Supersonic Aircraft

[Serendipity]

There has been an article in the Guardian about new designs for supersonic aircraft. It went on suggest that they could start flying within a couple of years. See http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/11/new-era-supersonic-air-travel-concorde Note all the designs have elongated noses and curvy wings. This is to diffuse the sonic boom into frequencies we can't hear.

There is one exception to this. Airbus have just had a US patent granted to get a supersonic aircraft to fly vertically so that the sonic boom goes horizontally in the sky. That's all I know, so will need to look into more details on this one.

In another development a group of people are trying to get at least one Concorde flying within four years. See http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...gh-concorde-could-fly-again-within-four-years . If all goes to plan it should be in a much better condition that the one in New York when I had lunch under its wing in the Spring of this year.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I don't think the economics are there, except perhaps for a niche market on very long routes for rich people? But cheap video conferencing undermines that. There is better environmental and economic reasons to examine ekranoplan and airships.

The Concorde thing is just a fan thing, not a commercial service. We are a long way from seeing supersonic flight for non-military use.

 

[Serendipity]

I don't think the economics are there, except perhaps for a niche market on very long routes for rich people? But cheap video conferencing undermines that. There is better environmental and economic reasons to examine ekranoplan and airships.

The Concorde thing is just a fan thing, not a commercial service. We are a long way from seeing supersonic flight for non-military use.

Agreed to a certain extent - a lot of the aircraft being designed are for the VIP / corporate small jet market - the 18 to 20 passenger mark.

However, there are a few for quite a lot more passengers. I personally can't see the big corporations spending the money on designing such aircraft if they did not think there was a realistic chance that they would one day come into service. The space industry is in part driving that market - see the Skylon spinoff - I think it's called Lapcat or some such name - as an instance of what I mean. I would expect that to see service about 2025 - not that far away in time. The engines which are the crucial technology development are already in the in-depth development part of the project cycle.

Concorde may be a fan thing - but there may be enough interest commercially to get one flying the shows.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I personally can't see the big corporations spending the money on designing such aircraft

I think it's a combination of professional interest and ego. It's cheap enough if they don't actually start making a prototype and can result in patents (often done simply for portfolio and exchange with allies to avoid being sued fo something related in something else) and ideas for mainline projects. R&D: The R is often "blue sky" stuff with no immediate application, the D is Development of a particular product. Any company not doing "R" is eventually held hostage by IP of competitors and only able to licence stuff.