Baby Boom demonstrator unveiled

Can anyone ELI5 why this is so difficult to do in 2016? It seems to me it was done commercially already 20 years ago and Militarily no problem what so ever. Is it just the size? Are there regulations regarding traditional commercial routes that would hinder it?

a reply to: sputniksteve

Supersonic aircraft can't fly supersonic over populated areas. Concorde had to fly 250 nm off shore before it could go supersonic, and had to slow to subsonic the same distance off shore. These aircraft are designed to drastically reduce the footprint and effects of the sonic boom they produce so they can go supersonic in areas other aircraft can't.

Plus the cost per hour now has come down significantly from the Concord days.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Which is a shame, I love the Aerion's looks, but I doubt it'll ever fly.

Could Airbus be facing pressure from its big international airline customers to kill the Aerion out of fear that if could cut into the long-distance 1st class service that keeps carriers like Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, and Singapore in the black?

A boutique service flying 6-10 passengers in an Aerion, even at $15k a head, would obliterate sales of super-luxury tickets like Emirates's suites.

a reply to: Barnalby

I can definitely see that happening.

I've only seen one picture of the demonstrator, despite searching for more. Makes me think it is far from complete. I also read an article that says this demonstrator has three engines. I can't see that from the pic. Guessing the reporter mixed up the stats with the airliner, maybe?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

Of course they will, but do you really think people, especially business people are going to pass up the chance to be at a meeting in London at lunch, and home for dinner on the same day, no matter what the eco groups say? They're going to be the primary market, other than the two orders from airlines.

Nope but NY to London is a whole different issue opposed to flying over the CONUS or heck even the EU which may be more difficult to convince IMHO

originally posted by: Barnalby
Could Airbus be facing pressure from its big international airline customers to kill the Aerion out of fear that if could cut into the long-distance 1st class service that keeps carriers like Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, and Singapore in the black?

Thats really a great thought I had not considered pressure from the big airlines. However, I can see them being pragmatic an buying the air-frame to stay competitive. Im still thinking that this will be the play toy of the 1% more than a revenue service craft.

a reply to: FredT

The article states over sea routes such as sanfransisco to Paris.....its been a few years since I went to school but I assume this still contains a large portion of flight over land? Seems an odd flight, why not LA to Sydney?

a reply to: FredT

As long as the FAA and EASA give approval, that's all that matters. The eco groups can bitch all they want, but if it gets approval and the boom is below nuisance level, then they can deal with it.

a reply to: Forensick

For routes like that they'll be able to go supersonic without having to go the requisite 250 miles.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Doubly so if you were to build a swing-wing bird that could operate out of LCA.

I'm actually shocked that nobody has considered that as an option, especially given BA-1 service nowadays. Speak nothing of giving it the short-firld capability to fly to places such as the Colorado resort towns, Jackson Hole, Bar Harbor, the Caribbean, and the Alps, where LCA runway lengths are the norm.

Maybe it's just the kid who grew up reading Tintin in me who wants to see a supersonic variable geometry tri-jet business aircraft in the flesh.

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Zaphod58

Doubly so if you were to build a swing-wing bird that could operate out of LCA.

For a military it makes sense. They do not always have to factor in MRO etc. I cannot imagine how much the MRO of civilian swing wing would be. The addition cost would be a negative factor in the cost per seat mile etc that traditional airlines use to determine the profitability of a route etc.

Is there a comparison between size and speed, eg. A F1 car can go fast but needs refueling regular, a large jet is heavy and can go miles as its performance is optimized for fuel efficiency, a supersonic business jet, I assume some sort of modeling that you can carry enough fuel to push an engine to its max or are these new engines more efficient at high performance not requiring reheat erc?

What size runway they need is another querie..

a reply to: FredT

I'm thinking more the potential of a swing-wing design with good short/medium field performance in the private/corporate jet market.

You're right, the cost will be a major turn-off for commercial carriers, but for the buyers that would even be considering an SSBJ, the extra $25-50M and maintenance costs for a swing-wing will be more than worth it if they can fly nonstop between Westchester and Breckenridge or San Francisco and Bar Harbor or between Dubai and the high Swiss airfields in 2-3 hours without having to stop at a larger airstrip and transfer to a plane that can fly the last leg. In fact, the short-field capability that a swing-wing will get you could be THE thing that sells an SSBJ.

They have the XB-1 in the wind tunnel, preparing for a Mach 0.3 test tomorrow. That will simulate low speed aerodynamics, such as takeoff and landing.

Boom Technologies has completed wind tunnel testing of a scale model and has begun building structures for the scaled prototype. The aircraft will not make an attempt at using quieting technology for supersonic flight, so will be restricted to over water supersonic flight.

YAY cant wait for pics