Supersonic Passenger Jet

NJA_Capt said:
That's what they thought about the Concorde. It never caught on. There are several gigantic factors in the US that will preclude its' viability.

Speed costs money. (Airline) Passengers aren't willing to pay way it will cost to operate supersonic airliners. All the walmart society wants is a free ride.

Airlines are in a cost savings mode. They are currently operating a pathetically slow speeds (M 0.74-0.77). It is counterproductive to have a supersonic plane and fly it slowly.

The US ATC system is completely outdated in its aircraft handling procedures. I don't mean modernization....that is just lipstick on a pig. They are designed around older, less performing aircraft and are severely wasteful to modern aircraft. The procedures are designed to make the controller's job easier when they should be designed to make air travel itself efficient. Millions of gallons/year are wasted from early descents and delayed climbs. There also needs to be a protocol for fast vs slow planes. All planes should not be forced to fly the speed of the slowest in line. The prime example is the Citation X when compared to the Concorde. There were only approx 12 Concordes which operated with specific ATC handling procedures. There are over 300 Citation Xs and the fleet has been flying for 15 years. Even with such vast fleet numbers, ATC hasn't fully grasped the speed differential between M.90+ and M.77. One controller slowed us down and even told us..."think about all the gas you are saving." We were quick to point out his misconception.

So. In a nutshell:
The airlines can't afford to buy them.
Passengers aren't willing to pay what the service is worth.
ATC can't efficiently sequence them. (which would make the cost rise, then the ticket prices rise, then the fleet numbers reduce.....sounds just like the Concorde)

What is truely sad is that airliners today are operating no faster and no higher than they were 50 years ago. Advances in the first 50 years of aviation were stagering.....the Wright flyer to the 707. The last 50 have been spent making the panel look pretty and getting more thrust with less fuel. Which really is moot when ATC makes you fly the last 300 miles at FL230 instead if FL410+.
Click to expand...

You're not going to see these things used for domestic speed runs, at least in my vision of the future, you're going to see them moving time critical freight (a la fedex) across oceans, or VIPs from new york to shanghai at break neck speeds. Coach passengers aren't willing to pay for it. People whose time is worth way more than joe sixpack are going to pay for the speed.
 
NJA_Capt said:
...

ROFL...You mean like the Space Shuttle? What a waste of assets. Never met its design goals or laugh goals. It cost a lot of money and now we are back to Rockets. They have been talking about the National Aerospace Plane since the '80s.
Click to expand...

Eventually, the world has to get a lot smaller first
 
How can people say never? So we have hit are cap folks, that is it. They will get bigger and more fuel efficient, but we have hit the speed limit until the end of time. Common, how much sense does that make?

IMO someday we will have vertical takeoff hypersonic passenger aircraft. Technology is going to continue to improve. With those improvements will be improved transportation. Heck, I remember seeing a show years ago on the discovery channel or something like that, on breaking down solid objects to send through fiberoptic wires and rebuild. (teleporting technology) They couldn't and cannot do it, but someday?

Point is, if you can dream it, chances are someday technology will make it possible.
 
Supersonic flight technology will improve to a point where it would be economical. It has been improving a ton in the military world (F-22). It is a good ways from a civilian application, but to say it wont happen in the airlines would be far from correct. Never know what type of engine technology there might be in the future.
 
shdw said:
How can people say never? So we have hit are cap folks, that is it. They will get bigger and more fuel efficient, but we have hit the speed limit until the end of time. Common, how much sense does that make?
Click to expand...
How much sense does it make that modern airliners are slower (certified) than the ones built 40-50 years ago. They also are not certified to fly any higher than those 40-50 years ago. Only 1 large airplane (A380) has been certified since the 1970s, and it remains to be seen if it will be a success.
The limiting factor now is runway/taxiway widths. You cannot operate A380s or flying wing type airliners on a wide scale unless you rebuild every commercial airport in the World. Pretty safe to say that won't happen. As fare as VTOL/SST aircraft. If the L-o-n-g developmental cycle of the V22 is any indication, your great grandkids will still be dreaming about a VTOL/SST in 200 years.
 
shdw said:
IMO someday we will have vertical takeoff hypersonic passenger aircraft. Technology is going to continue to improve. With those improvements will be improved transportation.
Click to expand...
Supersonic technology is a mature science that has been around for 60 years. Hypersonic technology has been around over 50. How much time do you think they need? Most fighter technology for the last 20 years has been on stealth and maneuverability. Outside of the F22, most US fighters are slower than the ones they replaced. And if the development of the subsonic V22 is any indication, your great-grandkids will be dreaming about a VTOL/SST in 200 years.

It is absolutely embarrassing that aircraft like the SR71 and Concorde have been built, flown and retired and there is nothing even on the drawing board for a commercial replacement. The biggest single barrier is the US domestic ban on civilian supersonic flight.
 
NJA_Capt said:
It is absolutely embarrassing that aircraft like the SR71 and Concorde have been built, flown and retired and there is nothing even on the drawing board for a commercial replacement. The biggest single barrier is the US domestic ban on civilian supersonic flight.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is pretty upsetting but hopefully research into the so-called "silent boom" can progress and help resolve part of this issue.
 
How high do you have to fly before the boom is no longer an issue? I mean, if you fly at 70,000' is the sonic boom going to be a problem?
 
norm-45d5f59c16c74-Back+To+The+Future+(1985).jpeg


This, plus 1.21 gigawatts, and you have yourself a new type of SST!
 
NJA_Capt said:
What is truely sad is that airliners today are operating no faster and no higher than they were 50 years ago. Advances in the first 50 years of aviation were stagering.....the Wright flyer to the 707. The last 50 have been spent making the panel look pretty and getting more thrust with less fuel. Which really is moot when ATC makes you fly the last 300 miles at FL230 instead if FL410+.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:That's what I've always thought.
 
ppragman said:
How high do you have to fly before the boom is no longer an issue? I mean, if you fly at 70,000' is the sonic boom going to be a problem?
Click to expand...
I may be mistaken, but doesn't controlled airspace end at 65,000 feet or something like that? It seems like if you designed the right type of technology, you could just fly supersonic at those altitudes. Granted that wouldn't be very practical for short haul.
 
scramjet said:
I may be mistaken, but doesn't controlled airspace end at 65,000 feet or something like that? It seems like if you designed the right type of technology, you could just fly supersonic at those altitudes. Granted that wouldn't be very practical for short haul.
Click to expand...

FL600 is the top of class a but I believe supersonic flight was banned over land in the USA.
 
This thread got my interest peaked (one of my lifelong goals is to break the sound barrier)

I found something that I hadn't heard of before:

"Designed to cruise at an altitude of 60,000 feet at speeds of Mach 1.6 to 1.8 (approximately 1,218 to 1,370 statute miles per hour) with a range of 4,600 statute miles, the two-engine gull-wing aircraft is designed to create a sonic boom only 1% as strong as that generated by the Concorde."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Supersonic_Transport
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top