Concorde successor ?

[pmplayer 9,817]

Would be a fascinating thing - at last for me as a Concorde Lover 😘

https://boomsupersonic.com/overture

 

and a page in German Language who says there be first orders from United Airlines - first flights are planned for 2026..

https://t3n.de/news/united-airlines-ueberschalljets-concorde-1382894/?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-de-DE

 

 

cheers 😉

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Concorde with modern avionics... YES PLEASE 😄

[wim123 769]

this is bound to be a failure, not allowed to fly supersonic over land, waste of energy, etc.

[Chock 17,770]

6 minutes ago, wim123 said:

this is bound to be a failure, not allowed to fly supersonic over land, waste of energy, etc.

Read up about it a bit more and you'll see they have addressed those concerns.

[pmplayer 9,817]

15 minutes ago, wim123 said:

this is bound to be a failure, not allowed to fly supersonic over land, waste of energy, etc.

They shure not can offer something that coast millions of bucks and not to be on the right side of the rules; as Alan said  "they have addressed those concerns"

 

cheers 😉

Edited June 6, 2021 by pmplayer

[himmelhorse 1,277]

17 minutes ago, Chock said:

Read up about it a bit more and you'll see they have addressed those concerns.

That appears so but at 88 to 150 seats available it is going to take a bucket load of dollars to fly in it. However, I think Concorde was in much the same boat.  I believe also, that if it is released in MSFS some time tomorrow morning, I could be a buyer LOL

Looks magnificent.

Tony

[pmplayer 9,817]

26 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

  I believe also, that if it is released in MSFS some time tomorrow morning, I could be a buyer LOL

 

Tony

Shure me too ! 🙃

Still awaiting a good "old" Concorde for MSFS..

 

cheers 😉

Edited June 6, 2021 by pmplayer

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

They say they are going to use sustainable fuel. Im not sure what that even means. I dont think it's solar driven? 😄

Also, I read the article, read their homepage info, and subbed to their newsletter. Nowhere did I see how they plan around the noise pollution dilemma. 

[Chock 17,770]

5 minutes ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

They say they are going to use sustainable fuel. Im not sure what that even means. I dont think it's solar driven? 😄

Also, I read the article, read their homepage info, and subbed to their newsletter. Nowhere did I see how they plan around the noise pollution dilemma. 

What they have said on that score, is that aerodynamically it is more sophisticated in how it triggers and dissipates the shockwaves that are the cause of sonic booms. Of course they can't change the laws of physics, but this in combination with the fact that it isn't as big as Concorde allegedly means it is less prone to massive sonic booms, however, the name is a bit of a giveaway as to the fact that it almost certainly does kick off a few.

Concorde got around that by accelerating to Mach 1 when out over water and decelerating when over water too, and I assume this may also have something to do with what Boom is going to do, possibly with more efficient engines which lend themselves more easily to those kind of profiles although it seems to me that on a planet which is two thirds covered with water, there will be plenty of routes it can take where it won't be an issue anyway. We have to bear in mind that a lot of the complaints about Concorde in this regard were more about other airliner manufacturers lobbying their representatives to try and put the block on a rival airliner than they were about tree huggers although even these were quite frequently motivated by their support for 'Murica, where their default position was to object to this Frog and Limey upstart plane.

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Yes, it does make sense going supersonic over water on several routes, but for example going from UK to Asia would mean flying over continental landmasses and that would prevent going supersonic. 

The heavy tubeliners already go pretty fast (like .84 of m1) so the overture wouldn't be able to compete for speed in that regard. It might get there a little bit faster, but not by much. So then their only option is to compete in fuel efficiency and comfort (I wouldn't think they will be able to compete for price per ticket). The delta wing is, as you know, very efficient at high speeds and higher altitudes, but at slower speeds it becomes inefficient. For the route from EGLL to KJFK it would normally use about 40% of it's fuel just getting to its cruise climb. I wonder what technological magic they will put on her to make her overcome that?

[Bobsk8 13,056]

4 hours ago, pmplayer said:

Would be a fascinating thing - at last for me as a Concorde Lover 😘

https://boomsupersonic.com/overture

 

and a page in German Language who says there be first orders from United Airlines - first flights are planned for 2026..

https://t3n.de/news/united-airlines-ueberschalljets-concorde-1382894/?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-de-DE

 

 

cheers 😉

Will never happen. 

[pmplayer 9,817]

24 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Will never happen. 

Maybe not but we will see, and why they can ordered if it will never happend - not to shure for that "never happen" never say never, we never know.. 🤔

 

cheers 😉

[eslader 1,851]

2 hours ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

They say they are going to use sustainable fuel. Im not sure what that even means. I dont think it's solar driven? 😄

Jet fuel is basically diesel fuel. We already have biodiesel which is derived from farm crops. Theoretically it's sustainable. 

I say theoretically because currently it's not - producing it requires energy and until all of that energy is itself sustainable, then biodiesel isn't.

But if every piece of equipment used to grow and harvest it is biodiesel or better yet electric, and you use modern farming practices that don't wreck the land or require gobs of pesticides, and the distillery is run on sustainable electricity (wind/solar/etc), then you could end up with a sustainable hydrocarbon-based fuel. Especially since unlike ethanol, you can transport biodiesel in pipelines instead of having to ship it via truck or train.

 

[Amon1973 1,436]

As an Rolls Royce employee, I'm normally involved in R&D work (at least in some capacity) so hopefully I'll be involved in this engine project. Things like this are rather exciting to have a minor role in, one of the plus factors of working for a company like RR when your into Aerospace/flight Simulation like we all are.

On the video below I help manufacture about half of the engine components on show, it's exciting to see them on show in this video.

 

[ThrottleUp 638]

3 hours ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

Yes, it does make sense going supersonic over water on several routes, but for example going from UK to Asia would mean flying over continental landmasses and that would prevent going supersonic. 

The heavy tubeliners already go pretty fast (like .84 of m1) so the overture wouldn't be able to compete for speed in that regard. It might get there a little bit faster, but not by much. So then their only option is to compete in fuel efficiency and comfort (I wouldn't think they will be able to compete for price per ticket). The delta wing is, as you know, very efficient at high speeds and higher altitudes, but at slower speeds it becomes inefficient. For the route from EGLL to KJFK it would normally use about 40% of it's fuel just getting to its cruise climb. I wonder what technological magic they will put on her to make her overcome that?

The fat tubes do between 850-960 km/h in the cruise (still air speed). This thing will clip along at 1,800km/h.

Tokyo-Seattle for example.

• Fat tube = 8hr 30min
• Overture = 4hr 30min

More examples on their site: https://boomsupersonic.com

 

Edited June 6, 2021 by ThrottleUp