Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

HAB911

(8,782 posts)
Sat Mar 25, 2017, 08:25 AM Mar 2017

Fly To London From New York In 3 Hours: Flights Will Speed Up With World's Fastest Passenger Jet

A Colorado startup was one step closer toward its ambitious goal of building supersonic passenger jets capable of crossing the Atlantic in slightly more than three hours after securing $33 million in funding.

snip

“This funds our first airplane, all the way through flight tests,” Boom founder and CEO Blake Scholl told TechCrunch. “Now we have all the pieces we need – technology, suppliers and capital – to go out and make some history and set some speed records.”

Boom Supersonic said its passenger jet will fly at Mach 2.2, or 1,451 miles per hour, and carry 45 passengers.

While the company will not be the first to build a supersonic passenger jet, it would be the first to offer supersonic flights to passengers at reasonable — although not cheap — prices. The supersonic Concorde brought passengers across the Atlantic in three and a half hours for nearly three decades before it was put into retirement in 2003. A one-way ticket on the Concorde cost $18,500 in today's dollars; a ride on a Boom flight will cost just $2,500.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fly To London From New York In 3 Hours: Flights Will Speed Up With World's Fastest Passenger Jet (Original Post) HAB911 Mar 2017 OP
Add two hours wait time at the airport... nt Xipe Totec Mar 2017 #1
And another two hours going through the COLGATE4 Mar 2017 #2
I flew on the Concorde three times on upgrades. To Europe, it was a terrible... NNadir Mar 2017 #3
Supersonic flight is very fuel inefficient. mn9driver Mar 2017 #4
That isn't the most judiciously chosen company name I've ever seen ... eppur_se_muova Mar 2017 #5
The performance gain seems too small to be commercially viable. ManiacJoe Mar 2017 #6

NNadir

(33,363 posts)
3. I flew on the Concorde three times on upgrades. To Europe, it was a terrible...
Sat Mar 25, 2017, 09:33 AM
Mar 2017

...experience, since one arrived in Paris from New York at physiological 4 or 5 in the afternoon, whereas in Paris, it was 9 or 10. By the time you cleared customs, got a cab, and got to your hotel, it was at least 11; everything was closed.

If you're an insomniac - I am - your sleep schedule is completely screwed up for several days.

It was kind of cool coming back to the US, since you arrived before you left in theory. I only did that once. The other two times I flew to France. It actually wasn't a good idea.

I would never have paid full price for a ticket on the plane. It was much more pleasant flying business class on Air France (or other airlines) to and from Europe.

I once got upgraded to first class from business on Air France as an apology for a screw up on their part. Best flight ever.

I wrote more fully about my thoughts on the Concorde and related concepts elsewhere: The Utility of Light: Getting Real with the Existing Energy Infrastructure.

Looking back on my life, I feel kind of guilty for the life I lead in those days, since supersonic aircraft are unnecessary & unwise since they exacerbate the environmental disaster before us.

mn9driver

(4,410 posts)
4. Supersonic flight is very fuel inefficient.
Sat Mar 25, 2017, 09:54 AM
Mar 2017

It's a very high drag flight regime. It's also hard on airplanes. The skin heating alone causes all sorts of problems.

The stock market is up, and airlines are currently making record profits, so it makes sense that someone would decide the time is right for this. But the obstacles to sustained profitability for supersonic transport are considerable. I would bet against them.

eppur_se_muova

(36,222 posts)
5. That isn't the most judiciously chosen company name I've ever seen ...
Sat Mar 25, 2017, 03:56 PM
Mar 2017

considering the problems with sonic booms which limited Concorde's use, and the crash which ended it.

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
6. The performance gain seems too small to be commercially viable.
Sun Mar 26, 2017, 07:08 PM
Mar 2017

The Concorde did 1350 mph for 3.5 hours to cross the Atlantic. With 2x-3x the passenger space.
I doubt jet engines have gotten that much more efficient for long-range supersonic flight.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Fly To London From New Yo...