How to make a supersonic transport viable
Poll: How to make a supersonic transport viable
Total Members Polled: 65
Discussion
nikaiyo2 said:
annodomini2 said:
If you believe a lot of the conspiracy crap, the F22 won because it is the prettier of the 2 designs and that the YF23 was more advanced.
According to this they were both supercruise:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercruise
I thought the F22 was the more developed design and basically supercruised (and did all its other stuff) right out the box where as the F23 was kind of maybe designed to be possibly be able to supercruise after 20 years of F35 style development.According to this they were both supercruise:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercruise
Eric Mc said:
Experience counts massively in aircraft and aero-engine design. If you are going to breeze onto the scene as a brand new start up making all sorts of grandiose claims, you'd better have poached the best people you can get from the other manufacturers.
Seems like that's what Boom have been doing.You can read about some of their people on their website, and it's quite an experienced team.
Maximus_Meridius101 said:
I suppose there could be a market for a smaller, low capacity SS aircraft. Kind of like a supersonic G6 ( Gulfstream G650 ) but I doubt we’ll ever see another supersonic commercial airliner again.
If Musk get's his way, suborbital hops would make supersonic aircraft look like a snailMaximus_Meridius101 said:
I suppose there could be a market for a smaller, low capacity SS aircraft. Kind of like a supersonic G6 ( Gulfstream G650 ) but I doubt we’ll ever see another supersonic commercial airliner again.
I wonder if they could go too small though. BBJ and ACJ have a fair trade in widebody jets for the corporate/private market so there's some big $ out there for the taking. assuming you sort the noise issue, Probably comes down to operating costs not being completely absurd and range - range seems paramount in big money private jets and going supersonic compromises you even more. If you built the jet of a size say that would seat 50 in commercial application you could serve both markets, possibly trading space for fuel and range in some versions?
t ton of money behind them. They are also making plenty of benefit from the QSP programme. I don't think anyone's wishing them anything other than the best of luck. But it all just seems to be a bit unlikely at the moment.
Bit like the classic yacht restoration lot. You really want them to succeed, but it just all just looks a bit unlikely.
If Boom have properly deep pockets though, it's absolutely possible. I wouldn't have expected Space-X to be as successful as they are - but Eric succinctly described the recipe for their success a few posts above.
Bit like the classic yacht restoration lot. You really want them to succeed, but it just all just looks a bit unlikely.
If Boom have properly deep pockets though, it's absolutely possible. I wouldn't have expected Space-X to be as successful as they are - but Eric succinctly described the recipe for their success a few posts above.
Edited by Arnie Cunningham on Thursday 17th June 14:10
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but knowing Eric to be something of a space exploration fanatic, I'm surprised that he's quite as negative as he is about a 'startup' manufacturer's capability to deliver an SST in this world of SpaceX, Tesla, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, et al.
The World changes, and there is plenty of evidence that such high-tech 'disruptors', with sufficient financial backing, can be successful in the face of the established multinationals and Government organisations that we're used to, in these sectors.
The World changes, and there is plenty of evidence that such high-tech 'disruptors', with sufficient financial backing, can be successful in the face of the established multinationals and Government organisations that we're used to, in these sectors.
Equus said:
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but knowing Eric to be something of a space exploration fanatic, I'm surprised that he's quite as negative as he is about a 'startup' manufacturer's capability to deliver an SST in this world of SpaceX, Tesla, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, et al.
The World changes, and there is plenty of evidence that such high-tech 'disruptors', with sufficient financial backing, can be successful in the face of the established multinationals and Government organisations that we're used to, in these sectors.
I think the difference is that the successful startups have come up with new technology.The World changes, and there is plenty of evidence that such high-tech 'disruptors', with sufficient financial backing, can be successful in the face of the established multinationals and Government organisations that we're used to, in these sectors.
Boom just seem to be saying 'let's build Concorde again but a bit smaller, with modern materials and bigger windows'. Not really a disruption.
Dr Jekyll said:
I think the difference is that the successful startups have come up with new technology.
Boom just seem to be saying 'let's build Concorde again but a bit smaller, with modern materials and bigger windows'. Not really a disruption.
The very fact that they have modern materials, technologies and design analysis tools puts them a VERY long way ahead of Concorde, and I think you're underestimating the advances in aerospace technology since the 1960's, if you think otherwise.Boom just seem to be saying 'let's build Concorde again but a bit smaller, with modern materials and bigger windows'. Not really a disruption.
Sure, the other big players also have access to those technologies. What they lack is the commercial will - and perhaps simply the balls.
Equus said:
The very fact that they have modern materials, technologies and design analysis tools puts them a VERY long way ahead of Concorde, and I think you're underestimating the advances in aerospace technology since the 1960's, if you think otherwise.
Sure, the other big players also have access to those technologies. What they lack is the commercial will - and perhaps simply the balls.
The environmentalists, and bad P.R. / upsetting the woke generation are a big concern now. “Ohhh my god, oh my god did you hear that bang, How much Carbon Dioxide does that thing emit, won’t somebody pleeeeaaaase think of the children”. The market is too niche ( although could be profitable with the right strategy / marketing) and there are too many wet wipes in the world now. Sure, the other big players also have access to those technologies. What they lack is the commercial will - and perhaps simply the balls.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff