The future return of supersonic passenger plane travel.
Dec 2, 2014, 2:23 am
#1
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The future return of supersonic passenger plane travel.
If the following plan from Lockheed Martin (and its partner) and a separate one from Airbus (and its partners) end up coming to fruition on schedule, this would be a welcome development for me and seems likely to expand the affordability of passenger air travel at speeds at or above Mach 1.5:
https://www.yahoo.com/travel/concord...4877.html?hp=1
Unfortunately, these types of plans often end up being aborted well before delivery is even a possibility.
New York to Los Angeles in just over two hours? Passenger jets that fly faster than the speed of sound without that annoying sonic boom?
That could become reality thanks to two projects that aim to bring supersonic planes back to commercial air travel.
That could become reality thanks to two projects that aim to bring supersonic planes back to commercial air travel.
Unfortunately, these types of plans often end up being aborted well before delivery is even a possibility.
Last edited by GUWonder; Dec 2, 2014 at 2:30 am
Dec 2, 2014, 1:03 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Commercial aviation is bifurcating into a luxurious packet of perks for a thin topmost echelon of customers and the no-frills minimum for most others. I can see a super-exclusive supersonic solution designed for a very few free spenders, sort of the great-grandson of the BA A318 LCY-JFK service, but never for the public at large. The 80-passenger craft Lockheed Martin is working on is probably far too large. The 12-passenger Aerion, which Airbus has a hand in, is probably much more like it.
Dec 2, 2014, 2:51 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: UA Silver, Bonvoy Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 21,558
Love this sentence...
...the FAA, concerned about sonic booms going off over sleepy U.S. suburbs, currently bans civilian planes from going all “Danger Zone” in American airspace.
Dec 2, 2014, 7:57 pm
#6
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DFW
Programs: IHG Plat, AA GLD, DL FO, Natl Elite
Posts: 259
As BearX220 said, this will only be for the elite. The rest of us dirty proles will have to settle for a Spirit-type product.
Dec 2, 2014, 10:46 pm
#7
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bloomfield, MI, USA
Programs: DL Gold
Posts: 694
Sort of the way the economy in general works these days, eh? Everything goes to the top 0.1%, and the rest get the crumbs off of the table. In intercontinental front cabins, these really are the good old days, compared with 1960s F. Back of the plane continues its slide towards steerage. Reminds me of the 1970s SNL skit, showing servants in F peeling grapes, while the Y pax are the galley slaves manning the oars.
Dec 3, 2014, 1:20 am
#8
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Commercial aviation is bifurcating into a luxurious packet of perks for a thin topmost echelon of customers and the no-frills minimum for most others. I can see a super-exclusive supersonic solution designed for a very few free spenders, sort of the great-grandson of the BA A318 LCY-JFK service, but never for the public at large. The 80-passenger craft Lockheed Martin is working on is probably far too large. The 12-passenger Aerion, which Airbus has a hand in, is probably much more like it.
If these plans come to fruition and actual delivery, and if the operational and financing costs are lower than it was for Concorde, then my bets are: that the 80 pax one has more of a viable common carrier future than the 12 pax one; and that the quasi-democratization of supersonic travel is going to happen, it's just a matter of when.
Dec 3, 2014, 5:52 am
#9
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: AA Platinum, UA Gold, Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 179
I'd think suborbital flight would be more realistic in the next decade or so. That would make more sense for US/EU to Asia flights, especially considering the population and economic growth factors. The drag and design costs of flying really fast in any atmosphere are really expensive. A viable SSTO engine is really the issue there.
Dec 3, 2014, 7:37 am
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
While I would love to see supersonic aircraft return to TATL flights, I don't see the point with either of these aircraft. They're far too small and far too slow to have any kind of real use. What is needed is something that can cruise in the range of Mach 3-5 and carry something like 200-300 passengers with a sizable range. That I could see being a success.
Dec 3, 2014, 9:59 am
#12
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
While I would love to see supersonic aircraft return to TATL flights, I don't see the point with either of these aircraft. They're far too small and far too slow to have any kind of real use. What is needed is something that can cruise in the range of Mach 3-5 and carry something like 200-300 passengers with a sizable range. That I could see being a success.
But hypersonic passenger aircraft won't come without technology breakthroughs and pricing that supports economy of scale. Concorde never achieved the latter, and was doomed from the start; national and airline pride kept Concorde flying as long as it did. (I have to say, it was a thrilling ride to see the machmeter needle exceed 2.0 with nary a clue you had done so, and to be able to look out the window to see dark inky star-studded skies and to discern the earth's curvature.)
Dec 3, 2014, 1:27 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Remember that there are inherent disadvantages to disrupting a successful, stable economic model. The last time such a thing happened on a meaningfully large scale (Concorde doesn't count) was when the 747 came in 44 years ago. It ruptured comfortable economies of scale and caused yield chaos.
Regardless of the coolness of the technology, hypersonic or quadrasonic or whatever, if the airlines don't think they can make money at it, it'll go no further than the Discovery Channel.
Dec 3, 2014, 1:45 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Obviously the plane would need to be cost effective, but if LHR-JFK could be run twice daily with a single aircraft taking 200 seats in each direction it could be greatly successful. A major part of the problem with Concorde is that it was too slow to be able to make double daily roundtrip flights with a single aircraft.
Even an aircraft with something like a 4 seat F cabin and 190 seat W cabin could be interesting. If F sold at the current price of TATL F and W sold for the current price of TATL J I could see that being successful (again assuming the cost of operations were to remain in balance). No need for large flat-bed seats on 2 hour flights.