft materials are a standard in homes and hotels alike, they’re of particular concern on an airplane.

“If the smallest button on a seat is broken, the aircraft can’t take off, which hugely inconveniences passengers, of course, but is a significant loss for the airline,” Hawes explains. “So striking the right balance between beautiful, soft materials, and ones that can withstand a bit of wear was important.”

If there’s one fairly ingenious use of all this plush material, it’s that the two central seats come with their own couch, allowing travel companions to sit face-to-face during meals as if sharing a table at a café. How could there possibly be room for this domestic extravagance? The couch takes the space normally dedicated to an ottoman, doing double duty for elevating one’s feet or creating a more social atmosphere.

Currently, TAM’s new first-class cabin is featured on flights between São Paulo and Europe. To experience the world’s first couch in the sky, it’ll cost you around $12,000–now how much did you pay for your couch again?

Virgin Galactic is already busily spearheading a whole new industry in space tourism with SpaceShipTwo. But today at the Farnborough airshow the British company revealed it’s also ready to disrupt a long-standing industry and take it in wholly new directions: It’s formally unveiled LauncherOne, a tiny cost-effective rocket system to put small satellites into low Earth orbit. It could change your life sooner than you think. Really.

LauncherOne leverages the expertise that Virgin Galactic has been building up with its space tourism business, and stands on the innovations made by Scaled Composites when it launched SpaceShipOne on its historic XPrize-winning flight. That’s because it uses exactly the same air-launched model for the rocket, with a carrier aircraft lifting the spacecraft high into the atmosphere before dropping it and letting its engines fire it into space. LauncherOne actually employs the same WhiteKnightTwo launch aircraft used for the space tourism flights–which is a proven, existing airframe that instantly reduces costs.

By flying like this, LauncherOne doesn’t need a big, expensive first stage rocket loaded with fuel to get it off the ground. Instead itr requires just two boost stages to take it from launch into space, and then into orbit. This simplifies the avionics and engineering needed to make the thing fly, lowering the cost and reducing the chances that things can go wrong. Ground-launched rockets have all sorts of complex range-safety matters to deal with, involving clearing airspace and, sometimes, the sea in the general launch trajectory because the rocket might fail during flight. Because LauncherOne is launched from an aircraft, it can avoid many of these logistical issues, and it also allows for payloads to be more easily put into unusual orbits–the aircraft simply has to point it in a different launch direction.

The upshot of all of this cost-saving is that according to Virgin, a LauncherOne vehicle can put 500 pounds of payload into orbit for “below $10 million.” That works out cheaper than its likely biggest competitor Orbital’s Pegasus XL–another air-launched vehicle–and Virgin intends it to be able to reach the “world’s lowest prices” for launches.

And that’s just for single-satellite launch scenarios. There’s no reason that LauncherOne couldn’t be configured to release a swarm of low Earth orbit microsatellites in a single launch, and this is one of the most promising areas of space science right now.

In fact when revealing the vehicle’s parameters, Virgin boss Richard Branson even remarked that with LauncherOne, “nations, states, cities and even universities and schools will be able to launch dedicated satellites that will answer their diverse needs.” Satellite launches have nearly always been massively expensive, risky and fall within the purview of government-backed operations, or via defense companies, and even recent commercial space systems have been very expensive–until Virgin’s effort.

Right there is the part where your life will be affected, although it’s difficult to predict how much things will change and how fast. But to see what this could mean, imagine if a news organization like CNN stumped up the millions necessary to fly its own small imaging satellite–or possibly even a small fleet of them. When a global disaster occurs, or a breaking news story hits, CNN may then be able to deliver live or near-time satellite imaging of the event. (And they may even get their facts right.) Because Virgin is a private entity, it’s even possible that other startups may leverage its potential to do their own climate change science, or space-based observations of almost everything on Earth from traffic congestion in cities to tracking ships, or selling very real-time imagery to companies like Apple or Google to drive the “satellite view” that we’re all getting used to using for navigating around with our smartphones.

And lest you think this is all just pop science mumbo-jumbo, VG has already signed up enough launch partners for “several dozen” launches and aims to be commercially operating by 2016.

Image: Virgin Galactic

The National Transportation Safety Board has provided an update of its investigation of the crash of a highly modified North American P-51 aircraft at last year’s National Championship Air Races in Reno. The crash was the worst accident in the history of the air races, killing 10 spectators and the pilot. The NTSB found several places to improve air race safety, including ideas to redesign the course to minimize the risk to spectators.

Many in the aviation and air racing community feared last September’s crash would mean an end to the premier event in air racing. But the NTSB recommendations are for ways to improve safety, rather than shutting down the event.

“We are not here to put a stop to air racing,” said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman in a statement. “We are here to make it safer.”

While air racing was a very popular spectator sport in the early days of aviation, peaking in the 1930s when hundreds of thousands of spectators attended races, interest in recent decades has been largely limited to aviation aficionados. The air races in Reno date back to 1964, and today stand as the only major race of the year.

The NTSB recommendations include course design, the affects of g-forces on pilots and the design and inspection of the highly modified airplanes that make up the bulk of the aircraft racing in Reno.

The Galloping Ghost, the P-51 that crashed last year, included substantial modifications including removing more than three feet from each wing and changes to the flight controls. The modifications resulted in the World War II era fighter aircraft achieving speeds well over 500 miles per hour.

A diagram shows the external changes made to the Galloping Ghost in a quest for speed. Both wingspan and tailspan were reduced.

One of the changes the NTSB would like to see is more flying time and/or testing time of the pilot and airplanes before race day.

“Our investigation revealed that this pilot, in this airplane, had never flown at this speed, on this course,” Chairman Hersman said.

This poses a big challenge for a sport where much of the work is done by teams of volunteers and crew in the weeks and months leading up to the races each September. Often teams are trying out final improvements as race week progresses, protecting the vintage V-12 Rolls Royce engines originally designed for around 1,500 horsepower, but now producing more than 3,500 horsepower. Steve Hinton Jr., the youngest ever winner in Reno told Wired in 2010 that maintenance on the old airplanes is “easily a few hundred hours per flight hour.”

The crash investigation is ongoing, but the NTSB said initial findings indicate the Galloping Ghost was flying at over 530 miles per hour when it experienced an “upset” that eventually led to it crashing into a spectator area. The upset and subsequent maneuvers exceeded the aircraft accelerometer’s 9-g limit.

The accelerometer data combined with photos suggest the pilot lost consciousness following the unanticipated high g maneuver. Seconds later, the trim tab located on the tail of the airplane broke away, aggravating an already out of control airplane.

Many of the modifications made to the vintage aircraft to prepare them for air racing include changes to the controls such as the elevator where the broken trim tab was located. The modifications and changes were noted in the Galloping Ghosts’ logbook, and the airplane was flown after the various changes in order to gain approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. But the NTSB notes it is unlikely that thorough flight testing at speeds experienced during the air races was performed. And the NTSB adds that there is little if any engineering evaluation done for the modifications.

The aircraft that compete at the air races in Reno are categorized as “experimental,” allowing pilots and crew to change them significantly from their original design. The same type of engineering isn’t required for an airplane company producing a new type of airplane. The NTSB said in its initial recommendations that aircraft participating in the National Champion Air Races should undergo more rigorous evaluations because of the proximity to spectators.

An outline of the roughly eight mile oval used by the unlimited class air racers at Reno. The accident began as the Galloping Ghost was banking around pylon 8.

Other recommendations included making changes to the large oval flown by the fastest aircraft such as the P-51s and other World War II fighters to minimize maneuvering close to spectators.

The organization also suggests g-tolerance training for air race pilots, something that is common for military pilots as well as many aerobatic pilots that perform in airshows. This type of training prepares pilots for high g-force maneuvers and teaches them how to handle such circumstances while minimizing the chance of losing consciousness. The NTSB also wants the air races to look into the feasibility of using “g-suits” such as those warn by modern fighter pilots. These suits squeeze the legs and torso during high-g maneuvers to maintain enough blood in the brain so the pilot does not pass out.

More details from the investigation can be found here.

 Images: NTSB

Photo: Terrafugia

There’s a flying car coming to the New York International Auto Show this week. The Terrafugia Transition is a two-seat airplane with foldable wings, four wheels and turn signals. Over the past few years the Massachusetts company has called its creation a “roadable aircraft” and lately, a “street legal airplane.” But ahead of the Transition’s first appearance at an auto show, it’s perhaps more appropriate to simply call it what it is: a flying car.

Terrafugia and its Transition have been around for several years, but until now the company has largely stuck to the aviation community. But Terrafugia co-founder and CEO Carl Dietrich says that looking at the people who have placed orders for the $279,000 vehicle, they thought it would be worth looking outside the aviation world.

“We’ve noticed in our order backlog there are actually a fair number of people who are not currently pilots who are putting deposits down to order a Transition.”

So the company is coming to New York to gauge interest in a flying car from the non-pilot sector of the public, hoping the attraction of a flying car can create a few pilots and most importantly, customers.

Development of the Transition is progressing and last month Terrafugia completed the first flight of the production prototype. Dietrich expects flight testing to continue through 2012 and deliveries to begin next year.

The dream of a flying car has been around for a long, long time. And in recent years we’ve seen a dune-buggy-turned-car that flies like a powered parachute aimed at accessing remote parts of the developing world, and even aerospace guru Burt Rutan explored the concept in his final days at Scaled Composites.

Just today a Dutch company announced the successful first flights of the PAL-V, a single-seat three-wheeler that’s also a gyrocopter. But as is the case with many inventions that try to combine two already matured products, one plus one does not usually equal two.

The PAL-V One from Holland. Photo: PAL-V

The math doesn’t quite work out on the Transition either, though it’s arguably the most serious attempt at producing anything close to a practical flying car. It’s a decent airplane and as a car it can get you from A to B. The biggest challenge is finding the niche that can be served by the Transition which is neither a great airplane nor a great car. Terrafugia’s Dietrich says that marketplace might be people who fall in between the long driving commute or short airplane flight.

“If you’re flying 1,000 nautical miles, you’re probably going to want a higher performance aircraft” he says. “But if you’re flying 100, 200 or 300 miles, this might be ideal.”

With a cruise speed of 105 miles per hour, the Transition is faster than a car, especially considering it can often travel in a straight lines rarely available on the road. But it’s slower than many other Light Sport Aircraft (LSA), many of which fly at speeds closer to 135 mph. And comparing it to other new LSAs, the Transition is at least $100,000 more than most models.

But what Terrafugia believes is the value in the Transition is the convenience of always having the option of driving if the weather or some other issue prevents a safe flight. It’s true that one of the biggest challenges general aviation pilots face is being grounded because of bad weather. Many small aircraft can fly in inclement weather, but it requires more training and often more equipment to do so safely. So Terrafugia is touting the fact that its relatively simple light sport aircraft won’t force you to wait, or have to rent a car, just to finish a trip. Just fold up the wings and continue your journey on the ground.

Of course then you’ll be driving a rather delicate $279,000 car down the road. Little has been said about the cost of somebody backing into your folded wing. Something as simple as a minor fender-bender may be a bit more expensive than simply replacing a bumper.

Terrafugia’s Transition in flight. Photo: Terrafugia

Despite any potential drawbacks, Terrafugia has found a customer base that believes the flying car makes sense. Dietrich says about two-thirds of their existing customers are looking at the Transition as a practical form of transportation to suit their specific needs. Examples include a surveyor who could travel quickly to jobs around the state and a real estate developer who likes the idea of being able to scout new sites from above and give aerial tours to customers. The other third simply see the Transition as a fun vehicle and like the idea of owning a flying car.

For the rest of the population there are plenty of ground-bound vehicles to look at this week in New York and lots of plenty of airplanes to see at shows like Airventure in Oshkosh. So the challenge will be to decide whether or not the $279,000 Transition is a better option than a $100,000 Porsche Carrera plus a $160,000 Flight Design CTLS (leaving some extra cash for those car rentals).