Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Now Concord Will Pass What Will B Next?  
User currently offlinePilot kaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1918 times:

hay
its so sad that concord will soon b grounded 4 good and yet what will b next for supersonic traveling??
the boeing sonic cruiser has been shelved and there has been no plans for another bird.
so is this the end?
or will our technology go even further?
what do u think?
p.kaz

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePlanespotterx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1893 times:

the planes taking over the next 20 years will be A340-600's A380's B747XX, and B777-300'S, SST aircraft wont be around until a suitable economic climate is around, which wont be for a while im sorry to say, or unless a cheaper way of flying supersonic is invented, which is economic for the airlines, the environment, and the traveller (perhaps hydrogen powered aircraft will be around soon, who knows)
Meanwhile Concorde will probobally be used as museum pieces, with the possibility that Aerospace companies may borrow the plane for flight testbeds into supersonic development.. NASA did it with the TU-144


User currently offlineLeezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1793 times:

What will be next ???

Jack shit if you ask me. No manufacturer has the balls these days to go all out and build something totally revolutionary like BAC/Sud Aviation did with the Concorde and Boeing did with the 747. We just took the first technological step backwards !!.

But I guess they do more research now than they did back in the 50's/60's/70's into whether an airliner will sell or not and also most manufacturers are now privately owned whereas they used to be state owned back in the 60's so had an almost endless cash supply which kind of changes their way of thinking.

 Smile



"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1756 times:

No manufacturer has the balls these days to go all out and build something totally revolutionary like BAC/Sud Aviation did with the Concorde

Revolutionary? Must have been the shortest-lived damp-squib revolution in aviation history.

You can justify something as revolutionary when it sweeps away the current way of doing business and replaces it wholesale with something new and enduring.

If Concorde had been 'revolutionary' then every airline would have one today.

It travelled fast, that's all. And it achieved this by being noisy, expensive and drinking fuel like it was water. In other words, all 'old guard' stuff that was itself being relegated to history as Concorde entered service.

Boeing 747 - now that was revolutionary.

It's precisely because of commercial failures such as Concorde that we don't take more risks within the industry. This country has a habit of grounding potentially successful programmes and pushing ahead with white elephants.


User currently offlineSerge From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1989 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

Damn.. I wish I had $2999 to blow on the "one way Concorde, one way economy" special that is now going on...  Sad

Hopefully I can see her takeoff/land before they're gone. I've only seen it on the ramp at JFK.


User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2471 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1699 times:

I'd hold out a slight hope that within the next 15-20 years Boeing might decide to resurrect its' Sonic Cruiser variant capable of going modesty supersonic, up to Mach 1.4, according to articles I read. While certainly not in Concorde's league, speedwise, it would be a much more economical aircraft. Even so, the air travel picture would have to improve enormously for even such a modest SST as this, a "poor-man's Concorde", to have any chance for success. So the chances for any kind of SST anytime in the nest 25 years are probably quite poor. Get used to being relegated to plodding, subsonic beasts of burden for a long time to come.

User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

Don't forget that a senior Boeing chap received a sharp slap on the wrist from the EU for claiming that there was plenty of fossil fuel left to meet the Sonic Cruiser's thirsty needs.

It's that kind of thinking that shafted Concorde. We'll only see super-fast if we can simultaneously have super-efficient.

Super-efficient...hmm...now where have I heard that...?


User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2471 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1619 times:

Backfire, don't forget that the SUBSONIC version of Boeing's Sonic Cruiser was supposed to be as economical as a 767. I'd imagine the supersonic version would burn more fuel but there are many who say it would actually be more efficient than the .98 mach version, being out of the transonic buffer zone. Airbus believes that, though they haven't as yet done serious R&D on it. With the right configuration and engines, speed AND relative fuel efficiency may not be mutually exclusive concepts. Boeing's SC based SST concept would be a twin and would get to its' top speed, say Mach 1.2-1.4 WITHOUT afterburners, perhaps Concorde's main liability, since it was relatively efficient in cruise at Mach 2 with the burners off. Much work would need to be done but there's the promise here of a relatively efficient and environmentally friendly SST that might be pursued if the air travel market recovered sufficiently to demand it. Despite the obstacles, speed remains an enticing goal.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Now There's A380, What's Next? posted Thu Dec 21 2000 01:30:51 by Jiml1126
Where Will Easyjets Next Base Be posted Thu Apr 19 2007 12:52:57 by F4f3a
FedEx Cancels 380F, Who Will Be Next? posted Tue Nov 7 2006 22:36:20 by DeltaDAWG
What Will Come Next For Airbus? posted Sun Sep 24 2006 20:07:28 by JamesJimlb
What Will Be Next? posted Sun Sep 24 2006 05:40:26 by Jamesjimlb
A Little Early - But What Will SK's Next Widebody? posted Fri Dec 16 2005 05:46:43 by Flybynight
Who Will Be Next To Join Star? posted Wed Nov 23 2005 02:43:01 by VonRichtofen
What Will The Next Gen Turboprop Be Like? posted Tue Sep 27 2005 23:40:15 by 8B775ZQ
Continental/Alaska Will Be Next posted Sat May 21 2005 10:46:18 by Co757
HP/US To Wed! Who Will Will Be Next? posted Fri May 20 2005 03:26:07 by Co757