Boom $5k return - 3.4 hours LHR/JFK

Old Mar 24, 16, 2:20 pm
  #16  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 207
There is more chance of a Titanic II or the original Concorde flying again. Why spend $5000 on this when you can get an ex-EU fare in first for less than that?
Dean Cooperfield_West is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:26 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 124
Because you have an important meeting in London on Tuesday morning, an equally important meeting in New York on Tuesday afternoon, need to be back in London Wednesday morning and don't fancy a red-eye.
esspeebee is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:34 pm
  #18  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by esspeebee View Post
Because you have an important meeting in London on Tuesday morning, an equally important meeting in New York on Tuesday afternoon, need to be back in London Wednesday morning and don't fancy a red-eye.
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.
Dean Cooperfield_West is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:34 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Berlin, Germany; Toronto, Canada; and SW Florida, USA
Programs: UA 1K, BA Gold, Hyatt Globalist, and assorted others
Posts: 24,092
Originally Posted by Dean Cooperfield_West View Post
There is more chance of a Titanic II or the original Concorde flying again. Why spend $5000 on this when you can get an ex-EU fare in first for less than that?
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.
LondonElite is online now  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:39 pm
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Hague, NL
Programs: GMLFL, Life 2.0 - Mucci Premiere Classe & des Chevaliers Toulousiens
Posts: 22,850
Originally Posted by LondonElite View Post
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.
Maybe I should tell you about that time when a client tried to get hold of me but couldn't because I wasn't at my desk where the phone was...

Times change.
henkybaby is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:43 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 124
Originally Posted by Dean Cooperfield_West View Post
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.
Except that the five hour time difference means that your 2.5 hour flight taking off at 12:00 lands at 09:30...
esspeebee is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:46 pm
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Berlin, Germany; Toronto, Canada; and SW Florida, USA
Programs: UA 1K, BA Gold, Hyatt Globalist, and assorted others
Posts: 24,092
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!
LondonElite is online now  
Old Mar 24, 16, 2:48 pm
  #23  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Hague, NL
Programs: GMLFL, Life 2.0 - Mucci Premiere Classe & des Chevaliers Toulousiens
Posts: 22,850
Originally Posted by LondonElite View Post
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!
Sounds eh... super cool.

(And I mean that. I am also truly nostalgic for the days I did not have an electronic slave bracelet!)
henkybaby is offline  
Old Mar 24, 16, 3:36 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JAX
Programs: Former BA/AA/CP/LY employee, BA Executive Club Blue, IHG Platinum, Samsung Platinum
Posts: 2,890
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

JAXBA is offline  
Old Mar 25, 16, 2:20 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AVP & PEK
Programs: UA 1K 1.6MM, Hertz PC
Posts: 3,266
Originally Posted by enjoyingit View Post
...until someone finds a way of eradicating the sonic boom...
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!
narvik is online now  
Old Mar 25, 16, 2:31 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: 86,656
Originally Posted by London_traveller View Post
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?
The quote doesn't say *another* European london-based carrier. It could be the case that they're partnering with Virgin and Virgin has (also) signed a letter of intent.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Mar 25, 16, 4:28 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: 47,167
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.
pinniped is offline  
Old Mar 27, 16, 8:43 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 1,342
That is the worst name for an airline. I'd be afraid that mentioning the airline's name within earshot of a TSA agent is going to get me in trouble.
t325 is offline  
Old Mar 27, 16, 12:57 pm
  #29  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Proud Charter Member of the OUM
Posts: 21,193
Originally Posted by Dean Cooperfield_West View Post
There is more chance of a Titanic II or the original Concorde flying again. Why spend $5000 on this when you can get an ex-EU fare in first for less than that?
Welcome to the Titanic II, BTW:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_II
DenverBrian is offline  
Old Mar 27, 16, 7:21 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: ORD
Programs: United 100K, Etihad Gold, Marriot Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 501
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!
steveo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: