The future of supersonic travel

[xFLAMESx]

Okay - now we all know Concorde could NEVER be replaced as such but what about possible successors?

I've looked into this and found that with a few modifications a Rockwell B1 "Bone" COULD be a good start.
The airframe is capable of Mach 2.2 (although is rarely flown faster than Mach 1.0) and it has roughly the same shape as Concorde.

HOWEVER it also has the variable geometry wing which would allow greater lift at take-off, meaning less thrust being required, meaning a quieter aircraft, meaning happier residents.
It also has greater range and is significantly lighter when empty.
Although expensive and loud, replace the engines with quieter ones and it is possible.

What are your thoughts on the matter?

[glb]Carl out.....[/glb]

[SideWinder9]

I dont know.... Airlines taking old B-1s out of the desert, and converting them into passenger planes? Sitting in the Bomb bay?

[Wing Nut]

A B-1 passenger jet?  Where would you put the two passengers that might fit?  Aside from that, I don't think they could ever get around how LOUD the thing is...

[xFLAMESx]

Why not it seems like a simple solution.
Not so much old one's from the desert, I was thinking more along the lines of aquiring licence (whichever company was to take it on) and building new passenger friendly ones instead.
BA seem so desperate to get supersonic again it seems like a perfect answer.

Sitting in the Bomb Bay?

Well at least you wouldn't have to worry about the rush to get off!

I see it as a fairly good idea as I would love to see them flying in and out of Heathrow everyday

[glb]Carl out.....[/glb]

[xFLAMESx]

[quote]A B-1 passenger jet?

[ozzy72]

Carl if you want to go supersonic there is a much simpler method, the Blue Peter method in fact. You'll need;
A Cornflakes packet
Double backed sticky-tape
Pair of scissors
Skateboard
Two hundred tins of Baked Beans
Half a dozen cabbages
One match

Cut wings out of the Cornflakes packet and stick to your back using the sticky-tape.
Place the skateboard on a long flat straight piece of pavement. Stand on skateboard.
Scoff beans and cabbage.
Lean over and hold lit match to your rear

[Scorpiоn]

Carl if you want to go supersonic there is a much simpler method, the Blue Peter method in fact. You'll need;
A Cornflakes packet
Double backed sticky-tape
Pair of scissors
Skateboard
Two hundred tins of Baked Beans
Half a dozen cabbages
One match

Cut wings out of the Cornflakes packet and stick to your back using the sticky-tape.
Place the skateboard on a long flat straight piece of pavement. Stand on skateboard.
Scoff beans and cabbage.
Lean over and hold lit match to your rear

Eat your heart out Lockheed! Now that's thinkin' with your noggin!

[Hagar]

LOL I would pay good money to see that.

Supersonic air travel as we know it is extremely noisy & expensive. The noise of the engines is bad enough but you have to consider the effects of the "sonic boom" when flying over land. The environment lobby already has the knives out for the airline industry.

BA seem so desperate to get supersonic again it seems like a perfect answer.

If this is so I can't help but wonder why they dumped Concorde in such indecent haste. There is no alternative & the reasons given included the fact that BA had lost their customer base. They never really recovered from the terrible disaster in Paris. Without the privileged, wealthy regular customers it's just not practical. Unless someone can come up with an efficient form of supersonic travel for the masses (as the 747 did for the subsonic market) I don't see it happening.

[xFLAMESx]

This is true, however, if the cost of maintenance could be reduced (newer materials, newer engines), methinks there could be some money in it.
I also noticed that demand for supersonic dropped because of high ticket prices. Now if maintenance costs are lower, ticket prices could be reduced too.
As for the sonic boom - same restrictions would apply as with Concorde.

Like I say - it was just an idea, but methinks with the right backing it COULD work.

Carl out.....

[Hagar]

This is true, however, if the cost of maintenance could be reduced (newer materials, newer engines), methinks there could be some money in it.

I also noticed that demand for supersonic dropped because of high ticket prices. Now if maintenance costs are lower, ticket prices could be reduced too.

Supersonic aircraft are not only expensive to maintain but also to operate. The amount of fuel used for one Atlantic crossing is frightening. It's also been suggested that supersonic flights at high altitude are one of the prime contributors to pollution & "Global Warming". (I have my own opinions on this subject.) Knowing how expensive anything to do with commercial aircraft is I could never understand how any airline could make a profit operating conventional airliners - let alone supersonic ones. I think this is borne out by the number of airlines currently in financial trouble. The airline industry is not in a particularly healthy state right now.

As for the sonic boom - same restrictions would apply as with Concorde.

Like I say - it was just an idea, but methinks with the right backing it COULD work.

Concorde was severely restricted in where it could operate for various environmental & political reasons. It never fulfilled its true potential due to these restrictions. Sorry, but I don't see any other supersonic airliner overcoming these difficulties.

[xFLAMESx]

Sadly, you have alot of very strong points there Doug.

Concorde was severely restricted in where it could operate for various environmental & political reasons. It never fulfilled its true potential due to these restrictions. Sorry, but I don't see any other supersonic airliner overcoming these difficulties.

I didn't know that. Now I know, methinks my idea was silly and means we will probably still be flying subsonic in 2050.

In that case what are you thoughts on Hypersonic flight?

Carl out.....

[Hagar]

I remind you Carl that these are my opions. Others might well disagree. They often do.

It does seem a tad ironic to me that one of the BA Concordes now stands outside the Museum of Flight in Seattle. I'm not sure it was ever allowed to land there during its operational life.

In that case what are you thoughts on Hypersonic flight?

Many ideas have been suggested over the years. It sounds expensive to me. I've never really thought about it. I don't think it's likely to happen in my lifetime. Maybe I'd better leave it at that.

[Stormtropper]

In that case what are you thoughts on Hypersonic flight?

Ozzy has already answered that , except you got to times the beans and cabbage by 5

Cheers
Jeff

[eno]

If this is so I can't help but wonder why they dumped Concorde in such indecent haste. There is no alternative & the reasons given included the fact that BA had lost their customer base. They never really recovered from the terrible disaster in Paris. Without the privileged, wealthy regular customers it's just not practical. Unless someone can come up with an efficient form of supersonic travel for the masses (as the 747 did for the subsonic market) I don't see it happening.

B.A didnt want to dump concorde .... they weren't given the choice .... the French government had a big hand in persuading the maintainence companies to pull the plug on concorde .... B.A. had got it back into profit after the Paris crash and all the upgrades.... Air France was still loosing money. A good book on the concorde debacle is Supersonic Secrets by Rob Lewis ... it goes into the concorde story in detail.

http://www.supersonicsecrets.com/

go have a look
cheers
eno

[Hagar]

go have a look
cheers
eno

Thanks Eno. It looks interesting & worth a read. I'll see if I can find a copy. The author is not familiar & I don't know where he got his facts from.