Supersonic planes of the future

[Jez]

adjective: feasible
possible to do easily or conveniently.

Using the definition of the word, I don't think you can describe the operation of Concorde aircraft as that.

Indeed, i think the word plasmahal is looking for is that it proved that it was possible rather than very feasible.

I think the same applies today to be honest. Yes there have been massive advances in aviation technology, but these advances do not mean that the gulf between subsonic and supersonic is any narrower than it ever was. We also have the environmental lobby these days. I cant see supersonic ever being feasible in any currently recognisable form tbh.

 

[platinum87]

Concorde was perfectly feasible, just was not a long term financially viable business.

adjective: feasible
possible to do easily or conveniently.

Using the definition of the word, I don't think you can describe the operation of Concorde aircraft as that.

Indeed, i think the word plasmahal is looking for is that it proved that it was possible rather than very feasible.

I think the same applies today to be honest. Yes there have been massive advances in aviation technology, but these advances do not mean that the gulf between subsonic and supersonic is any narrower than it ever was. We also have the environmental lobby these days. I cant see supersonic ever being feasible in any currently recognisable form tbh.

The fuel cost for a flight from London - New York is roughly £50, for a Concorde it would be £300.

A seat would cost 3-4x as much as an economy seat on a modern plane. Which is pretty much 1st class prices.

Both British airways and Air France ran the Concord in profit the entire time.

The problem is not with the operation, but with development. This is why Boeing or Airbus will not make such a plane as they cannot sell enough of them.

That being said, seems like 2 companies are developing such a plane.

Will they make a loss? Maybe, either way someone will buy and operate it, and they will make a profit

 

[alec]

Concorde could only realistically operate on few select routes due to noise, range, and demand limitations.
Apparently demand for supersonic travel is not very high.
Makes sense Virgin is looking at a smaller plane. Smaller the plane, less noise it makes supersonic, maybe even fit requirements to fly over populated areas.
Also sell to ultra-rich for personal use.

 

[ianh]

Calling it a "passenger" plane is a bit of a misnomer. Really it's just a business jet like a Gulfstream/Learjet etc that happens to be supersonic and as such, it's not the sort of thing you'd be taking the wife and kids to Majorca in for a 2 week all inclusive.

If this thing ever got even slightly close to reality, it'd be for companies/people with Billions in the bank to waste on this vanity project.

 

[plasmahal]

adjective: feasible
possible to do easily or conveniently.

Using the definition of the word, I don't think you can describe the operation of Concorde aircraft as that.

Concorde was designed and built and operated for many years, so it was feasible as it was self proven.

It was convenient to those who could afford it.

So it was 100% feasible as well as executed, but the costs were the main issue.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Concorde was designed and built and operated for many years, so it was feasible as it was self proven.

It was convenient to those who could afford it.

So it was 100% feasible as well as executed, but the costs were the main issue.

If costs were the main issue despite others above stating that wasn't the problem, then how is it feasible as a business model? You seem to be saying it's feasible as long as money is no object.

 

[sanaxe1]

Boom super sonic are doing one as well. Orders from Virgin and Japan airlines.

https://boomsupersonic.com/

 

[BongoHunter]

I can see planes of the future being slower and electric if we're talking about long haul travel for the masses -

I'm sure there's enough billionaires for a decent market in supersonic business jets as well though! That Boom thing does look cool too.

 

[plasmahal]

If costs were the main issue despite others above stating that wasn't the problem, then how is it feasible as a business model? You seem to be saying it's feasible as long as money is no object.

you never mentioned as a business model, I did.

People think we’ve gone backwards because we’ve already had concorde, however, that sort of proved that it wasn’t feasible.

you meant Concorde as an aircraft.

 

[alec]

Can't see electric passenger liners, not until we run out of oil kerosene completely. And even then LNG or synthetic kerosene would still be ahead of electric.
Electric can compete with petrol in cars by adding a ton of batteries, but planes are just too weight sensitive.

 

[Ayahuasca]

you meant Concorde as an aircraft.

No, I didn't just mean the aircraft itself. It's stating the obvious saying the aircraft on its own is feasible because we've already seen it in operation.

Pretty much everything is feasible if you disregard the finances of it. For something that was apparently easy and convenient, why are we still without a similar commercial aircraft nearly 20 years later?

 

[BongoHunter]

Can't see electric passenger liners, not until we run out of oil kerosene completely. And even then LNG or synthetic kerosene would still be ahead of electric.
Electric can compete with petrol in cars by adding a ton of batteries, but planes are just too weight sensitive.

I agree that current state of the art isn't going to let us build electric passenger jets. But look how far batteries have come in the last 10 years - and 3d printable composites and new materials can also give provide a lot of potential weight reduction - I don't think an electric passenger plane in future is that unlikely - just a long way away... probably be a flying wing type thing doing the speed of a current turboprop or something.

 

[danoliver1]

I will wait for Elon Musks trans Atlantic hyperloop.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

Because Virgin Galactic was such a success....

I'll believe it when I see it.

Plans are already underway apparently Rolls Royce have been co-opted for the engires https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ft-powered-Rolls-Royce-propulsion-system.html

Concorde was perfectly feasible, just was not a long term financially viable business.

Thats the question isn't it, apparently its "business class only" so its an expensive thing for elites, this is the US though where there is no shame attached to personal or corporate wealth.

 

[Stu999]

I will wait for Elon Musks trans Atlantic hyperloop.

I think something like that would be cool too. There has been speculation about a maglev train running in a low pressure tunnel for a journey like that. I’m all for new innovations in travel.

 

[plasmahal]

Thats the question isn't it, apparently its "business class only" so its an expensive thing for elites, this is the US though where there is no shame attached to personal or corporate wealth.

That's it, it will only be accessible by the really wealthy despite most westerners being better off.

Concorde was operated at a loss and the rest of the BA business picked up the slack, it was a status symbol and the jewel in the crown for a fleet of A/C.

 

[BongoHunter]

That's it, it will only be accessible by the really wealthy despite most westerners being better off.

Concorde was operated at a loss and the rest of the BA business picked up the slack, it was a status symbol and the jewel in the crown for a fleet of A/C.

Concorde was profitable for BA according to the interwebz:

How much profit did Concorde make for British Airways?

On average Concorde made and operating profit of £30-50 Million a year for British Airways in the boom years where many passengers were travelling first class. British Airways reportedly received £1.75 Billion in revenue for Concorde services against an operating cost of around £1 Billion. Air France made a much smaller profit.

http://www.concordesst.com/retire/faq_r.html

 

[Eurofighter]

What are you referring to? Virgin Galactic is doing just fine. In fact they have an agreement with NASA for sub orbital flights to train astronauts.

They have been going since 2004 though. Seems slow going for 16 years but I'm still hopeful I guess. Just it seems to be taking ages.

 

[Angilion]

I think there's another factor to be considered - journey time as opposed to flight time. You still have to get from home to the airport, go through all that you need to do to get the passengers and cargo on the plane, do that again in reverse when you land and then get to wherever it is you want to go (which is unlikely to be very close to the airport). Even if new supersonic planes are allowed to go supersonic over land, the only part of the journey time that will be shortened will be the flight time. It will only reduce journey time significantly on longer flights.

The tickets will be more expensive than a subsonic plane and the flight will be less comfortable than first class on a subsonic plane, so who's the market? It's not mass market air travel - subsonic passenger planes are enough for that and would be attractively cheaper. It's not luxury travel because it won't be luxurious. If a meeting really needs to be done as soon as possible that would usually call for a virtual meeting as that would be far quicker. The trading that boomsonic lists as the moral imperative for supersonic planes isn't like the examples of the past they give because those enabled faster trade and/or faster communication. This wouldn't - they're not cargo carriers and they're far slower than existing communication. You don't need to touch someone to do business with them.

Am I missing something?

 

[Zefan]

Carry between 9 and 19 people. Yes that’s what the world needs, lots of small planes chewing fuel and flying a handful of people around!

The world didn't need the Tesla Roadster either.