So what ever happened to that idea? In 2001, with the A380 already on the boards, Airbus claimed to be working on the 'E2'; a sonic cruiser to compete with Boeing's now-defunct program.
Why did Airbus drop it? Did it even exist, or was it just to scare Boeing?
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Katanapilot
I never knew Airbus had thos ideas. But can't it be for similar reasons that the Boeing sonic cruiser was dropped? It simply didn't plug into the law of economics.
I never knew Airbus had thos ideas. But can't it be for similar reasons that the Boeing sonic cruiser was dropped? It simply didn't plug into the law of economics.
Flown on: DC-10-30, B747-200B, B747-300, B747-300SR, B747-400, B747-400D, B767-300, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300
-
- AvObserver
- Posts: 2605
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Airbus conducts future transport design studies, same as Boeing. The transonic transport was just another and Airbus wanted to show they were ready to go with such an airliner if Boeing received enough airline interest to launch the Sonic Cruiser. Sadly, for either maker, the market just isn't there.
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Still pie in the sky.
Some of its tech stuff was not near being developed.....
Some of its tech stuff was not near being developed.....
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Airplanes are developed based on current airline business and anticipated future business. The Sonic Cruiser (and A's alternative) were great ideas during the Dot Com Boom and the airlines were interested. Then came the Dot COm Bust, 9/11 and SARS and Sonic Cruisers were dead - fortunately before B's investment went through the roof. A probably lost even less money on theirs.
-
- NWFltAttendant
- Posts: 331
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
I would have to agree with the airlines not being ready for such technology. Instead theyre looking at dressing up the A300 in another scheme as the A350. ..and the 7E7 wasnt a threat. 
Go yakkin !!!!!!
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Instead theyre looking at dressing up the A300 in another scheme as the A350.
Ugh. Come on. That means the 707, 727, 737, and 757 were all the same plane with different names.
N
Ugh. Come on. That means the 707, 727, 737, and 757 were all the same plane with different names.
N
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
That means the 707, 727, 737, and 757 were all the same plane with different names.
If I had a nickel for every time one of the Airheads on this site had said that, I would be as rich as Tuh-ray-zuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
In any case, the Sonic Cruiser idea is still a winner in my humble opinion. The labor cost savings and improved utilization that would come from reducing block times by 10-15% would be considerably greater than the cost of greater fuel consumption unless oil prices went even higher than they are today.
If I had a nickel for every time one of the Airheads on this site had said that, I would be as rich as Tuh-ray-zuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
In any case, the Sonic Cruiser idea is still a winner in my humble opinion. The labor cost savings and improved utilization that would come from reducing block times by 10-15% would be considerably greater than the cost of greater fuel consumption unless oil prices went even higher than they are today.
-
- dogfighter2111
- Posts: 1867
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Aircraft manufacturers will still be looking into designs like this, but an aircraft like concorde would never be designed again, because a lot of countries would not accept Concorde into it's Airspace due to the sonic boom.
-
- katanapilot
- Posts: 157
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
although designs are on the way that could minimize the sonic boom to acceptable levels. i think i'll see a next-gen sst in my lifetime.
-
- NWFltAttendant
- Posts: 331
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Gig...
give all of us a freakin' break... the 707, 727, 737, and 757 look nothing alike. The 707 is a 4-engine aircraft, the 727 is a t-tail trijet, and the 737 is a short to medium range twin jet..... oh yes.. the 757, thats really similar to the 707
give all of us a freakin' break... the 707, 727, 737, and 757 look nothing alike. The 707 is a 4-engine aircraft, the 727 is a t-tail trijet, and the 737 is a short to medium range twin jet..... oh yes.. the 757, thats really similar to the 707
Go yakkin !!!!!!
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
"That means the 707, 727, 737, and 757 were all the same plane with different names."
They were different airframes, only the manufacturer was the same and the nose designs were similar.
Eventually the interest in producing trans-sonic and supersonic civil transports will come back to a point of fruition, however, theres still alot of issues to address before it will be affordable again, such as fuel efficiency costs and economics, much less increasing noise restraints. Instead, biz jets will be the most likely candidates, such as detailed in Popular Science.
They were different airframes, only the manufacturer was the same and the nose designs were similar.
Eventually the interest in producing trans-sonic and supersonic civil transports will come back to a point of fruition, however, theres still alot of issues to address before it will be affordable again, such as fuel efficiency costs and economics, much less increasing noise restraints. Instead, biz jets will be the most likely candidates, such as detailed in Popular Science.
From the shores of the sea we have come afar, we have risen high, among the stars.
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Ugh. Come on. That means the 707, 727, 737, and 757 were all the same plane with different names.
Folks, Gigneil assumed that this was understood to be an absurdity. He was really arguing that it is just as absurd to say the same thing of the A300 and A350.
Folks, Gigneil assumed that this was understood to be an absurdity. He was really arguing that it is just as absurd to say the same thing of the A300 and A350.
-
- DfwRevolution
- Posts: 9308
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
give all of us a freakin' break... the 707, 727, 737, and 757 look nothing alike. The 707 is a 4-engine aircraft, the 727 is a t-tail trijet, and the 737 is a short to medium range twin jet..... oh yes.. the 757, thats really similar to the 707
Give you a break? Try getting a clue first
Gigneil drew a perfect analogy between the A300 and the A350, they are no different than the evolution from the 707 to the 737NG. Only your ignorance stands in the way. The A300, A330, A340, and possibly A350 all share the same fuselage diameter, but the A330/A340 have modern wings, different engine configurations, different tales ect.
This is the exact same way the 707 tube has matured. The 737NG and 757 are the exact same upper bubble as the 707, with new engines, wings, ect.
Aircraft manufacturers will still be looking into designs like this, but an aircraft like concorde would never be designed again, because a lot of countries would not accept Concorde into it's Airspace due to the sonic boom.
Psh.. that's a gross gross exaggeration. In 2001, prior to Teir One's roll-out, who here would have thought a reusable space-tourist vehicle would be proven technology today? The aerospace industry is full of suprises, for all we know, the 777's replacement could be a high-subsonic or supersonic aircraft...
[Edited 2004-11-19 01:17:59]
Give you a break? Try getting a clue first
Gigneil drew a perfect analogy between the A300 and the A350, they are no different than the evolution from the 707 to the 737NG. Only your ignorance stands in the way. The A300, A330, A340, and possibly A350 all share the same fuselage diameter, but the A330/A340 have modern wings, different engine configurations, different tales ect.
This is the exact same way the 707 tube has matured. The 737NG and 757 are the exact same upper bubble as the 707, with new engines, wings, ect.
Aircraft manufacturers will still be looking into designs like this, but an aircraft like concorde would never be designed again, because a lot of countries would not accept Concorde into it's Airspace due to the sonic boom.
Psh.. that's a gross gross exaggeration. In 2001, prior to Teir One's roll-out, who here would have thought a reusable space-tourist vehicle would be proven technology today? The aerospace industry is full of suprises, for all we know, the 777's replacement could be a high-subsonic or supersonic aircraft...
[Edited 2004-11-19 01:17:59]
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Why does this look like a model rocket made by Estes?
-
- DfwRevolution
- Posts: 9308
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
Why does this look like a model rocket made by Estes?
Indeed... very interesting wingtip configuration. The current vouge of wingtips are called monotips. Like the name implies, they are a single surface that may stretch above and below the wing. In nature, many bird feathers form "slotted wingtips" which are much more complex and drag reducing. They could be spun-off for commercial use, but so far they're complexity makes them too difficult to manufacture affordably.
I've never seen a man-made slotted wingtip, but I imagine that's what is on the E2 concept.
IMO Airbus should have moved on a second generation Concorde in the late 90s, then introduce the Concorde-G2 and A380 side-by-side. RD dollars would obviously stretched thin, but more partnerships or perhaps a less ambitious A340NG would have made it possible.
What I was thinking was the same Concorde airframe with newer, lighter alloys. Re-engine with the PW F135 supercrusing turbofan, shed a few tons with new avionics and systems. Replace drooping nose with synthetic vision system, sheding several more tons. A modest improvement, rather than starting from scratch, would be much more economical from a design and production perspective.
Indeed... very interesting wingtip configuration. The current vouge of wingtips are called monotips. Like the name implies, they are a single surface that may stretch above and below the wing. In nature, many bird feathers form "slotted wingtips" which are much more complex and drag reducing. They could be spun-off for commercial use, but so far they're complexity makes them too difficult to manufacture affordably.
I've never seen a man-made slotted wingtip, but I imagine that's what is on the E2 concept.
IMO Airbus should have moved on a second generation Concorde in the late 90s, then introduce the Concorde-G2 and A380 side-by-side. RD dollars would obviously stretched thin, but more partnerships or perhaps a less ambitious A340NG would have made it possible.
What I was thinking was the same Concorde airframe with newer, lighter alloys. Re-engine with the PW F135 supercrusing turbofan, shed a few tons with new avionics and systems. Replace drooping nose with synthetic vision system, sheding several more tons. A modest improvement, rather than starting from scratch, would be much more economical from a design and production perspective.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
-
- katanapilot
- Posts: 157
- Joined:
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
excellent ideas! i particularily like the synthetic vision one. makes so much sense...and reminds me of just how low-tech the first generation was.
one thing is for sure: whoevever makes the next generation SST, it will be one hell of an aircraft.
one thing is for sure: whoevever makes the next generation SST, it will be one hell of an aircraft.
RE: Airbus E2 'Sonic Cruiser'
I didn't know about a Eurosonic, it is likely they would have competed is SC was a hit; that was why it was dropped, cuz SC got slammed.
Keep in mind though, 7E7 came from the Boeing Sonic Cruiser project, it was the option of the more efficent cruiser as opposed to the faster counterpart that got the attention of the airlines. Remember they claimed that SC should use the same fuel and go faster, hence, 7E7 would used the same engines to fly slower and use less fuel. I'm not saying that Trent 1000's are capable to Mach 0.98, but that was the follow-on inspiration for the 7E7. Boeing's SC still is a good idea.
Forgive me, but the idea that a sonic airliner market does not exist is bull. They are there, it is just the currently aimed customers do not BELIEVE the project will work. Once they believe, they will invest because they will determine it may be worth their investment of time & money -- that is a market -- the willingness of a whole bunch of people to purchase a product and to do so continually based on their own funds, agendas, interests, etc.
>>"Aircraft manufacturers will still be looking into designs like this, but an aircraft like concorde would never be designed again, because a lot of countries would not accept Concorde into it's Airspace due to the sonic boom."<<
That is true IF AND ONLY IF another sonic was designed exactly like Concorde, by looks and performance parameters. To imply absolutely never another SST, you've got to be an idiot, I suggest looking up the phrases "Quiet Supersonic" ,"Pentagon" and "Northrop".
>>"one thing is for sure: whoevever makes the next generation SST, it will be one hell of an aircraft."<<
You have no idea, God I wish I could show you.
Keep in mind though, 7E7 came from the Boeing Sonic Cruiser project, it was the option of the more efficent cruiser as opposed to the faster counterpart that got the attention of the airlines. Remember they claimed that SC should use the same fuel and go faster, hence, 7E7 would used the same engines to fly slower and use less fuel. I'm not saying that Trent 1000's are capable to Mach 0.98, but that was the follow-on inspiration for the 7E7. Boeing's SC still is a good idea.
Forgive me, but the idea that a sonic airliner market does not exist is bull. They are there, it is just the currently aimed customers do not BELIEVE the project will work. Once they believe, they will invest because they will determine it may be worth their investment of time & money -- that is a market -- the willingness of a whole bunch of people to purchase a product and to do so continually based on their own funds, agendas, interests, etc.
>>"Aircraft manufacturers will still be looking into designs like this, but an aircraft like concorde would never be designed again, because a lot of countries would not accept Concorde into it's Airspace due to the sonic boom."<<
That is true IF AND ONLY IF another sonic was designed exactly like Concorde, by looks and performance parameters. To imply absolutely never another SST, you've got to be an idiot, I suggest looking up the phrases "Quiet Supersonic" ,"Pentagon" and "Northrop".
>>"one thing is for sure: whoevever makes the next generation SST, it will be one hell of an aircraft."<<
You have no idea, God I wish I could show you.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 2707200X, 777Mech, 880dc8707, a318, ah414211, AH45, AirportRival, AMALH747430, Antarius, ATLFlyer323, ATLgaUSA, ATLTowerboy, BA744PHX, bobd6, bradyj23, cairns, caliboy93, codc10, corkscrew, CrewBunk, czpdx, DEN1895, Europecc, flyinglen, flymco753, glbltrvlr, gregn21, HAWKXP, Ishrion, jayunited, jetblueguy22, jpetekyxmd80, kanban, MD80MKE, MIflyer12, mjba257, mrrockoutloud, N353SK, PA727, publius1787, qf2220, Revelation, SCFlyer, SESGDL, sunking737, TropicalSky, TWA772LR, USPIT10L and 336 guests