Boom $5k return - 3.4 hours LHR/JFK
Mar 24, 2016, 1:34 pm
#18
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 207
Assuming one meeting started at 9 and ended at 10.30, you could be at LHR by 11.00, assuming the supersonic flight was at 12.00 you could be in JFK by 2.30pm. By the time you taxi, disembark, and clear customs and immigration is is 4.00pm. You get to the meeting by 4.30pm and finish at 6.00pm. Very optimistic and very tiring.
Mar 24, 2016, 1:34 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
I guess I didn't tell you about the time I flew SSC in the morning to NYC, signed off on a deal, had a glass of champagne, got on the 1400 return Concorde, and had a drink t home in Chelsea (London) with my wife at 2300, about 14 hours after I left the house that morning. Best way to travel.
Mar 24, 2016, 1:39 pm
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Hague, NL
Programs: GMLFL, Life 2.0 - Mucci Premiere Classe & des Chevaliers Toulousiens
Posts: 22,911
I guess I didn't tell you about the time I flew SSC in the morning to NYC, signed off on a deal, had a glass of champagne, got on the 1400 return Concorde, and had a drink t home in Chelsea (London) with my wife at 2300, about 14 hours after I left the house that morning. Best way to travel.
Times change.
Mar 24, 2016, 1:43 pm
#21
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 124
So you just use Skype, or postpone the meeting. Even with a 2.5h flight which is faster than Concorde is still doesn't give you the ability to attend two meetings.
Assuming one meeting started at 9 and ended at 10.30, you could be at LHR by 11.00, assuming the supersonic flight was at 12.00 you could be in JFK by 2.30pm. By the time you taxi, disembark, and clear customs and immigration is is 4.00pm. You get to the meeting by 4.30pm and finish at 6.00pm. Very optimistic and very tiring.
Assuming one meeting started at 9 and ended at 10.30, you could be at LHR by 11.00, assuming the supersonic flight was at 12.00 you could be in JFK by 2.30pm. By the time you taxi, disembark, and clear customs and immigration is is 4.00pm. You get to the meeting by 4.30pm and finish at 6.00pm. Very optimistic and very tiring.
Mar 24, 2016, 1:46 pm
#22
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
Sometimes you just need to be there in person. This particular deal required a person physically present in NY to sign eight copies of a sale/purchase agreement. It wasn't a bad day!
Mar 24, 2016, 1:48 pm
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Hague, NL
Programs: GMLFL, Life 2.0 - Mucci Premiere Classe & des Chevaliers Toulousiens
Posts: 22,911
(And I mean that. I am also truly nostalgic for the days I did not have an electronic slave bracelet!)
Mar 24, 2016, 2:36 pm
#24
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JAX
Programs: Ex-BA/AA/CP/LY staff, BA Executive Club Blue, IHG Diamond, Marriott Silver, Chick-fil-A Red
Posts: 3,588
CNN News article today: there's an impression of the aircraft parked at T5 gate A23: http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/24/aviati...inkId=22650330
Mar 25, 2016, 1:20 am
#25
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AVP & PEK
Programs: UA 1K 1.9MM
Posts: 6,356
Not eradicate, but work has been done to reduce the effect. Not sure if these BOOM folks have access to that research though.
Quiet Supersonic Platform
IMO they need to eradicate the NAME: that will be the bigger hurdle!
Quiet Supersonic Platform
IMO they need to eradicate the NAME: that will be the bigger hurdle!
Mar 25, 2016, 1:31 am
#26
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,413
I read that too and very briefly wondered if it was BA. But there are so many reasons why BA wouldn't go for this kind of thing right now, in terms of commercial viability, risk, etc, I can't believe it's BA.
But if not BA (nor Virgin who are already mentioned), which other "major London-based airline" would it be?
But if not BA (nor Virgin who are already mentioned), which other "major London-based airline" would it be?
Mar 25, 2016, 3:28 pm
#27
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
If someone actually builds the boomless jet at scale, that vastly changes the economics of supersonic. London-New York wasn't a big enough niche to justify a fleet in the long run, but add to TATL all of the North American transcons as well as the Europe-ME-Asia overland routes and it's a different story.
Mar 27, 2016, 11:57 am
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,704
Mar 27, 2016, 6:21 pm
#30
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: ORD
Programs: United 100K, Etihad Gold, Marriot Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 578
I always figured they could make a killing doing LAX-NYC flights this way, of course they would need to deal with the noise issues. Lets say I could leave at 9 am, arrive in LA at 7 am. Could leave LA at 3 pm, and be home by 7 pm, that would be a great deal!