I'd break this down:

- Long frame. Good idea, most touring bikes should be like this, even the light ones. Added weight is pretty trivial, rear end could be bolt on carbon, if the idea ever got legs.

- 90-120 pounds. Totally crazy, unless you have a reason. Like the guy who climbed Mount Everest after riding there on a bike:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9x1Jkl_680

But just to have the gear, newbie/crazy. I met a guy who had a regular MTB and was cycling across Canada carrying about 150 pounds. The guy was seemingly happy with his choice, but it was painful to watch. Just finished reading a trip journal by a guy who soloed El Cap. He needed/wanted to be up there for 2 weeks (he has also done the nose in a day) so he had to haul up the cliff 150 + pounds of gear, and carry it down in four stages. You need to carry all your water, all your waste, and a ton of gear for the aid climbing, a portaledge, I think he had a least a 24 of beer etc... He said at the end he didn't want to do it again... So what is the reason for your wanting to carry so much? Otherwise the whole thing sounds a little nutty.

Also, claims the wheels aren't strong enough, and need to be tandem weight (good enough idea), seem like self fulfilling prophesies. "I needed a strong bike, because I was carrying a lot of gear, because I was moving so slow..." One can pull 120 pounds, anyone with two kids at max in a bike trailer knows it can be done... My wife did it all the time and she weighs 95 pounds.

- Makes no sense to me to make the bike you are contemplating for air travel. That is where i would start to think in terms of a Bike Friday. Probably would stay full size, but would not ever consider a gonzo bike unless it just had to be.