Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 7764
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:12 pm

If you were near, it was more likely afterburner lights, as fighters don’t go supersonic near the airfield.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26279
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:17 pm

GDB wrote:
But in later years it has become clear that I was missing the point, it's a simple one, the gains in lower emissions has been more than negated by the growth of the industry.
I put this down to my own experience and not seeing directly all those LCC's, though they of course were not the only ones growing, I guess I was stuck in the mindset of the airline industry when I entered it in the 1980s.

I'm OK with the industry dedicating itself to more people getting more enjoyment out of life via affordable air travel.

I'm a tad skeptical about the eco projections and in particular about aviation taking what I think seems to be an unfair burden to try to address climate change.

GDB wrote:
I note the glib statement by Boom about it's environmental impact, rather typical in it's lack of detail.
There were many environmental objects to Concorde, some genuine, others fanciful, some just political. One real concern was the threat to the upper atmosphere and Ozone Layer if 100's of Concordes were in operation.
As it turned out there were so few it made no difference, however Boom is slated to fly at these altitudes too.
They won't get backing for a Concorde sized customer base/production run.
So what is their answer? Bio fuels? Even then there will be requirements for extensive studies on this.

It's another huge doubt against this project.

As pointed out by ScottB above, their biggest logical conundrum is that you can put that same biofuel into a 787 or A350 and fly many times more people around for the same ecological cost. It's a very inconvenient truth that Boom has no answer for, because none exists and none ever will, because physics.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Prost
Posts: 2644
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:29 pm

If this were to come to fruition I think a new United livery for the Boomerang would be in order.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2637
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:34 pm

SRQLOT wrote:
I’m not the most learned at supersonic flights. Have there been studies made at what altitude would the sonic boom be weaker on the ground? Do you actually have to get into space for it not to affect the ground or if you could fly up to 100,000 feet there would be a big change in the boom?

Fundamentally, the boom does get fainter as you go higher but not as quickly as one might hope. While much faster than any proposed SST, the Space Shuttle boom could be heard from altitudes as high as 250,000 ft. The problem is that any air-breathing jet engines struggle at altitudes beyond 80,000 ft.

It is possible to achieve completely boom-free flight in the stratosphere at transsonic speeds up to M1.15 - M1.3, depending on atmospheric conditions. This is because the change in temperature with a change altitude bends/reflects sound to a certain degree. The effect is strong enough to keep the boom at low speeds (and any other aircraft noise) away from the ground. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/201 ... 007349.pdf
 
JibberJim
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:33 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:23 pm

YQBexYHZBGM wrote:
Concorde did occasionally generate a perceptible sonic boom over the rural area west of Halifax, Nova Scotia where I lived in the late 1990s. There was no FlightAware or FlightRadar24 at the time, so I'm not certain if any attempt was made to keep the flight path offshore to avoid Halifax or other populated areas. It was not a frequent occurrence, but when it did happen, it usually sounded like a heavy door closing accompanied by a vibration that lightly rattled glassware in my kitchen.


That's interesting, in South West England we could hear it almost every flight, and it was never loud or coming with vibration like a military jet interception that you occasionally get. I guess it was the direction, if they were late dropping to subsonic then you'd get it, but otherwise have nothing?
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22204
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:44 pm

One thing I always like to consider is the actual tangible impact of an SST.

OK, I want to go from my home in SFO to visit my friends in SYD (or go to a meeting). On a 777 or 787, that's about a 14 hour flight. Boom quotes 8:30 for LAX-SYD, which is still quite a long flight. Also, most US-AU flights leave late at night and arrive early in the morning. How will an SST arrange this so that the schedule isn't utterly horrible?

But let's talk about cost. I can pay 3-4x the Y fare and get a very comfortable lie-flat J-class seat for that flight, get a good night's rest, and arrive in SYD ready to go. Or I can pay what I assume is 3-4x the Y fare, take the SST in what will almost certainly *not* be a lie-flat J seat, and get there in just over half the time. On balance, I think I'm going to prefer the subsonic option.

Where I think this gets into more value is in the East Coast-Europe and West Coast-Northeast Asia services in which there are multiple frequencies per day and the time differential now drops down from 7-8 hours to 3-4 hours. I can sit in a non-J seat (especially with what I assume will be delightful meal service similar to what was done on Concorde) for 3-4 hours and pay J-level prices. But if you're going to jack the prices up even higher to 5-6 times the subsonic Y fare, then my interest rapidly wanes and I'd rather just fly in J on a subsonic flight.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2637
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:48 pm

Revelation wrote:
I'm a tad skeptical about the eco projections and in particular about aviation taking what I think seems to be an unfair burden to try to address climate change.

Much of that is due to a very small number of people (less than 1% of the world's population) who contribute half of aviation's emissions. Only 4% travel internationally in any given year, and only 11% of the world board a plane at all. So aviation is, to an extent, a luxury compared to other CO2 sources like heating or farming.

Supersonic travel does nothing to address that.
 
vfw614
Posts: 4008
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:50 pm

cpd wrote:
Image

That's who had options on Concorde. Feel free to disagree with it, that's from the manufacturer itself. I don't know exactly when that brochure was printed (and there are other pages of it) but it's very, very old.


That brochure is from late 1971/early 1972 as it mentions the South America tour of the prototype that took place in September 1971.

In 1972, two more airlines ordered the aircraft, CAAC amd Iran Air. So in total options/orders from 18 airlines for a total of 84 or so aircraft.

What I found interesting is that airlines apparently had to deal with BAC or Aérospatiale - did the manufacturers compete for Concorde orders? (only Pan Am and CAAC "ordered" from both)
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2637
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:52 pm

DocLightning wrote:
Where I think this gets into more value is in the East Coast-Europe and West Coast-Northeast Asia services in which there are multiple frequencies per day and the time differential now drops down from 7-8 hours to 3-4 hours.

A benefit on east-west routings it that you can depart and arrive at approximately the same local time. So you could depart at a comfortable time in the morning, say 07:00 in London, and arrive at 07:00 in New York for a full day of work. Or you could depart at 19:00, after a long workday, and be home in time for dinner. Of course it only works in one direction.
 
FCOTSTW
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:59 pm

Here you go... for all those of you wishing to get to London in three hours.

https://hub.united.com/2021-06-03-unite ... 16403.html
 
eurotrader85
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 8:40 pm

DocLightning wrote:
One thing I always like to consider is the actual tangible impact of an SST.

OK, I want to go from my home in SFO to visit my friends in SYD (or go to a meeting). On a 777 or 787, that's about a 14 hour flight. Boom quotes 8:30 for LAX-SYD, which is still quite a long flight. Also, most US-AU flights leave late at night and arrive early in the morning. How will an SST arrange this so that the schedule isn't utterly horrible?

But let's talk about cost. I can pay 3-4x the Y fare and get a very comfortable lie-flat J-class seat for that flight, get a good night's rest, and arrive in SYD ready to go. Or I can pay what I assume is 3-4x the Y fare, take the SST in what will almost certainly *not* be a lie-flat J seat, and get there in just over half the time. On balance, I think I'm going to prefer the subsonic option.

Where I think this gets into more value is in the East Coast-Europe and West Coast-Northeast Asia services in which there are multiple frequencies per day and the time differential now drops down from 7-8 hours to 3-4 hours. I can sit in a non-J seat (especially with what I assume will be delightful meal service similar to what was done on Concorde) for 3-4 hours and pay J-level prices. But if you're going to jack the prices up even higher to 5-6 times the subsonic Y fare, then my interest rapidly wanes and I'd rather just fly in J on a subsonic flight.


IMO this is where people are missing the point when they say about the time they land etc. Faster is better. If you could teleport yourself in 1 second to anywhere on the planet, that's not bad, it is good. You of course pick a good time to do it, but you don't waste unnecessary time mooching about on a plane getting there, you spend more time doing what you want with the extra time you have. Take a QF flight from LAX to SYD. Takes say 15hrs. You depart Saturday evening, say 22:00 LAX time, land 08:00 SYD on Monday losing the day going through the dateline. Then compare to Boom, it takes just 8.5hrs flight. Now of course landing at 02:00ish on Monday morning in SYD is pointless, but the point is the bank schedules as we know them across the globe will change. Instead of departing at 22:00, maybe you leave LAX at 18:00 on Saturday, land Sunday evening just after 21:00 and maybe have a beer with family or friends before tucking yourself up in a real bed for the night. But this also opens up new possibilities. Doing a day flight LAX-SYD is currently pointless. Depart say 09:00 from LAX on Monday, and you won't get there until 19:00 on Tuesday. Well with Boom you can depart LAX say 07:00 on Monday, and get to SYD for 10:30 on Tuesday, giving you a decent chunk of the day to do work.

I believe BOOM said the aircraft could accommodate 88 lie-flat beds in an all-business class configuration, so let's assume UA Polaris equivalent for this unlikely project anyway. So the seat won't be bad, you get 8hrs of sleep or movies or whatnot, and then you've got 6.5hrs to do what you want with your life, rather than mooching around for a whopping 15hrs of your life trying to have the longest sleep possible or getting fat eating ice cream after your fourth movie.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 14947
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 9:24 pm

eurotrader85 wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
One thing I always like to consider is the actual tangible impact of an SST.

OK, I want to go from my home in SFO to visit my friends in SYD (or go to a meeting). On a 777 or 787, that's about a 14 hour flight. Boom quotes 8:30 for LAX-SYD, which is still quite a long flight. Also, most US-AU flights leave late at night and arrive early in the morning. How will an SST arrange this so that the schedule isn't utterly horrible?

But let's talk about cost. I can pay 3-4x the Y fare and get a very comfortable lie-flat J-class seat for that flight, get a good night's rest, and arrive in SYD ready to go. Or I can pay what I assume is 3-4x the Y fare, take the SST in what will almost certainly *not* be a lie-flat J seat, and get there in just over half the time. On balance, I think I'm going to prefer the subsonic option.

Where I think this gets into more value is in the East Coast-Europe and West Coast-Northeast Asia services in which there are multiple frequencies per day and the time differential now drops down from 7-8 hours to 3-4 hours. I can sit in a non-J seat (especially with what I assume will be delightful meal service similar to what was done on Concorde) for 3-4 hours and pay J-level prices. But if you're going to jack the prices up even higher to 5-6 times the subsonic Y fare, then my interest rapidly wanes and I'd rather just fly in J on a subsonic flight.


IMO this is where people are missing the point when they say about the time they land etc. Faster is better. If you could teleport yourself in 1 second to anywhere on the planet, that's not bad, it is good. You of course pick a good time to do it, but you don't waste unnecessary time mooching about on a plane getting there, you spend more time doing what you want with the extra time you have. Take a QF flight from LAX to SYD. Takes say 15hrs. You depart Saturday evening, say 22:00 LAX time, land 08:00 SYD on Monday losing the day going through the dateline. Then compare to Boom, it takes just 8.5hrs flight. Now of course landing at 02:00ish on Monday morning in SYD is pointless, but the point is the bank schedules as we know them across the globe will change. Instead of departing at 22:00, maybe you leave LAX at 18:00 on Saturday, land Sunday evening just after 21:00 and maybe have a beer with family or friends before tucking yourself up in a real bed for the night. But this also opens up new possibilities. Doing a day flight LAX-SYD is currently pointless. Depart say 09:00 from LAX on Monday, and you won't get there until 19:00 on Tuesday. Well with Boom you can depart LAX say 07:00 on Monday, and get to SYD for 10:30 on Tuesday, giving you a decent chunk of the day to do work.

I believe BOOM said the aircraft could accommodate 88 lie-flat beds in an all-business class configuration, so let's assume UA Polaris equivalent for this unlikely project anyway. So the seat won't be bad, you get 8hrs of sleep or movies or whatnot, and then you've got 6.5hrs to do what you want with your life, rather than mooching around for a whopping 15hrs of your life trying to have the longest sleep possible or getting fat eating ice cream after your fourth movie.


Sorry I agree with Doc, for the price, those extra 6.5 hours aren’t worth it, especially with the tech stop. Flying longhaul makes one fat anyway, that’s for sure :lol:
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1425
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 9:42 pm

Long live trimotors!

Building an interested customer base will be a key part of securing all of the funding they need to keep this project moving forward.

I still would not bet my money on their success, but this is a move in the right direction, and I'm excited by the news.

FGITD wrote:
It's also a single seat technology demonstrator.

Not bad, but it's a bit like showing off a motorcycle as proof that you can build a bus.


I would say a motorcycle is to a bus what a turboprop is to a supersonic transport. They both drive on wheels in the one case and fly on fixed wings in the other, but there are fairly fundamental differences in their designs.

A more appropriate comparison to make to a bus would be a bare-bones, shortened chassis you might build to verify that key systems like the suspension and transmission perform as expected before you design the final chassis around them. You can't test a bus suspension on a motorcycle. At one point, Tesla Motors was doing this type of tech demonstrator work using the Lotus Elise as a mule platform.

Likewise, you can't validate supersonic drag predictions, inlet shock stability, and nozzle geometry on a subsonic turboprop. I assume a big part of the reason Boom is building the XB-1 is to validate their computational fluid dynamics models are able to accurately predict factors like these, or tweak those models to be more accurate before finalizing the Overture design.

I know if I were an investor, I would want to see empirical data backing up Boom's claims before putting a significant amount of money into the company. If I were an airline, I would want to see it before placing a firm order.

MDC862 wrote:
Yes, but will any of this group be able to spend $15-20,000 per ticket one-way on a consistent basis?


Boom has not been talking about $15,000+ one-way tickets. Even Concorde was closer to that as a round-trip price. They have been talking about business class level prices, which would be more like $5,000 round trip US to Europe.

Please note that although there is a big efficiency penalty for supersonic flight, this isn't what drove the bulk of Concorde's operating cost. Concorde had a similar range as what Boom is targeting, and had a maximum fuel capacity of roughly 325 gallons per passenger. Jet fuel currently costs around $2/gallon.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
I don't think the people shelling out $15K to fly these hypothetical route are the types that are willing to deal with even Clear/TSA-Pre Check, or a baggage claim.


Not $15,000, and the people shelling that out for business or first class already do deal with airports.

eurotrader85 wrote:
They are talking about 100% carbon neutral plane with 100% sustainable fuel. What is meant by that? And is that realistic? Is it really a fully sustainable fuel that would be a giant quantum leap in energy consumption for travel for mankind and the associated benefits for the industry,


Aviation biofuel will not save energy. It will reduce net emissions. So far that appears realistic. Testing on 100% biofuel is ongoing to ensure aircraft engines can operate reliably on it long term.

Do be aware that 100% carbon neutral is marketing speak. Biofuels do have some net greenhouse gas emissions due to energy and resources consumed in production and land use. Life cycle analyses that I have looked up vary greatly depending on the feedstock and processing method. I think the worst cases (but most cost effective) were around 20% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions compared to petroleum, and the best so far have been around 80% reduction.

Noshow wrote:
There is no way a tiny company can just develop another mini-Concorde within some years still not having the engine to do it.


They're not going to be a tiny company if they continue forward with this project. I don't know how much funding they have so far (based on press releases on their website, it is at least several hundred million dollars), but they will need a lot more, or they will need to show enough promise one of the major manufacturers buys them out. Getting this aircraft designed, certified, and creating a production system for it will take thousands of employees.

They won't be developing their own engine, nor is it expected to be from scratch. One of the existing engine manufacturers will almost certainly adapt an existing core, or a scaled variant of an existing core, to a medium-bypass, afterburning design.
 
xpfg
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 1:17 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 10:01 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
They're not going to be a tiny company if they continue forward with this project. I don't know how much funding they have so far (based on press releases on their website, it is at least several hundred million dollars), but they will need a lot more, or they will need to show enough promise one of the major manufacturers buys them out. Getting this aircraft designed, certified, and creating a production system for it will take thousands of employees.

They won't be developing their own engine, nor is it expected to be from scratch. One of the existing engine manufacturers will almost certainly adapt an existing core, or a scaled variant of an existing core, to a medium-bypass, afterburning design.


From what I recall, they have about $700 million (not near enough, of course).

RR will be developing the engine with them...if the project actually makes it.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19925
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 10:12 pm

DDR wrote:
Seriously, it is good to see super Sonic travel coming back.


Seriously, wake us up when it actually happens. ;)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
cpd
Posts: 6764
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 10:12 pm

vfw614 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Image

That's who had options on Concorde. Feel free to disagree with it, that's from the manufacturer itself. I don't know exactly when that brochure was printed (and there are other pages of it) but it's very, very old.


That brochure is from late 1971/early 1972 as it mentions the South America tour of the prototype that took place in September 1971.

In 1972, two more airlines ordered the aircraft, CAAC amd Iran Air. So in total options/orders from 18 airlines for a total of 84 or so aircraft.

What I found interesting is that airlines apparently had to deal with BAC or Aérospatiale - did the manufacturers compete for Concorde orders? (only Pan Am and CAAC "ordered" from both)


Thanks - the brochure came from the tour when 002 was in Sydney. It was handed out by the representatives from the manufacturer. People were allowed to walk around and look at 002. I'm not sure how the order process went. The rest of the brochure, sorry, no colour corrections here:

The front cover:
Image

The back page:
Image

When you look at the sheer scale of that project, it adds to the doubts that Boom can make its effort a reality. BAC and Aérospatiale/Sud Aviation weren't just some upstarts, they already had a lot of experience. Yes we have modern technology and the benefits of general knowledge of what a supersonic aircraft should be like, how the aerodynamics should be - but it's still a tough job.
Last edited by cpd on Fri Jun 04, 2021 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
UA748i
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 11:53 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Fri Jun 04, 2021 10:27 pm

scbriml wrote:
DDR wrote:
Seriously, it is good to see super Sonic travel coming back.


Seriously, wake us up when it actually happens. ;)


Im inclined to agree with scbriml.

The prospects of it are exciting, but lets be realistic, does anyone actually believe that airplane will even enter service this decade, if ever?

Ambitious...but then again, maybe the industry can use some ambition.

Let's see.
 
jeffrey1970
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2001 1:41 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:55 am

GDB wrote:
jeffrey1970 wrote:
I wonder when the NIMBY's will come out about this supersonic jet?


It's way beyond the usual NIMBY's, booms, high altitude pollution, noise, however a moot point as this is so unlikely to happen


I agree with you. I will believe it when I see it.
 
United1
Posts: 4281
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:17 am

Revelation wrote:

United1 wrote:
If Boom hits their targets the airfare should be around 5k. Comparable to a first class fare…much lower than what Concorde was able to profitability operate at.

Boom has no control over what airlines will charge for a seat if/when this thing gets into commercial service.


During the design phase Boom has a lot of control over what an airline can charge. Boom is aiming at keeping the CASM of the aircraft low enough that a 5K fare is viable vs what Concorde would have had to charge on a similar route. If they hit their targets 5K is a viable fare and as I said comparable to F class today.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1425
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:30 am

scbriml wrote:
Seriously, wake us up when it actually happens. ;)


Ok, you said "seriously," but I have to ask if you're really serious.

Personally, I've got a fair amount of doubt this aircraft will enter service. But I'm still fascinated by the idea of faster, sleeker, higher-flying passenger aircraft.

I'm going to be following this one just like I have followed every major aircraft program since I was old enough to appreciate them. In fact, with more attention because it is so much more distinctive.

If it fails, I'll be disappointed, but I will have enjoyed watching the program until then.

So, no need to wake me. I'm staying awake with respect to following the news on this.
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2548
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:08 am

The Today Show had a promo video that showed the artist representation of the United aircraft with 27 windows each side = 54 windows. The YT video inferred there would one seat per window, but the video stated there would be 88 passengers. So is the final aircraft going to be 2 seats across or four seats across??? (1:31)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDhreOMwZ-c



32andBelow wrote:
International travel with Tesla starships is more likely

Yeah, I thought windowless hyper sonic planes for the elite was what was coming...


Aaron747 wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

What are you going to do about sonic booms over the US in that scenario?


Perhaps you need to read the material on Boom's website. Their whole premise is designing supersonic aircraft that minimize sonic boom and can legally fly over the US and other countries. it's part of the reason they are going for smaller aircraft flying a business class product at prices comparable to conventional subsonic service.


NASA has studied minimization for years and have shaved off a few dB at most. Supersonic overflight of populated areas will not be reapproved.


mxaxai wrote:
Ziyulu wrote:
Regarding noise, does anyone remember if the Concorde had louder noise during take off and landing as compared to other aircraft?

Deafeningly loud. With afterburners, Concorde was more than 10dB louder than the 707-320B and nearly 20dB louder than the DC-9. It was even louder than modern supersonic fighters (the F-35 reportedly comes close).


JetBuddy wrote:
This might be a silly question, but I hear people arguing that the aircraft won't ever be permitted flying over land at all.

Why is that? I thought a sonic boom only happened when an aircraft reaches the speed of sound, and when leaving the speed of sound. It doesn't happen the entire flight.

The Concorde just taking off from DFW was too loud. As loud as a military jet.
Smoothest Ride so far ~ AA A300B4-600R ~~ Favorite Aviation Author ~ Robert J. Serling
 
Brystar45
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 7:59 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:04 am

Hello everyone Bryant here.

I for one am super happy about Supersonic Planes making a big comeback, the news that United bought 15 Supersonic Jets makes me excited because finally, finally, we are going to get Supersonic jets back. Finally, an Airline is taking the steps for the future, finally, we are thinking forward as a species.

I know that Supersonic Jets are expensive or any endeavor like this is expensive, but it is possible and the good thing that this shows that nothing is impossible, sure there are limitations now but the future will be amazing. Supersonic Jets, Electric Planes, Commercialized space travel, Spaceplanes, and more are going to be an exciting time.

Currently, I am a University Student at Embry-Riddle I feel proud of Boom Supersonic and United. I am hoping Emirates is not far away, British Airways, Air France, and Lufthansa will follow soon I am hoping I am right along with Ethiad and Qatar, and Singapore Airlines. Carbon Neutral I am excited because this means it will be able to fly with SAF's which is a huge thumbs up! We have the technology and resources for it. I can't wait to see these jets fly, or in testing mode when I finish my University and am part of the Aerospace Industry, working for NASA and other agencies.

Will be exciting to see these at Miami International Airport eventually even at Kennedy Space Center along with the Dreamchaser from SNC too. Aerospace is getting much more exciting.
Going for my goals of being in the Aerospace Industry, Traveling the world and more!
 
Noshow
Posts: 2489
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:13 am

Nothing is final until now. To me it looks more like some financial investor marketing project to people that have a lot of money but no idea of the complexity of required technologies.
This is beyond startup scope for sure and how much boom progress have we seen during the last years? Not so much.
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:15 am

JibberJim wrote:
YQBexYHZBGM wrote:
Concorde did occasionally generate a perceptible sonic boom over the rural area west of Halifax, Nova Scotia where I lived in the late 1990s. There was no FlightAware or FlightRadar24 at the time, so I'm not certain if any attempt was made to keep the flight path offshore to avoid Halifax or other populated areas. It was not a frequent occurrence, but when it did happen, it usually sounded like a heavy door closing accompanied by a vibration that lightly rattled glassware in my kitchen.


That's interesting, in South West England we could hear it almost every flight, and it was never loud or coming with vibration like a military jet interception that you occasionally get. I guess it was the direction, if they were late dropping to subsonic then you'd get it, but otherwise have nothing?


I have a story about that, must have been around late '99 when one evening, on a late shift in the hangar, I took a phone call. It was from an irate member of the public in Cornwall. At the time BA kept chopping and changing their comms department, which for us meant that not experienced operators would sometimes patch calls to the likes of us, which should have gone to the PR dept.
Then if need be they could ask us for any advice, even then really the job of Engineering Management.

In any case, this lady was complaining about the sonic boom Concorde had just made, I hid how doubtful she heard an actual boom, maybe just the noise of the aircraft, so asked if she noted any military fast jets, 'no' it was Concorde came the angry reply, I pointed out that the aircraft was prohibited from overland supersonic flight, (not wanting to muddy the waters by mentioning that we occasionally did charters over sparely populated areas of Canada, say from YYZ to US or Canadian West Coast destinations, G-BOAG's final flight to the Seattle Museum being one, we got dispensation each time from Canada for these 'Moose Scaring' flights).

So, was this lady's complaint genuine? Was AF doing a charter? We were not that day, however her estimation could match the inbound BA004. I said her concerns would be passed up the line and suggested a call to the CAA, I provided a number for them.
So was it a genuine boom?
It turns out that at certain times, such as solar max periods, the boom could bounce off the Ionosphere, reflecting forward of the aircraft, albeit at a much diminished power.
The result was the inbound aircraft decelerated a few miles sooner than before, just that was enough.
But it made the press, likely my caller was not the only one who complained.

This I feel speaks volumes about the acceptability of booms, even a much reduced one, that only made noise (reduced from the usual boom) and could create no damage.
Which is why 'Boom' is a bloody stupid name to call this proposed new SST.

Sorry to be a naysayer Brystar45, however my own experience with the only SST that has ever carried commercial pax, the encounter with a member of the public recounted above, should make you pause.
When you were on the fleet and were immersed in the history of the aircraft, which included it's struggle to get to service in far easier times for accepting state funded big technology projects, or big technology whoever funds it, (Boom will need a LOT of money), Conversely in times also far less aware of the environmental issues, still a change like more awareness and then a change in the world economic order out of nowhere, such as the 1973 oil crisis, killed Concorde in the major markets, really makes the claims by Boom and UA somewhat risible.

There has not been the major step change in technology to get around these issues, certainly the Boom as now proposed, shows no sign of this. Just wishful thinking and some rare positive PR for an airline struggling like so many others.
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:40 am

vfw614 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Image

That's who had options on Concorde. Feel free to disagree with it, that's from the manufacturer itself. I don't know exactly when that brochure was printed (and there are other pages of it) but it's very, very old.


That brochure is from late 1971/early 1972 as it mentions the South America tour of the prototype that took place in September 1971.

In 1972, two more airlines ordered the aircraft, CAAC amd Iran Air. So in total options/orders from 18 airlines for a total of 84 or so aircraft.

What I found interesting is that airlines apparently had to deal with BAC or Aérospatiale - did the manufacturers compete for Concorde orders? (only Pan Am and CAAC "ordered" from both)


My guess would be that had additional orders come about, who assembled might be related to 'sphere' of influence, which by then really meant either the British Commonwealth or the Francophone nations. Outside of that, had any come from the US likely the UK line, from Europe, France. Where did that leave South America, Iran or China? The latter were buying HS Tridents and came close to also buying VC-10's.
UK also had a relationship with the Shah of Iran, including all those Chieftain tanks supplied, as well as warships, the former are the subject of an ongoing dispute with Iran today, or at least is weaponized by them to hold a Iranian-British woman on spurious 'spying charges. The other day their largest warship, a 1977 completed tanker/supply vessel sank.

This 1972 in hindsight was later seen as a mistake, not the tour itself, rather that they used a Prototype. I regard these really as Technology Demonstrators rather than prototypes as generally accepted today.
Not only shorter, with a less developed wing planform, analogue intake controls (problematic, replaced by digital ones on the 'Pre Production' machines), the solid visor that would never be certified.
But most of all, earlier engines that were far more smokey than production ones, just when the world was turning against loud and polluting aircraft, all over the news footage of very smokey Concorde take offs.
http://www.concordesst.com/002.html

Really, they should have used the far more close to production standard G-AXDN.
This and it's French counterpart are what I call the prototypes.
http://www.concordesst.com/01.html

To today, for a long time, though ultimately not likely to be built, I felt the Aerion design at least tried to mitigate the negatives around supersonic flight.
In a way Boom seems not to, in their time they also got, for periods at least, some interest from established aerospace vendors.
But look what happened to them.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2489
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:53 am

The only way for supersonic to go forward I see would be some big sponsor from the Middle East pumping in money for prestige reasons. Say a country like Qatar or similar. But then they would need a good load and high cruise speed range from the Middle East to at least the US east coast nonstop and could go supersonic only for non land mass parts of the route because of boom noise.
 
cpd
Posts: 6764
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 10:04 am

GDB wrote:
vfw614 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Image

That's who had options on Concorde. Feel free to disagree with it, that's from the manufacturer itself. I don't know exactly when that brochure was printed (and there are other pages of it) but it's very, very old.


That brochure is from late 1971/early 1972 as it mentions the South America tour of the prototype that took place in September 1971.

In 1972, two more airlines ordered the aircraft, CAAC amd Iran Air. So in total options/orders from 18 airlines for a total of 84 or so aircraft.

What I found interesting is that airlines apparently had to deal with BAC or Aérospatiale - did the manufacturers compete for Concorde orders? (only Pan Am and CAAC "ordered" from both)


My guess would be that had additional orders come about, who assembled might be related to 'sphere' of influence, which by then really meant either the British Commonwealth or the Francophone nations. Outside of that, had any come from the US likely the UK line, from Europe, France. Where did that leave South America, Iran or China? The latter were buying HS Tridents and came close to also buying VC-10's.
UK also had a relationship with the Shah of Iran, including all those Chieftain tanks supplied, as well as warships, the former are the subject of an ongoing dispute with Iran today, or at least is weaponized by them to hold a Iranian-British woman on spurious 'spying charges. The other day their largest warship, a 1977 completed tanker/supply vessel sank.

This 1972 in hindsight was later seen as a mistake, not the tour itself, rather that they used a Prototype. I regard these really as Technology Demonstrators rather than prototypes as generally accepted today.
Not only shorter, with a less developed wing planform, analogue intake controls (problematic, replaced by digital ones on the 'Pre Production' machines), the solid visor that would never be certified.
But most of all, earlier engines that were far more smokey than production ones, just when the world was turning against loud and polluting aircraft, all over the news footage of very smokey Concorde take offs.
http://www.concordesst.com/002.html

Really, they should have used the far more close to production standard G-AXDN.
This and it's French counterpart are what I call the prototypes.
http://www.concordesst.com/01.html

To today, for a long time, though ultimately not likely to be built, I felt the Aerion design at least tried to mitigate the negatives around supersonic flight.
In a way Boom seems not to, in their time they also got, for periods at least, some interest from established aerospace vendors.
But look what happened to them.


On the back page of the brochure, you see the bit on the engines showing exactly the point you made about smoke.

Not even other commonwealth countries purchased it.

I don’t know if persistence to make into reality the often talked about B Model with no afterburners and other improvements would have turned the situation around. Even the later research projects came to nothing.

But I’m very sceptical about the Boom project. I wouldn’t be putting money into it.
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 10:31 am

Ziyulu wrote:
Regarding noise, does anyone remember if the Concorde had louder noise during take off and landing as compared to other aircraft?


With the passage of time since 2003, easy to forget or really, not be around to remember it.
Put it this way, if you lived on the flightpath, you knew when it was taking off, which if you were involved in the operation but not on shift, if you did not hear it when expected you wondered about a delay. The head of Concorde Engineering for much of my time there and probably one of the smartest people I have ever met, certainly was not above ringing in to ask 'where is it then?'

More seriously, BA, AF and their respective governments had to fight the NY Port Authority, Concorde had started thrice weekly services to IAD, so it was not a case of 'the Americans trying to ban Concorde'.
However, their attempts while failing to stop Concorde, ironically made JFK quieter, since to pass the noise tests a turn was instituted after take off over Jamaica Bay to avoid populated areas, which in turn also led to older and noisier subsonics like 707 and DC-8 doing the same, plenty of them still around at the time no it turned out Concorde reduced noise around JFK.

It was a battle with NYPO, one hero of Concorde people around at the time was the then US Transport Secretary William Coleman.
How it was reported at the time;

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/05/12/arch ... judge.html

Here are some videos, included if you a spare hour, the last BA Round The World Charter in 1999, both BA and AF ran these from time to time, we also did a round Africa one in early 2000.
I lived near LHR, many most really loved to hear and see it roar up, however that was a few times a day, this would not hold for most if several times an hour, understandably.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZqbWezJ_lg

The Round The World;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB-smagT0O4
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 10:57 am

cpd wrote:
GDB wrote:
vfw614 wrote:

That brochure is from late 1971/early 1972 as it mentions the South America tour of the prototype that took place in September 1971.

In 1972, two more airlines ordered the aircraft, CAAC amd Iran Air. So in total options/orders from 18 airlines for a total of 84 or so aircraft.

What I found interesting is that airlines apparently had to deal with BAC or Aérospatiale - did the manufacturers compete for Concorde orders? (only Pan Am and CAAC "ordered" from both)


My guess would be that had additional orders come about, who assembled might be related to 'sphere' of influence, which by then really meant either the British Commonwealth or the Francophone nations. Outside of that, had any come from the US likely the UK line, from Europe, France. Where did that leave South America, Iran or China? The latter were buying HS Tridents and came close to also buying VC-10's.
UK also had a relationship with the Shah of Iran, including all those Chieftain tanks supplied, as well as warships, the former are the subject of an ongoing dispute with Iran today, or at least is weaponized by them to hold a Iranian-British woman on spurious 'spying charges. The other day their largest warship, a 1977 completed tanker/supply vessel sank.

This 1972 in hindsight was later seen as a mistake, not the tour itself, rather that they used a Prototype. I regard these really as Technology Demonstrators rather than prototypes as generally accepted today.
Not only shorter, with a less developed wing planform, analogue intake controls (problematic, replaced by digital ones on the 'Pre Production' machines), the solid visor that would never be certified.
But most of all, earlier engines that were far more smokey than production ones, just when the world was turning against loud and polluting aircraft, all over the news footage of very smokey Concorde take offs.
http://www.concordesst.com/002.html

Really, they should have used the far more close to production standard G-AXDN.
This and it's French counterpart are what I call the prototypes.
http://www.concordesst.com/01.html

To today, for a long time, though ultimately not likely to be built, I felt the Aerion design at least tried to mitigate the negatives around supersonic flight.
In a way Boom seems not to, in their time they also got, for periods at least, some interest from established aerospace vendors.
But look what happened to them.


On the back page of the brochure, you see the bit on the engines showing exactly the point you made about smoke.

Not even other commonwealth countries purchased it.

I don’t know if persistence to make into reality the often talked about B Model with no afterburners and other improvements would have turned the situation around. Even the later research projects came to nothing.

But I’m very sceptical about the Boom project. I wouldn’t be putting money into it.


Funny you brought up Concorde B, all this talk of Boom and inevitably Concorde has revived long dormant thoughts on this subject.
One of these days I will maybe do a mildly alternate history around this, with a few more airframes, operated by maybe a few more operators, with a somewhat longer service life.
What routes worked for Concorde over the years? City pairs that were also major financial/business centers like NY, Paris and London.
If the B model could do FRA-LHR non stop, maybe a few for LH?
What about the SIA-BA tie up in 1979-80?
One of these days.....
http://www.concordesst.com/concordeb.html
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19925
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:13 am

GDB wrote:
Put it this way, if you lived on the flightpath, you knew when it was taking off


I was in my late-teens when Concorde entered service. We lived across the Bath Rd from Hounslow West tube station (so two miles from the end of the runways. When Concorde took off to the East, the whole house shook. Even when taking off to the West, you could still clearly hear when one took off. If there had been 20 Concorde flights a day, it would have been pretty miserable, and I say that as someone who loved living where we did.

I would also point out that it's not like it didn't have competition on the noise side of things - VC-10s, Tridents & BAC 1-11s were hugely loud, but Concorde sounded like it was an order of magnitude louder.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:02 pm

scbriml wrote:
GDB wrote:
Put it this way, if you lived on the flightpath, you knew when it was taking off


I was in my late-teens when Concorde entered service. We lived across the Bath Rd from Hounslow West tube station (so two miles from the end of the runways. When Concorde took off to the East, the whole house shook. Even when taking off to the West, you could still clearly hear when one took off. If there had been 20 Concorde flights a day, it would have been pretty miserable, and I say that as someone who loved living where we did.

I would also point out that it's not like it didn't have competition on the noise side of things - VC-10s, Tridents & BAC 1-11s were hugely loud, but Concorde sounded like it was an order of magnitude louder.


Ah yes, the BAC 1-11 including the refitted noise suppressors, (in engineering terms, as useful as a marzipan dildo).
Initially Concorde too was to have silencers on the rear nacelles, they were not fitted for service since they did not work.
This is what I don't get about Boom, how to go from an acceptable engine for noise/emissions to one that can do sustained supercruise.
Yes the Concorde's engine was a greatly refined existing Olympus but that powerplant was from the start a high performance military engine, not an adapted civil one.
 
CranfordBoy
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 7:42 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:57 pm

scbriml wrote:
GDB wrote:
Put it this way, if you lived on the flightpath, you knew when it was taking off


I was in my late-teens when Concorde entered service. We lived across the Bath Rd from Hounslow West tube station (so two miles from the end of the runways. When Concorde took off to the East, the whole house shook. Even when taking off to the West, you could still clearly hear when one took off. If there had been 20 Concorde flights a day, it would have been pretty miserable, and I say that as someone who loved living where we did.

I would also point out that it's not like it didn't have competition on the noise side of things - VC-10s, Tridents & BAC 1-11s were hugely loud, but Concorde sounded like it was an order of magnitude louder.


Interesting! We were (sort of) neighbours back in the day then. I grew up in Cranford which borders the perimieter fencing at LHR and is directly under the flight path.. On the rare occasions when Concorde took off from 9L (ie the northern runway towards London) it was still very low when passing over Cranford. Boy was it loud! But I loved it. There wasn't a car alarm in the neighbourhood that didn't go off because of the vibration.

You're quite right though: 2 or 3 departures a day to JFK/IAD was tolerable (and fun!), no way would the authorities have ever allowed that noise if it was every hour or so.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9602
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:37 pm

United1 wrote:
Revelation wrote:

United1 wrote:
If Boom hits their targets the airfare should be around 5k. Comparable to a first class fare…much lower than what Concorde was able to profitability operate at.

Boom has no control over what airlines will charge for a seat if/when this thing gets into commercial service.


During the design phase Boom has a lot of control over what an airline can charge. Boom is aiming at keeping the CASM of the aircraft low enough that a 5K fare is viable vs what Concorde would have had to charge on a similar route. If they hit their targets 5K is a viable fare and as I said comparable to F class today.


One can't have 4x fuel burn per seat mile, comparable floor space, small fleet operating economics, and charge comparable prices to 787 J today. That just doesn't work. CRJ-200 seating for J prices? Not for me.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26279
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:51 pm

United1 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
United1 wrote:
If Boom hits their targets the airfare should be around 5k. Comparable to a first class fare…much lower than what Concorde was able to profitability operate at.

Boom has no control over what airlines will charge for a seat if/when this thing gets into commercial service.

During the design phase Boom has a lot of control over what an airline can charge. Boom is aiming at keeping the CASM of the aircraft low enough that a 5K fare is viable vs what Concorde would have had to charge on a similar route. If they hit their targets 5K is a viable fare and as I said comparable to F class today.

Right, yet that doesn't mean UA still would charge $5k, they will charge what they think the market can bear, presumably with an eye-watering premium due to the 'eliteness' of it all.

If UA can only get the same revenue from a sub-sonic first class fare, it makes no sense for them to invest in all the expensive activities that have to happen for them to induct a SST.

GDB wrote:
This I feel speaks volumes about the acceptability of booms, even a much reduced one, that only made noise (reduced from the usual boom) and could create no damage.
Which is why 'Boom' is a bloody stupid name to call this proposed new SST.

Sorry to be a naysayer Brystar45, however my own experience with the only SST that has ever carried commercial pax, the encounter with a member of the public recounted above, should make you pause.
When you were on the fleet and were immersed in the history of the aircraft, which included it's struggle to get to service in far easier times for accepting state funded big technology projects, or big technology whoever funds it, (Boom will need a LOT of money), Conversely in times also far less aware of the environmental issues, still a change like more awareness and then a change in the world economic order out of nowhere, such as the 1973 oil crisis, killed Concorde in the major markets, really makes the claims by Boom and UA somewhat risible.

There has not been the major step change in technology to get around these issues, certainly the Boom as now proposed, shows no sign of this. Just wishful thinking and some rare positive PR for an airline struggling like so many others.

Indeed, and now we have social media which has given a megaphone to everyone, including the kids from the back of the classroom. The wails of anguish one hears over trivial things already makes it clear no quarter will be given to this chariot for the elite.

MIflyer12 wrote:
One can't have 4x fuel burn per seat mile, comparable floor space, small fleet operating economics, and charge comparable prices to 787 J today. That just doesn't work. CRJ-200 seating for J prices? Not for me.

:checkmark:

It won't work for UA or JL either.

scbriml wrote:
GDB wrote:
Put it this way, if you lived on the flightpath, you knew when it was taking off

I was in my late-teens when Concorde entered service. We lived across the Bath Rd from Hounslow West tube station (so two miles from the end of the runways. When Concorde took off to the East, the whole house shook. Even when taking off to the West, you could still clearly hear when one took off. If there had been 20 Concorde flights a day, it would have been pretty miserable, and I say that as someone who loved living where we did.

I would also point out that it's not like it didn't have competition on the noise side of things - VC-10s, Tridents & BAC 1-11s were hugely loud, but Concorde sounded like it was an order of magnitude louder.

A good friend worked for the US consultancy that had the contract for noise monitoring at the three major LON airports in the 90s. This led me to be outdoors at LHR as a Concorde took off a few hundred yards away. The only similar sound I could remember feeling and hearing was at an air show with a F-14 Tomcat in full afterburners. It was a truly visceral thing. You could not avoid feeling the pressure the sound waves made on your chest, no sensitive noise monitoring instruments needed. This would never pass muster in today's world, IMO.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Brystar45
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 7:59 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:10 pm

But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today. I feel Boom is going to be like Space X in a way and both companies should work with each other, some kind of collaboration and Virgin Galatic is going with their own Supersonic Jet too!

I get what a lot of people are saying but now is the time to advance and to go for the future, We cannot be stuck in the past and not fly, we humans are made to surpass things to be better for the better of humanity as a whole. People didn't think we could land on the Moon and we did back in the 1960s, with our calculators are so powerful they powered the flight to the Moon.

I am now starting my Master's with Embry-Riddle and I feel I can make a difference and seeing a new generation of Aerospace is amazing! So I get what a lot of people are saying but I am glad an Airline took the initiative to move forward to the future.

Plus I do want to see the Baby Boom fly, I can't wait, I won't be able to see it in person but it will be interesting to see it fly! And it will fly we have to think outside of the box.
I don't understand how people are so negative about it on here, aren't we Aerospace fans and aspiring people that are in the Industry or like me trying to get into Aerospace for my careers.
Going for my goals of being in the Aerospace Industry, Traveling the world and more!
 
GDB
Posts: 14251
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:41 pm

Brystar45 wrote:
But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today. I feel Boom is going to be like Space X in a way and both companies should work with each other, some kind of collaboration and Virgin Galatic is going with their own Supersonic Jet too!

I get what a lot of people are saying but now is the time to advance and to go for the future, We cannot be stuck in the past and not fly, we humans are made to surpass things to be better for the better of humanity as a whole. People didn't think we could land on the Moon and we did back in the 1960s, with our calculators are so powerful they powered the flight to the Moon.

I am now starting my Master's with Embry-Riddle and I feel I can make a difference and seeing a new generation of Aerospace is amazing! So I get what a lot of people are saying but I am glad an Airline took the initiative to move forward to the future.

Plus I do want to see the Baby Boom fly, I can't wait, I won't be able to see it in person but it will be interesting to see it fly! And it will fly we have to think outside of the box.
I don't understand how people are so negative about it on here, aren't we Aerospace fans and aspiring people that are in the Industry or like me trying to get into Aerospace for my careers.


I wish you all the luck with that, young people entering the biz is always good. (As BA found to their cost after many years of not recruiting new apprentices).
However, take a tip from me, imagine you are in another era on the cusp of great technological change, say you are looking to start out in aircraft engineering, looking to be an A&P at a major US airline. (Good solid and well paid jobs then, when engineering was more respected).

It is the late 1950's, do you get expertise and a license to service piston engines or jet turbines?
Today my advice would be to look to alternative powerplants, both in terms of fuels for high bypass turbofans and yes, battery/solar power. Also it is likely further down the line that radical new shapes and materials will come in, not to go supersonic but to make normal travel environmentally acceptable. Both air-framers and power-plant vendors, as well as airlines, have a huge incentive for this. The day is coming when they won't have a choice but to do so.
That is where the future is headed. Don't be like a piston engine A&P when the jet age kicks in.

I really don't see the SpaceX comparison with boom, Musk has not tried to ignore both the market acceptability, nor the sound engineering principles that has underpinned his great success, as a space nut I am very inspired by him too.
Not even the Starship is defying the laws of physics, (however much it looks like it!)
 
Heinkel
Posts: 310
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:40 pm

Brystar45 wrote:
But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today.


Boom is far, far away from having a "prototype" flying soon. Correct me, if I'm worng, but what I understand is, that they are building a scaled down (1/3 scale?) experimental demonstrator. That is far, far away from what we usually call a "prototype". It is a flyable scale model, same what is known as a "concept car" in the automotive industry.
 
cpd
Posts: 6764
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:04 pm

Brystar45 wrote:
But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today. I feel Boom is going to be like Space X in a way and both companies should work with each other, some kind of collaboration and Virgin Galatic is going with their own Supersonic Jet too!

I get what a lot of people are saying but now is the time to advance and to go for the future, We cannot be stuck in the past and not fly, we humans are made to surpass things to be better for the better of humanity as a whole. People didn't think we could land on the Moon and we did back in the 1960s, with our calculators are so powerful they powered the flight to the Moon.

I am now starting my Master's with Embry-Riddle and I feel I can make a difference and seeing a new generation of Aerospace is amazing! So I get what a lot of people are saying but I am glad an Airline took the initiative to move forward to the future.

Plus I do want to see the Baby Boom fly, I can't wait, I won't be able to see it in person but it will be interesting to see it fly! And it will fly we have to think outside of the box.
I don't understand how people are so negative about it on here, aren't we Aerospace fans and aspiring people that are in the Industry or like me trying to get into Aerospace for my careers.


It’s probably because we are older and we’ve seen it all before. GDB was involved with Concorde in his career, so far the only viable operating SST that carried lots of passengers.

When it flew, acceptance of noise and pollution was already on the way out, now it is absolutely not acceptable.

Look, I want this stuff to work out as much as anyone else because I live on an island far away from everywhere else so any SST will be a great benefit to me by cutting flying time. I fly business or first so flying is still comfortable enough, but just getting to Dubai is 13+ hours. Then it’s a change of plane and another 6.5 hours. Then a transfer by road of about 1.5 hours. That’s a long time.

But it’s just not going to happen unless someone develops something very radical that doesn’t burn conventional fuels or fly in the conventional manner.
 
Heinkel
Posts: 310
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:11 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
Heinkel wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
This might be a silly question, but I hear people arguing that the aircraft won't ever be permitted flying over land at all.

Why is that? I thought a sonic boom only happened when an aircraft reaches the speed of sound, and when leaving the speed of sound. It doesn't happen the entire flight.


Nope. The sonic boom happens all the time, the a/c is flying supersonic. The be more precise: It is a double boom. One generated by the front of the a/c, one by the tail.

This double boom follows the aircraft during the whole supersonic flight. The boom takes 30 s - 60 s behind the a/c to reach ground, depending on the flight altitude. (Sound travels at Mach 1)

There is a nice YouTube video of the Concorde sonic double boom:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=annkM6z1-FE

The description / title of the video is wrong. It doesn't "break the sound barrier" at that moment. The boom follows the a/c like a carpet. The video shows well, how loud the bang is. It won't be tolerated over populated areas.


Thank you Heinkel and JibberJim for the explenation and teaching me something new today. I have heard them in the past (grew up around a military air base), but I thought it only happened once. Interesting physics.


The time between the two booms depends on the lenght of the a/c and its speed. It is the time it takes for the a/c to fly with its length over you from front to tail.

A F35 is 15.6 m long. Concorde was 61.66 m long. So at the same speed the time between the two booms from a Concorde is rough four times longer than the time between the two booms generated by an F35 or a similar fighter. So while you can clearly hear the double boom from the Concorde, it can be difficult to hear from a fighter.

Speed of sound is rough 342 m/s (1,236 km/h) at 20 °C. So Mach 2 means 684 m/s. So it takes Concorde rough 0.1 s (1/10 s) to fly over you. The two booms are 1/10 s apart.

In case of a short fighter jet, the two booms are only 0.025 c (25/1000 s) apart and this may sound like a single boom.

(I've simplified the calculation a bit, because speed of sound is not constant. If depends on air temperature and humidity).
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14392
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:12 pm

Heinkel wrote:
Brystar45 wrote:
But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today.


Boom is far, far away from having a "prototype" flying soon. Correct me, if I'm worng, but what I understand is, that they are building a scaled down (1/3 scale?) experimental demonstrator. That is far, far away from what we usually call a "prototype". It is a flyable scale model, same what is known as a "concept car" in the automotive industry.


Technology testbed I would say.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:38 am

Heinkel wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
Heinkel wrote:

Nope. The sonic boom happens all the time, the a/c is flying supersonic. The be more precise: It is a double boom. One generated by the front of the a/c, one by the tail.

This double boom follows the aircraft during the whole supersonic flight. The boom takes 30 s - 60 s behind the a/c to reach ground, depending on the flight altitude. (Sound travels at Mach 1)

There is a nice YouTube video of the Concorde sonic double boom:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=annkM6z1-FE

The description / title of the video is wrong. It doesn't "break the sound barrier" at that moment. The boom follows the a/c like a carpet. The video shows well, how loud the bang is. It won't be tolerated over populated areas.


Thank you Heinkel and JibberJim for the explenation and teaching me something new today. I have heard them in the past (grew up around a military air base), but I thought it only happened once. Interesting physics.


The time between the two booms depends on the lenght of the a/c and its speed. It is the time it takes for the a/c to fly with its length over you from front to tail.

A F35 is 15.6 m long. Concorde was 61.66 m long. So at the same speed the time between the two booms from a Concorde is rough four times longer than the time between the two booms generated by an F35 or a similar fighter. So while you can clearly hear the double boom from the Concorde, it can be difficult to hear from a fighter.

Speed of sound is rough 342 m/s (1,236 km/h) at 20 °C. So Mach 2 means 684 m/s. So it takes Concorde rough 0.1 s (1/10 s) to fly over you. The two booms are 1/10 s apart.

In case of a short fighter jet, the two booms are only 0.025 c (25/1000 s) apart and this may sound like a single boom.

(I've simplified the calculation a bit, because speed of sound is not constant. If depends on air temperature and humidity).


Big thanks to you and the others who take time to try to explain these really cool, but complex concepts for the rest of us. I love this stuff, but it is way beyond my level of knowledge. Love learning more!
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2548
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 4:23 am

Heinkel wrote:
The time between the two booms depends on the lenght of the a/c and its speed. It is the time it takes for the a/c to fly with its length over you from front to tail.

A F35 is 15.6 m long. Concorde was 61.66 m long. So at the same speed the time between the two booms from a Concorde is rough four times longer than the time between the two booms generated by an F35 or a similar fighter. So while you can clearly hear the double boom from the Concorde, it can be difficult to hear from a fighter.

Speed of sound is rough 342 m/s (1,236 km/h) at 20 °C. So Mach 2 means 684 m/s. So it takes Concorde rough 0.1 s (1/10 s) to fly over you. The two booms are 1/10 s apart.

In case of a short fighter jet, the two booms are only 0.025 c (25/1000 s) apart and this may sound like a single boom.

(I've simplified the calculation a bit, because speed of sound is not constant. If depends on air temperature and humidity).


Thanks for your explanation of the two booms. I understand it now, like I never had before.
Smoothest Ride so far ~ AA A300B4-600R ~~ Favorite Aviation Author ~ Robert J. Serling
 
cynlb
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:49 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 4:54 am

This is interesting.
'Air Force Two' Replacement Dropped With Funds Redirected To Supersonic Transport Research
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... t-research
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13975
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 5:39 am

marcelh wrote:
It’s more interesting why well known and established OEMs aren’t involved.

Neither Airbus, Boeing, nor Lockheed were shy about publicly sniffing around Aerion.

If this thing comes even remotely close to actual fruition, I'd be BEYOND shocked if one of them didn't jump in and throw their names/resources into it. I'm guessing production process.


Aesma wrote:
I don't see Biden doing the same for Boom.

Meh, Biden might not even be alive by the time this thing came to market. Hardly a concern.


Ziyulu wrote:
Regarding noise, does anyone remember if the Concorde had louder noise during take off and landing as compared to other aircraft?

Four afterburning turbojets.... um, you tell *US*.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 805
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 6:11 am

scbriml wrote:
DDR wrote:
Seriously, it is good to see super Sonic travel coming back.


Seriously, wake us up when it actually happens. ;)


No kidding. I hate to be a naysayer, but I don't this will happen, and certainly not on Boom's timeframe. Nope.
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 6:28 am

Hard to address my thoughts on different points throughout this long thread, so just my thoughts, memories and musings here.

How much technology can Boom pinch from Concorde rather than have to do 100% of their own R&D? I remember Concorde development had to deal with such issues as the fuselage skin overheating from the friction in flight, so they had to/or considered (I was just a homeboy reading stuff) pumping the fuel through webbed fuel lines under the skin to cool it. That windows had to be tiny (4" by 6") to reduce friction as well as not blowing out under the cabin pressure at 60,000 feet. (Are Boom's projected windows too generous?) That the external livery had to be minimal ....not the full BOAC/BA/AF liveries of the day for friction heating, weight or whatever.

The cabin was very narrow. I did get to tour the AF Concorde when it was on a promotional excursion stopping in Sacramento/SMF. I was struck how tiny it was inside. Long and skinny, low ceiling, 4 coach seats wide -nothing fancy-, just webbed seatback pockets. It felt like a long Dash-7 (the period 4-abreast ship of the day).

And the noise. Terrible on take-off. I heard it outside as well as over the scream of the 737-200 engine out my window while we were taxiing and Concorde taking off on the runway at an angle from us. Incredibly loud and shook our airplane. Then sitting in my friend's back garden in Hounslow, under the LHR approach as the birds came in every evening. Certainly quieter than take off by far, but still very obvious it was Concorde and not another airliner gliding in.

Hot and high performance: when the AF Concorde took off from Sacramento, which is a little less than a whopping 30 feet ASL, the departure time had to be moved up from 11:00 to 10:00 because the forecasted temperature at 11:00 would be too hot to get the thing off the 8500 ft runway.

So how will Boom compare? And again, my question is with the announced reduction in the Mach speed, will Boom be fast enough on the EWR-LHR run to really make that much difference over a Boeing/Airbus?
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired). Flight Memory: 181 airports, 92 airlines, 78 a/c types, 403 routes, 58 countries (by air), 6 continents. 1,119,414 passenger miles.

Home airport : CEC
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5728
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:37 pm

The physics of supersonic flight haven’t changed. And the physics dictate the economics. At the end it cost around $12,000 for a round trip fare crossing the Atlantic on Concorde, as opposed to maybe $3,000 first class. And the end result was that both BA and AF were unable to find enough paying customers to sustain service, which is what killed it. Yes, there are always people able and willing to pay whatever it costs to get there faster, but whether or not there are enough to make it economically viable is the question. And remember, the planes themselves were given to AF and BA for free, with all development and manufacturing costs paid for by the British and French governments. That will definitely not be the case here. I have serious doubts that this venture will survive serious economic examination.

Then there is development costs. I am unaware of any jetliner in history that did not exceed its development budget, usually by staggering amounts (think 787). Does anyone think that a newcomer can waltz in and develop a truly groundbreaking airliner at anything within sight of its budget? And if so, can I interest you in a bridge in Brooklyn? I would be astonished if any supersonic airliner can be brought into service for less than $50 billion.

And then let’s talk about fares. They are apparently talking of fares in the range of 3-4x Y fares. If they could actually achieve that then I agree it would have a chance. But I think that is as realistic as me finding a herd of unicorns to graze my lawn so I don’t have to mow it. The 787 reportedly cost around $32 billion to get to market, and has sold some 1400 so far. And people are seriously questioning whether Boeing will ever recover the development costs. How many does Boom think they will sell? At what price? And I stand by my $50 billion estimate for development cost.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
cpd
Posts: 6764
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:13 pm

cynlb wrote:
This is interesting.
'Air Force Two' Replacement Dropped With Funds Redirected To Supersonic Transport Research
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... t-research


So it becomes a government backed prestige project rather than being a viable one?

I can’t see it getting all that far. If it is to really make a difference, it will have to be quieter than existing planes and be able to do trans-pacific flights non stop. And it should have equal fuel economy to slower planes. Good luck for that happening.

There is one other risk, what if countries ban it from landing at their airports?
 
LightningZ71
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:38 pm

While physics hasn’t changed any in the intervening half century, materials science and computer aided design and development have certainly advanced by a large degree. The lessons learned from the concord are certainly going to inform Boom on where the big headaches are going to be, and also what they need to target for efficiency.

They aren’t treading blindly into completely new territory here. If they can come up with a cost model for the airlines that allows them to make money on each seat, they’ll sell them.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26279
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United orders supersonic planes from Boom (was: Big United Announcement Coming Up?)

Sun Jun 06, 2021 2:34 pm

Aesma wrote:
Heinkel wrote:
Brystar45 wrote:
But the thing is that Boom has a prototype ready to start flying soon, they went ahead of the curve with the prototype with that they will get feedback for the construction of Overture, people said the same thing with the Boeing 747, and look it's flying today.

Boom is far, far away from having a "prototype" flying soon. Correct me, if I'm worng, but what I understand is, that they are building a scaled down (1/3 scale?) experimental demonstrator. That is far, far away from what we usually call a "prototype". It is a flyable scale model, same what is known as a "concept car" in the automotive industry.

Technology testbed I would say.

Technology testbed is a good start, but this one doesn't even have the same engine tech needed by the final product.

I'd go with proof of concept, since the only thing it would prove is the concept itself, not the actual tech to be used by the product.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos