SSTs (Supersonic Transport) to make a comeback under Obama? Maybe?

[Hawkeye-X]

Just Maybe? I'd love to do a Denver-New York in under 2 hours. (Normal flight time is 4h30 min)

I'm just being very nostaligic because I have always wanted to fly the Concorde to London with the wife to do an European tour.

Alas, now with the retirement of the Concorde, it's never gonna happen.

Also, I would love to see that the SST's are eco-friendly (biodiesel fuel or something close)

Hawkeye-X

[Stevenmarc]

1. It was always nice getting home before you left.

[Cant trust em]

2. We're going to have some slim spending years coming up

After a 700B bailout, a 789B stimulus bill, a 1.5T treasurywhatsit, I think we're going to have to cool out any new initiatives for a while.

[1]

3. but sst's only do the ss part over the oceans...

so, i don't see a future for this one...

[backscatter712]

7. There was some research into mitigating sonic booms.

There were even some aircraft built or modified, including an F-5 with a strange bulbous nose shape designed to reduce its sonic boom.

Between doing that and raising the altitude from 35,000 feet to 80,000+ feet, that can reduce or even eliminate sonic booms.

Still, this is academic. Supersonic airliners are not green transportation, and aren't likely to be high on the list of projects to be funded. The Concorde, for example, was a hangar queen that required huge amounts of expensive maintenance, could only fly in a limited number of routes, like the New York-London route because of its sonic boom and its insanely loud engines, and it guzzled tremendous amounts of fuel.

[Believing Is Art]

9. It's gone further than that

They've now modified an F-15 with Gulfstream's boom-mitigating spike. When I was there, it was limited to ground tests, but according to press releases they've done some test flights and were able to extend and retract the spike. The goal is to get the overpressure down to 0.3 psf and I cannot say for sure they've succeeded to get it that low.

As far as I know, they can't get rid of the boom completely, excepting in some atmospheric conditions - obviously not dependable.

Someone said something about oceans. Can't say why, but unless they get the boom down drastically I think environmental groups should protest.

[1]

10. damn. the things you learn hanging out on du...

i am old enough, and grew up close enough to an af base, that i remember sonic booms over my community.

us kids thought they were cool. they really did rattle your bones...

[MADem]

4. If they could make it safer, or at least more "survivable" on take off and landing, that would help.

I do think it would be a neat thing to do if they could do it, though and make it a bit more affordable, too--it certainly would give a boost to the industry.

The Concorde was cool, but it was SOOOOOO expensive.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

5. I'll just be happy if NC gets enough money to finish 540 around The Triangle.

Is that too much to ask?

[Believing Is Art]

6. There's some work being done

When I interned at Dryden, most of my work was in recording and analyzing footprints of low booms. As far as I know, Gulfstream is the furthest along in developing a new SST. The problem isn't TO and landing so much as keeping the initial shock strength below 0.3 psf.

[Stevenmarc]

8. As much as I liked the Concorde the demographics don't support it anymore

Yes it's nice to get somewhere fast but the clientele that would fly a premium aircraft like a SST are looking to bypass the airport experience. They would rather charter a jet and have control over their departure time. At the end of the day the time wasted on the ground at the airport and a shorter flight really doesn't make up for basically driving up to the plane and taking off without the delays and the other potential annoying passengers.