Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
planemad
Topic Author
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:35 pm

Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 6:17 am

Do any companies like Boeing or Airbus have plans to design another Supersonic passenger plane. Now that Concorde is gone, there is no Supersonic Passenger plane
 
RickB
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 3:11 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 6:21 am

Interesting comment on the Sky news program from the marketing guy of Boeing suggesting that the only way to do a program like this in the future would be if Airbus,Boeing and Asian manufacturers got together.

Would be good to think that the next stage in international co-operation wasn't just Airbus - but inter-continental co-operation. Who could argue against an aircraft developed by everyone?

RickB
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 6:56 am

Even if they did club together, the politics over who designs/builds what, who has final say etc would be a nightmare!

The different companies I suspect would also be suspicious of cross over of ideas/technology that could be transposed to sub-sonic aircraft, to gain competitive advantage or play catch-up.

Also the risk of staff/skills changing companies would exist.

Therefore I cant see this happening in the short term.

The next development in this field will be when the next technological advancement comes in engine design (SCRAM jet?), to make the whole thing comparatively economical and profitable.

Rich.
 
RickB
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 3:11 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:00 am

Rich,

The same comments where made when Britain and France got together to make Concorde !

RickB
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:52 am

Rickb

how right you are - now where did I put my humble pie??


 Smile

Rich.


p.s. still maintain my bit about engine development!!
 
ssides
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 12:57 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:17 am

1) Due to political concerns, it is likely that a joint Boeing-Airbus venture will ever happen. Never say never, but who right now can say this is a possibility?

2) There simply isn't sufficient demand for supersonic passenger transport. There is only a very small number of people who need to fly from point A to point B at Mach 2. Due to the average costs produced by this demand structure, there is no way such an operation could be successful. The Concorde couldn't do it with 100 passengers per plane, and making a larger supersonic jet would be an engineering feat that no one wants to undertake. I think the question may be revisited in maybe 20 years, but until then, it's a non-starter.
"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
 
[email protected]
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:26 am

The next SST programme, whether it's in 10, 20 or 30 years time, will almost certainly be another multinational effort. The costs of planning, designing, building and launching a supersonic plane are so huge that no country alone will want do it by themselves. When the original Concorde plans were drawn up, the UK approached the US as a partner for building the Concorde, but that obviously didn't happen and Britain ended up partnered with France. The US and UK have already worked together on the new Joint strike fighter, so how about a BAE systems/Boeing SST programme in 2020?

In Arsene we trust!!
 
matt777
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:55 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:46 am

What about a long range, 250 seat SS aircraft? LAX-SYD in 8 hours... not bad at all for business people who need to stay fresh!
 
[email protected]
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:48 am

That was gonna be the Sonic cruiser, until Boeing scrapped it.
In Arsene we trust!!
 
shankly
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Sat Oct 25, 2003 9:09 am

A joint US/European SSC? Oh dear...

1st argument - Is it the Boeing-Airbus SSC or would it be Airbus-Boeing SSC. Maybe they could form a company called erm Vickers or Hadley Page

2nd argument - Boeing would want a twin, Airbus four engines. Final solution would be six to boost engine sales (see below)

3rd argument - engine choice. No argument - RR

4th argument - inaugural flight. Seattle or Toulouse. No argument - from Toulouse

5th argument - budget. No probs; just multiply the estimate by 10 and thats what it'll cost

6th argument - should components be flown in the Airbus Beluga or Boeing Beluga. As a compromise they select Russias new An224 Beluga

7th argument - over fly rights - lets put that one aside for 10 years

8th argument - 1st carrier to fly it. No argument - BA

9th argument - who will be its best customer - no argument - David Frost

10th argument - what shall be call it. Boeing want "The Groovy cruiser" France "Le Amour" Britain "Concorde" (saves printing new baggage labels) Germany "Me272" Spain "El Dali"
L1011 - P F M
 
masseybrown
Posts: 5580
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 1:29 am

Aviation Week had a good article on smaller supersonic aircraft last week. They think the next SST is likely to be a business aircraft, rather than a large transport. The NASA modified F-5 test plane has apparently demonstrated that boom-less overland flights are possible. AW cite Lockheed and Northrop as the most interested players, not Boeing or Airbus.
 
GDB
Posts: 13986
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:09 am

It would be nice to see, though probably decades away, however who'd have thought before 1962 that Britain and France would collaborate on such a difficult yet ultimately outstanding programme.
We had never collaborated before.
We spoke different languages.
We had different measurement systems, (yes the French parts of Concorde were Metric, the UK ones Imperial!)
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4961
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:31 am

Anyone seriously think Airbus/Boeing would build a super-sonic and compete with their current products? No, I don´t believe that, the only one that could
build a super-sonic in the future is Tupolev (the Tu-244 was halted, but some
parts where made?). So if someone silly rich (like Seattle born, William Gates?) wanted a SST, I think Tupolev would build one...
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
bmi330
Posts: 1429
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 9:04 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:34 am

Hears a great idea. If it aint broke don't fix it. AKA The Concorde NG. Take the original Concorde airframe and those great delta wings witch are very special. Get RR to deveope new more efficient engines and have cutting edge technology for the pilots. All that's needed to replace the current Concorde is an update of the current 1 a lot cheaper as well. simple plan but it works for me.
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:43 am

Remember also that the inability of a supersonic transport to fly any route reduces its feasibility. SSC's will only work on over-water routes, because nobody on land will appreciate a daily sonic boom.

Aaron G.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:46 am

The Concorde NG

Been there, done that (Concorde-B), failed!  Laugh out loud
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Benjamin
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 4:08 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:54 am

That was gonna be the Sonic cruiser, until Boeing scrapped it.

No, the sonic cruiser was not going to be an SS airplane. It was going to move only slightly faster than current planes, but below the sound barrier.
 
matt777
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:55 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 6:22 am

Yeah, exactly... Mach 0.95... a difference of 2 hours doesn't make sense.. but what about an 8 hour difference? (LAX-SYD or JFK-NRT)
Biz travellers want to arrive fresh to the destination.
Companies want productivity from their employees... if they take the A380, a 16 hour flight.. then you lose all day... but if you can have an 8 hour flight (some time for dinner, work and a good sleep) then you can work once you get to destination.
BTW, also look at it as an operative advantage. You can use one plane on a route that is operated by two sonic aircraft. It can come and go more times than the others, so dividing costs (yeah, they will be huge) into many more.

So for me the future will be extra-long-range Supersonic aircraft.
Regards from Argentina,
Matt  Big thumbs up
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5370
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:37 am

Whoever made the comment about engine technology was correct. Until an engine manufacturer can produce an engine that is:

1. Just as fuel-efficient as the 757, 767 or A320.
2. Just as quiet as A320, 737NG or 717.
3. Supercruise capability as the F-22.

I think the Sonic Cruiser has the aerodynamics of an SST...half 757, half XB-70.

There's no question about demand. If an airline can fly a SST at the operating cost level of their 747-400's, A-340's or 777's, then the SST would be very popular with business travelers. The A380 would be history. The 7E7 would never have been brought up.

In my opinion, a 10% increase in speed is not significant for me. The difference between Mach .87 and Mach .97 is negligible. However, if you develop a cost-efficient product that flies Mach 1.5, then people would be talking!
 
RickB
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 3:11 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:44 am

Getting a little fed up of saying this - Concorde supercruised decades before the F22 came along - Concorde did not use afterburners to maintain supersonic flight - that was one of the key differentiators between it and the TU144 - which required reheat throughout supersonic flight.

RickB
 
dw747400
Posts: 1100
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 12:47 pm

Concorde supercruise is a bit different from F-22 supercruise in that the 22 can go supersonic with no use afterburners... Concorde needs burners to get to supersonic speeds, but as you said, maintains its speed just fine once its there without afterburners. However, if we define that as supercruise, than a lightly loaded F-16 can supercruise too.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
RickB
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 3:11 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:59 pm

DW747400 - Concorde only uses reheat during the transonic region of flight - they are switched off around Mach 1.7 - the aircraft then continues to accelerate upto mach 2.0 without reheat. You are right its a little different to F22 supercruise - by about 400mph !!  Wink/being sarcastic

Reheat is used in the transonic region because it was realised that getting through this point quickly using reheat was more economical than taking longer to accelerate through this point without.

RickB
 
GDB
Posts: 13986
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 6:19 pm

I would not call the proposed Concorde B a failure, since it was never started.
Neither was it a Concorde NG, rather it was like comparing Concorde to the B747-100 with the Concorde B as a B747-200.
So just an improved version without reheat (quieter, more fuel efficient on take off), improved aerodynamics for more efficient subsonic flight and a bit more fuel capacity.
So not a step change in capability, still with Concordes pax capacity, (certified to 128 pax with a 36-inch pitch).
But viable for say FRA-JFK non stop had Lufthansa been a customer.
A pity it was not built, it would not have greatly increased sales, maybe only 20-30 or so would have been built, reflecting the need for routes based on a mostly overwater sector between two major business centres, Concorde B would have had about a 4500 mile range.
Shame all the huge effort that had gone into building Concorde was not used to make these modest improvements, which would have allowed increased operational flexibility, as well as a more stable support network with more operators.
http://www.concordesst.com/concordeb.html
 
dw747400
Posts: 1100
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Next SSC?

Sun Oct 26, 2003 11:49 pm

RickB,

that's exactly what I said... Concorde needs the reheats too punch through transonic drag, F-22 does not need this extra push in the transonic range.

A number of aircraft can do what Concorde can (cruise supersonic after using burners to get through the transonic drag build up.) For example, the F-16 (if lightly loaded with no external stores) has been able to hold around mach 1.2 in mil power (if memory serves me... its been a while since I talked with a -16 pilot) after using its burners from mach .9 to 1.1.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
elwood64151
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 10:22 am

RE: Next SSC?

Mon Oct 27, 2003 12:17 am

Wedgetail737:

I have, in another thread, suggested a supersonic aircraft that achieves Mach 1.4. I think that an aircraft that cruises at 930 knots (compared to 550 knots for the faster sub-sonic commercial jets) could operate at supercruise, like the F-22, and still give airlines a distinct advantage over their sub-sonic counterparts.

I do not believe an SST project MUST be an international project. After all, Boeing, Airbus, Lockheed, Northrop, Cessna, Embaerer and Bombardier are all capable of manufacturing commercial aircraft, and each has experience with high subsonic speed aircraft. Most of them have experience with transonic aircraft, and at least four have experience with supersonic aircraft.

A lifting body, similar to some of the more unique X-plane designs, could be a viable alternative to the "tube with wings" that we saw with the Concorde. Let's face it, if the Concorde hadn't been limited to about 100 passengers (717s carry more!), it would have been a very profitable aircraft.

Rickb:

The Concorde used afterburn to transit the sound barrier (Mach .95-1.7). Because of this, it used of a lot of fuel getting to Mach 2, making it very inefficient. Even if it hadn't used afterburn, it may well have used more fuel trying to accellerate to Mach 2 over a longer time period.

Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10247
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Mon Oct 27, 2003 12:23 am

Back to the International cooperation theory. Isn't that how every commercial airplane is built nowdays? Boeings are not built wholy in the US, and Airbuses are not built wholy in France. Different companies with different technologies, all around the World need to come together to build an airplane.

As for the noise. Try living next to an interstate highway like millions of people do. I find that a lot worse than a handfull of loud aircraft overhead. But it's not about the noise. It never was. It's about measuring up the pros and cons. People put up with highway noise because they get direct benefits from the highway, while it's very unlikely that the average joe will ever set foot on a supersonic airplane. It's the same reason people complain about traffic congestion but no one will allow commuter trains into their towns.

I believe the technology exists today to build a much more efficient supersonic transport - heck, BA was operating the Concorde at a profit and that was 30 year old technology - but more than technology what's needed is a change in people's mentality, and for that you need strong political backing at the local level.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:02 pm

There is only one way to make this possible: make one, but not for profit, for advertisement.

Something needs to be built at cost and it must be small enough to be at cost and build courage at the same time. Most of all it has to work as a mini-sonic X-plane, if you will. But unlike X-planes of the past, this one needs serious advertisement, or hype (radio, TV, internet, newspaper). This thing has to be part of the culture. Sonic planes have had a bad rep which was created since it was discovered that the sonic boom was such an annoyance. Like I said in another thread, the people (sadly ignorant 99% of those who travel aren't on these forums) are in charge, they are the market.

The only reason there is not market for a sonic plane is because no one thinks it can be done mainly cuz nobody tells them it can. They make no time to do their own research. If you were aware of an option, like the option to take a faster plane, you would at least consider it while others would make their own decisions.

Not everyone will join, there does not need to be that many, if people are aware, they will ask, eventually enough people will ask and airlines will begin to ask the companies that built the experimental plane about their results. All results need to be public for the public to accept it. Soon enough there will be talks into making a larger aircraft. The airlines need an answer to a growing number of "believers." The market infrastructure needs to be built before the plane.

I bet if someone or a company built this incredible machine within 5-7 years, expect a sonic transport within 20 years afterwards.

That is it. This plane needs to be part of the people, just like what Boeing is doing with the 7E7, just a way larger base structure, like a pop icon or something.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: Next SSC?

Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:14 pm

There is only one way to make this possible: make one, but not for profit, for advertisement

So... you're saying that the best way to make an SSC financially viable is to concentrate on spending more (on advertising & marketing) rather than on actually earning ticket revenue as previous aircraft have done?

Image, and "believers", don't pay the bills.
Cunning linguist
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:56 pm

No no no, I mean there needs to be a base for sales first, cuz right now there isn't one.

First advertise, then when the market is about to bloom, deliver the planes that were being built when the right amount of advertisement produces the right results for investors to be convinced the project will work.

I know it is not that simple but in a way there needs to be a bunch spent on advertising/marketing before anything happens in terms of a full scale venture. The ads need to be a combination of the 'test vehicle' and campaigns on various media outlets. This plane needs to be sold somehow, cuz the airlines need a reason, and that reason will be enough people asking for it.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: Next SSC?

Thu Oct 30, 2003 6:51 pm

I think that Boeing failure to bring the Sonic Cruiser to market shows that most airlines just aren't ready to invest in these type of airplanes.

From what I can recall, the Sonic Cruiser was to have two perfromance sweetspots, Mach 0.98 and 1.3. The airplane was to be certified for supersonic flight, however not sustained on the first model.

 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:48 am

"I think that Boeing failure to bring the Sonic Cruiser to market shows that most airlines just aren't ready to invest in these type of airplanes."

In the end it is the passenger that decided to fly their way or the highway, the only reason the airlines did not show interest is because their customers did not show interest. Don't you guys get it yet? The airlines are not in charge of this matter.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Next SSC?

Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:18 pm

Does anyone else believe that there needs to be an interest (outside of airlines) for a sonic transport before its R&D? Is so, what do you think is the best way to garner interest? I believe in advertisement.

Eh vous?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.

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