Boom Supersonic Overture M1.8 SST

[TomcatViP]

Ah, yes, they will face animosity. As the industry is structured today, it sees selling a blend of airliners and Business jets with de-multiplied engine sales as being more profitable.*
It is often funny to see people comparing the economics of subsonic Vs faster aircraft, always discarding the increased number of rotations with their repercussion on daily flight schedule. Seems as if yield management among the airline industry, inexplicably fall through a trap door (without even Spirit & Boeing being the cause).
Sadly, it is blatantly evident that the present model of engineered obsolescence is not sustainable. We have experienced massive financial frauds and lenient quality management, gone through a spike. IMOHO, those, among others, are clear signs of the end of an era.
It´s up to the industry to have that achieved only by outsiders, with the inherent risks on passengers safety... And profitability,

*But as expressed earlier, it´s only the very long range Business jets that will be affected.

 

[H_K]

It is often funny to see people comparing the economics of subsonic Vs faster aircraft, always discarding the increased number of rotations with their repercussion on daily flight schedule.

From the few times I’ve seen private jet users, pure speed is rarely the #1 priority. What’s more important is time efficiency in its broadest sense:

1) Point to point flexibility (flying to/from small airports to save ground travel time & hassle, or to get to remote locations)

2) Schedule flexibility (eg. the ability to change flight times on short/no notice… « let’s go wheels up »)

3) Use of time on the plane for meetings/calls, resting etc

There probably still is a niche “Concorde market” across the Atlantic (NY <-> London/Paris), or across the US (NY <-> LA/San Francisco) if you can fly supersonic above land, but your typical hedge fund or business leader who lives in a nice suburb 1hr-1.5hrs from a major airport hub might prefer his own private bizjet flying 20min from home and taking him direct to his destination, even if the biz jet has a 3hr longer block time.

Plus most bizjet flights are on shorter legs and/or random direct routes where there will never be a supersonic scheduled option. So I don’t think this makes much of a dent in bizjet usage.

Where I think there will be a market is people who fly first class commercial between major airport hubs but don’t have a transcontinental bizjet… but these travelers switching to supersonic would actually increase their carbon footprint so is not really desirable!

 

[TomcatViP]

We are not talking forcing them flying to a hub airport and having them driven to their end-destination in a Trabant taxi.

If you only replace the long leg of the crossing with a Supersonic and then switch over to a private jet, you still gain a lot of time without loosing in flexibility.
All this was already detailed earlier. But, as we are not here discussing Boom Supersonics per se, I will refrain to repeat myself.

Just imagine a hub airport in Brittany. You flew there from LaGuardia. In Zip time you are in Chamonix, London or Dublin. Idem Landing in Amsterdam that would connect you all across central Europe. Etc...

 

[H_K]

Just imagine a hub airport in Brittany. You flew there from LaGuardia. In Zip time you are in Chamonix, London or Dublin. Idem Landing in Amsterdam that would connect you all across central Europe. Etc...

OK I can see some of the promise then. To work I see 2 requirements:

1) Use bizjet hubs like London Farnborough/Luton, Paris Le Bourget, Teterboro NJ, Los Angeles Van Nuys etc and avoid commercial hubs as much as possible. This is to remove weather/ATC delays and the hassles on the ground with large airports (also often far from city centers). Requires relatively short runway capability (7,000ft / 2,100m).

2) Really good instant transfers to/from supersonic shuttle to smaller private bizjet / helicopter for the regional leg. This requires some thought around ground logistics, immigration clearance and boarding procedures etc. Probably not impossible, but just can't be an afterthought.

If you can save 3hrs block time, and 1hr on the ground on each end, plus still retain the flexibility to continue onwards by bizjet then you have something potentially very attractive (though I doubt is any better for the environment).

 

[Grey Havoc]

2) Really good instant transfers to/from supersonic shuttle to smaller private bizjet / helicopter for the regional leg. This requires some thought around ground logistics, immigration clearance and boarding procedures etc. Probably not impossible, but just can't be an afterthought.

A case of back to the future, perhaps?

A proposed British 'VTOL port' from the 1970s, h/t zebedee.

 

[djfawcett]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1828093046195663129

View: https://x.com/boomaero/status/1828093046195663129

https://twitter.com/x/status/1828097295260533139

View: https://x.com/bscholl/status/1828097295260533139

https://twitter.com/x/status/1828113321758978210

View: https://x.com/boomaero/status/1828113321758978210

https://twitter.com/x/status/1828137328499663195

View: https://x.com/boomaero/status/1828137328499663195

https://twitter.com/x/status/1828149567172309478

View: https://x.com/boomaero/status/1828149567172309478

Boom - FlyBy - XB-1 Completes Second Flight

Landing gear retracted and extended for first time, digital stability augmentation demonstrated successfully

boomsupersonic.com

 

[TomS]

Still really nose up and very fast on landing , but I guess there's not much they can do to change that, just manage it.

Seems like a reasonable envelope expansion campaign, four months for 10 flights should be doable barring any trouble.

Still intensely skeptical of their long-term plan but props for getting past the first demonstration flight.

 

[djfawcett]

Still really nose up and very fast on landing , but I guess there's not much they can do to change that, just manage it.

Seems like a reasonable envelope expansion campaign, four months for 10 flights should be doable barring any trouble.

Still intensely skeptical of their long-term plan but props for getting past the first demonstration flight.

The high angle of attack is the result of the wing have no high lift devices.

 

[NMaude]

The high angle of attack is the result of the wing have no high lift devices.

That's what I thought too, why doesn't it have flaps?

 

[TomcatViP]

Look at the tuft on the upper surface. Not bad. (would need a full video to get sure).

From Boom:

successfully demonstrated a new digital stability augmentation system, and used tufting to assess wing aerodynamics.

Landing is quite fast. AoA is noteworthy. Look also at the tailplane deflection that would look pretty much maxed out on other a/c (and how small they are).



Tufts and smoke generator at the wing tip

View: https://youtu.be/MLEg8qR0j64

 

[martinbayer]

A glimmer of hope.

 

[Moose]

That's what I thought too, why doesn't it have flaps?

Concorde didn't have flaps either, they would destabilize the delta wing and require an empennage to stabilize the aircraft. Maybe modern FBW could handle it, but I assume this demonstrator is playing it safe. Their production aircraft should probably pursue the dynamic drooping leading edge (not slats) that the Concorde Mk2 was working on.

 

[TomcatViP]

Still, I think it was crazy to fly that a/c without the SAS. Especially when you see that the pilot only wears a parachute ; hence, he has to blow the canopy off, unstrap and manage to get out of the cockpit with enough alt b/w him and the ground, not withstanding getting enough separation with the shoulder mounted Delta...

 

[djfawcett]

That's what I thought too, why doesn't it have flaps?

Pretty much an early decision (made by engineers no longer with them) that stuck with the program.

 

[NMaude]

Still, I think it was crazy to fly that a/c without the SAS. Especially when you see that the pilot only wears a parachute ; hence, he has to blow the canopy off, unstrap and manage to get out of the cockpit with enough alt b/w him and the ground, not withstanding getting enough separation with the shoulder mounted Delta...

Why wasn't it fitted with an ejection-seat?

 

[TomS]

Why wasn't it fitted with an ejection-seat?

Certifying a plane and ejection seat combo takes a lot of time and money. You'd need at least a partial second fuselage for sled tests, I imagine.

 

[TomcatViP]

No need for certification. It´s an experimental prototype. No airlines are going to check the ejection seat option.

As @NMaude ask, IMOHO,,, Cost (or more exactly, a narrow vision on cost benefits from unprofessional decision makers - see how much Boom would loose if a crash happens).

 

[Scott Kenny]

No need for certification. It´s an experimental prototype. No airlines are going to check the ejection seat option.

As @NMaude ask, IMOHO,,, Cost (or more exactly, a narrow vision on cost benefits from unprofessional decision makers - see how much Boom would loose if a crash happens).

Still need to make sure that the seat will get the pilot clear of the plane without killing him.

 

[NMaude]

Still need to make sure that the seat will get the pilot clear of the plane without killing him.

I have no doubt that Martin-Baker has a seat design on hand already in production that would do.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I have no doubt that Martin-Baker has a seat design on hand already in production that would do.

Still gotta build a fuselage chunk to test on a rocket sled track, because the airflows are different around each airframe.

 

[TomcatViP]

Another evidence that Supersonic travel for 1st class is a need for all, Customers and airlines:

https://airlive.net/news/2024/09/02...install-lead-plates-in-its-a330-300-aircraft/

The customers targeted by this seat design would probably have paid more and be happy with a Jump seat... traveling at Mach2!

The lack of imagination is a recursive sign in aviation that we are reaching the apex of an old paradigm. (see the days preceding the long range metallic monoplane).

 

[TomS]

Another evidence that Supersonic travel for 1st class is a need for all, Customers and airlines:

The customers targeted by this seat design would probably have paid more and be happy with a Jump seat... traveling at Mach2!

There's pretty good evidence that this just isn't true. Concorde, which was exactly this, economy seats at Mach 2, clearly lost the battle against comfortable First/Business at Mach 0.8 across the Atlantic.

 

[NMaude]

There's pretty good evidence that this just isn't true. Concorde, which was exactly this, economy seats at Mach 2, clearly lost the battle against comfortable First/Business at Mach 0.8 across the Atlantic.

The Concorde fleet finally broke even and started making a profit in the 1990s IIRC, what finished it off was that very unfortunate and public crash of an Air France Concorde taking off from the Paris international airport 21 years ago.

 

[TomcatViP]

'Concorde flights were relatively rare and, worst, deserved only a selected numbers of airports that were mostly major hubs, hence with a poor flexibility for passengers transfers to business jets, And when the intercontinental private jets made really their boom, Concorde was already an old airframe that was plagued with departure delays.

Concorde flight being rare, there was a ow flexibility for last minute reservation, to the point that large administrations bought their seat on a long lead time, unrelated to the reality of their needs. This is not an economic model that a private business can adhere (think Taxes reduction).

This is why, introducing a new engine will only burden Boom's profitability with their inherent risk of being unreliable. Departure times and arrivals are of an outmost importance, Dispersion out of major international hubs is also necessary to safeguard transfers and departures of Business jets owners. As I have written before, using a stopover to deplan and refuel in order to fly at a low weight (hence lowering the noise level during approach and departure).

 

[TomS]

The Concorde fleet finally broke even and started making a profit in the 1990s IIRC, what finished it off was that very unfortunate and public crash of an Air France Concorde taking off from the Paris international airport 21 years ago.

Sure, they started to make money on planes whose entire development cost was subsidized by the British and French governments rather than being amortized across the actual production run.

'Concorde flights were relatively rare and, worst, deserved only a selected numbers of airports that were mostly major hubs, hence with a poor flexibility for passengers transfers to business jets,

Boom will be similar -- there simply won't be enough volume to support point-to-point flights to everywhere.

 

[NMaude]

Certifying a plane and ejection seat combo takes a lot of time and money.

I know but I doubt that the additional costs would add much to the total programme cost also by not fitting this high-performance supersonic aircraft implies that they don't value the safety of the test-pilot much.

You'd need at least a partial second fuselage for sled tests

Correct but as I said this shouldn't have added much to the total cost of the programme.

 

[martinbayer]

I live in a SoCal sweet(?) spot where depending on wind conditions with open second level windows I can hear the Disneyland nightly 9:30 PM fireworks and/or some USMC Camp Pendleton post dark artillery exercises on a fairly regular basis, and I've also listened intently to a daytime Space Shuttle return to Edwards, which definitely left me less than nonplussed, so hit me with some actual supersonic traffic and I'll get back to you on the comparative nuisance levels. But then again, my wife would tell you that my hearing levels are less than optimal ...