‘Groundbreaking’ flights six-times faster than speed of sound one step closer..

[Mad_Jay]

The acceleration and deceleration would be insane for that distance to get up to speed.

Concorde was also banned from going supersonic over land, so this would likely be the same.

To get to Rome it would probably fly out to sea, around France, past Portugal and Spain and then leg it up the med.

Then slow down in time to be subsonic for flying over Italy.

 

[tangey]

G-Force innit. You can go a billion miles an hour and not notice it, it's the acceleration that gets you. As long as it's slow and steady you've got nothing to worry about.

I do wonder what hitting a bird at mach 6 will do

pretty sure the bird would die

 

[tangey]

Concorde was also banned from going supersonic over land, so this would likely be the same.

To get to Rome it would probably fly out to sea, around France, past Portugal and Spain and then leg it up the med.

Then slow down in time to be subsonic for flying over Italy.

Somewhat premature me thinks to be talking about destinations, nevermind flightpaths !

 

[Mad_Jay]

Somewhat premature me thinks to be talking about destinations, nevermind flightpaths !

Probably as made up as this concept will be

 

[Grrrrr]

Ars Technica went into some details of how to mitigate the sonic boom for supersonic aircraft.

After Concorde, a long road back to supersonic air travel

Supersonic flight without loud booms? NASA is working on that.

arstechnica.com

 

[nalla]

wont be cheap and so wont be available to us mere mortals.

 

[Tuppy_Glossop]

I do wonder what hitting a bird at mach 6 will do

Trouble with the missus?

 

[Brazo]

Actual in flight times are rarely the problem it’s the drive to the airport the parking the time taken on the parking bus, the 2-3 hours you need to arrive before take off. You’ve lost half a day before you even board the plane. Imagine the easy wins that could reduce overall travel time if these were looked at and there’s zero additional co2.

 

[Freefaller]

Be interesting to know how much CO2 would be generated vs a standard 8 hour flight.

It's good that people like yourself think of that. Personally that doesn't even venture into my mind nor does it impact the decisions I made.

Thank you for asking an interesting question! (no sarcasm!)

 

[Freefaller]

Elon Musk's ideas about it went nowhere and did nothing. And Virgin Hyperloop went out of business. But the Europeans have at least drawn up standards for the concept.

Technically it can be used for freight easily enough but designing it for people is just not practicable at the moment.

 

[Stu999]

Concorde II?

There's already a company trying to do Concorde II, the unfortunately named Boom Supersonic (https://boomsupersonic.com/).

I think it's been at least five years since they started making announcements, and they're still working on testing a prototype smaller plane.

Boom Supersonic XB-1 hits new speed record in latest test flight

Boom's XB-1 supersonic jet took its fifth test flight out of Mojave Air & Space Port on Oct 7th, 2024 setting a few new records in the process. The XB-1 is the one-third-scale platform that Boom is using as the foundation for its eventual Overture aircraft that aims to bring back commercialized…

newatlas.com

 

[robj20]

Wait and see if these go ahead first.

Boom - Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

Making the World Dramatically More Accessible

boomsupersonic.com

We're in talks with them for using our equipment.

 

[Nasher]

Should have just built new Concorde aircraft.

 

[Devilman]

Should have just built new Concorde aircraft.

Concorde was never economically viable.

 

[adam cool dude]

Concorde was never economically viable.

Pretty much why the 747 is now dead and the A380 didn't even last 20 years. No money in it.

 

[pastymuncher]

The problem isn't so much the engines it's more a case of what are you going to make the aircraft out of. Just look at the SR-71 Blackbird, that does around half the speed and needed exotic fuel (that leaked on the ground as the seals only worked at high speed) and a specially designed skin to withstand the temperatures at mach 3 and was stupidly expensive to build. This thing is supposed to do mach 6 and carry passengers. I don't think we have the technology to achieve this while making it comercially viable yet. I liken it to something like the Eagle annuals and the sci-fi films of the 50's/60's and where they thought we would have advanced to by now. We are nowhere near where they thought we would be and it all turned out to be a pipe dream, a bit like a mach 6 sub-orbital airliner right now.

 

[manic111]

"Groundbreaking" feels like an ill thought through term for an aircraft

 

[Macky]

Certainly a cool technological aspiration. But I'm not convinced by the business case!

 

[Alibaba99]

Pretty much why the 747 is now dead and the A380 didn't even last 20 years. No money in it.

Plenty of operator's are putting their A380s back into use, and some would like more if they could get hold of them.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

G-Force innit. You can go a billion miles an hour and not notice it, it's the acceleration that gets you. As long as it's slow and steady you've got nothing to worry about.

I do wonder what hitting a bird at mach 6 will do

Nothing, as you won't be encountering any birds at the altitude it would need to go that fast, basically anything above 37,000ft and there's no chance of any avian collisions. Venus Aerospace plan on mach 6 at an altitude of 170,000ft.