Boom Technology M2.2 SST

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,210
Reaction score
23
George Allegrezza said:
Having a demonstrator also helps keep the funders and potential customers enthused. Given that a lot of the investors come from Silicon Valley, and given also that the startup/outsider nature of the company means that airlines are going to be a tough sell, hardware beats slideware every time (the subtleties of the fidelity of the model to a full-size vehicle notwithstanding).
Or DOD is getting the Valley to fund an LRSA demonstrator; Boom's advisory board is interesting.
 

DrRansom

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
517
Reaction score
1
Boom could demonstrate a long-range cruising engine and platform. That will be attractive for different people...
 

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
116
Reaction score
3
TomS said:
They have to find someone willing to design a whole new fan for whatever core they choose. Their design concept is based on medium bypass turbofans, but I don't think anyone has an extant engine in that power bracket.
A medium bypass turbofan doesn't make any sense for M2.2 cruise, or am I missing something?

While I don't believe the F414 as it currently stands could be capable of M2.2 supercruise, indeed it could have a modified fan to better suit the supercruise regime.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
67
NUSNA_Moebius said:
TomS said:
They have to find someone willing to design a whole new fan for whatever core they choose. Their design concept is based on medium bypass turbofans, but I don't think anyone has an extant engine in that power bracket.
A medium bypass turbofan doesn't make any sense for M2.2 cruise, or am I missing something?
Shrug. That's what Boom is proposing. They claim it will enable them to meet FAA Stage 5 (ICAO Chapter 14) noise standards at part throttle before ramping up for supersonic flight once over water. It sounds fairly iffy to me.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boom-unveils-xb-1-supersonic-demonstrator-431503/

Boom executives, however, are confident they have a plan to comply with Section 14, despite proposing an even larger aircraft with enough to thrust to travel nearly 40% faster than the [Aerion] AS2.

Medium bypass engines and throttle back at takeoff get you to Chapter 14 compliance,” Boom chief executive and founder Blake Scholl, a former Amazon executive.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,210
Reaction score
23
What's a medium bypass ratio these days? Mid-single digits?
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
67
marauder2048 said:
What's a medium bypass ratio these days? Mid-single digits?
Notionally between about 1.8:1 and 4:1, but there's a lot of wiggle room.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
F101 has a 2:1 bypass ratio as I recall, but is out of production, and probably more engine than they need.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
67
sferrin said:
F101 has a 2:1 bypass ratio as I recall, but is out of production, and probably more engine than they need.
Minus the burner, it might not be far off. They're going to have to be able to take off and climb out on partial engine thrust to hit the noise targets, so they might need something that big.

It could actually make sense. The older AvWeek article on Boom said they were looking at two cores -- one military and one civilian, as the possible basis for their new engine. The F101 core evolved into the CFM56, so they might be thinking about reversing that evolution, refanning a modern CFM56 core into a lower-bypass design.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,113
Reaction score
69
Advertisement video:
https://youtu.be/cV_lBGP5QJs
Code:
https://youtu.be/cV_lBGP5QJs
Original source: www.boomsupersonic.com
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
New article about Boom Technology.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/12/04/colorado-boom-technology-supersonic/
 

Reaper

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
202
Reaction score
4
After watching the interview with the CE, I have mixed feelings about the company: "Yeah the founder read a book about aircraft design and thought why not developing a supersonic business jet and its possible"

For sure it's possible, but the noise issue is still not fixed and I wonder if it commercially makes sense in times when airlines need to create low cost carriers to make money. Also I wonder why Mach 2.2, because from what I learned from my aerodynamic prof. Ma 1.6 (like the Aerion) makes much more sense.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
My guess would be Mach 2.2 is the most you can reasonable cruise at with an aluminum/composite airframe.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
143
https://twitter.com/boomaero/status/805982214731296768
 

Attachments

DrRansom

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
517
Reaction score
1
I can see the argument for Mach 2.2, it is sufficiently faster than a business jet to be worth the added cost. The Aerion is about twice the business jet speed, a nice but perhaps not significant decrease in travel time.

The Boom jet has the advantage of being able to pursue Mach 2.2 flight as a balance of efficiency and cost, Aerion would be bounded by the need for a low-boom design.

For top speed, one possibility is that they can't find an engine to economically cruise any faster. I doubt the USAF would give boom the STELR engine and there is a lack of supersonic cruising jet engines elsewhere.

For heating, MIG-31 is a supersonic cruising airplane and it appears to be made of simple materials. I think it cruises around Mach 2.5. Of course, composites might have lower temperature limits.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
559
Reaction score
68
DrRansom said:
For heating, MIG-31 is a supersonic cruising airplane and it appears to be made of simple materials. I think it cruises around Mach 2.5. Of course, composites might have lower temperature limits.
The MIG-31 is largely steel with titanium used on the hottest spots. Hardly ideal for a biz jet.

If I remember correctly the Concorde was originally designed for 2.2 cruise, but flew a bit slower in service to extend the service life of the airframe.
 

patvig

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
114
Reaction score
0
Website
www.vignaud.org
Following Air & Cosmos 2526, specifications of final aircraft will be :
  • wingspan = 18.2 m
  • length = 51 m
  • 45 to 55 passengers
  • crew = 6
  • speed = 2335 km/h (mach 2.2)
  • cruising ceiling = 15 240 m
  • range = 8334 km (4 500 nautics)
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,622
Reaction score
71
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-supersonic-jets-20170202-story.html
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
67

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
TomS said:
Flyaway said:
Supersonic flight promised by 2023 as Boom announces airline orders for 76 aircraft

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/06/20/supersonic-flight-2023-as-boom-announces-airline-orders.html
Surprisingly, these orders apparently include non-refundable deposits. Virgin apparently has an order for four at $200 million each.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/20/centennial-boom-supersonic-airplane-design/
I am really surprised 5 airlines have gone for this. I was convinced this was a non-starter as a project.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
67
Sundog said:
That's exactly what the AvWeek article says; the third engine is in the tail and the two lateral intakes are split to feed the third tail engine.
The latest renders of the XB-1 have a third inlet, presumably feeding the third engine, for "improved propulsion system stability." Surprise, surprise, that third engine didn't like being dependent on the two split inlets.
 

Attachments

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
Boom Technology Says Data Exist To Set Supersonic Noise Standards

Supersonic-airliner startup Boom Technology believes sufficient research has already been conducted for the FAA to set a reasonable sonic boom standard that would allow civil supersonic flight over land within a few years. An amendment to the Senate’s fiscal 2018 FAA reauthorization bill, if it becomes legislation, would require the agency to set an “economically feasible and technologically practical” boom standard by as early as mid-2020. Efforts led by the ...
http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/boom-technology-says-data-exist-set-supersonic-noise-standards
 

Reaper

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
202
Reaction score
4
Presentation of Boom at AIAA conference at 1:15.

https://livestream.com/accounts/6056055/events/7456997

- only certified proven technologies
- flight over water and uninhabited areas at the beginning only
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
Boom Supersonic to pick engines in 2018

Boom Supersonic hopes to pick an engine to power its developmental airliner programme next year as it works towards service entry in 2023 for the 55-passenger aircraft.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/dubai-boom-supersonic-to-pick-engines-in-2018-443216/
 

totoro

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
256
Reaction score
3
Website
www.youtube.com
When media mention 4500 mile reach for future Boom 55 seat plane, do they mean nautical miles or international miles?
 

Reaper

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
202
Reaction score
4
New money and cooperation with JAL:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/jal-aims-to-go-supersonic-with-investment-in-boom-su-443870/
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
More to the above.

JAL Options Up to 20 Boom Supersonic Airliners

The partnership with JAL includes an investment of $10 million in Boom, which is particularly significant, says Blake Scholl, founder and CEO of the startup aerospace company formerly known as Boom Technology. “This is the first time in history an airline has put real cash into a supersonic transport program, and to us it is a commitment and a demonstration that the customer interest is real,” he says.
As a strategic partner for this most recent supersonic project, JAL will be directly involved in shaping several aspects of the program. “You really want to have a customer voice in the development program,” says Scholl. JAL will help define the aircraft’s operating model, maintenance cost targets and areas such as the interior design, catering and cabin layout. “JAL has set a high customer bar and has deep operational experience,” says Scholl, who adds that “every customer wants to have a voice, and several others are already involved.”

JAL, which Scholl says intends to use its supersonic aircraft primarily on busy North Pacific trunk routes to North America, has had a long-term interest in acquiring high-speed transports. Although the Japanese carrier ordered three Concorde aircraft in 1963, these were canceled after the global oil crisis a decade later. Similarly, the airline also provisionally ordered up to eight of the larger Boeing 2707 before the U.S. supersonic effort was also canceled in the early 1970s.
Toward this end, Boom is also “really surprised” at the high level of interest shown by Congress and the White House in advancing legislative support for lifting the current ban on supersonic overland flights. If successful, this could substantially increase the market for commercial high-speed transports. An amendment to the Senate’s fiscal 2018 FAA reauthorization bill, if it becomes legislation, would require the agency to set an “economically feasible and technologically practical” boom standard by early as mid-2020.

Notwithstanding the question of whether the privatization of air traffic control is included, Scholl says: “Should an FAA bill get passed early next year, it will almost certainly include something on supersonic transport—and that will be either good, or really good. Everyone wants to make this happen, and we don’t have to change any regulations to see this work.”
Boom is also gearing up to begin assembly of its XB-1 “Baby Boom” supersonic demonstrator, a one-third-scale proof-of-concept vehicle that will pave the way for the airliner. The small delta aircraft, due to fly subsonic in late 2018 and supersonically in 2019, is powered by three General Electric J85-21 engines. Recently completed test work in the buildup to assembly includes completion of structural tests on a composite wing spar at temperatures and loads representative of the Mach 2.2 design cruise condition.

The evaluation was conducted in a specially developed hydraulic test rig in which the spar was subjected to load while being heated in an oven that enclosed the rig. Temperatures inside the test apparatus reached 300F, “which is well above the heat soak operational temperature,” says Scholl. Netherlands-based TenCate Advanced Composites, which provides high-temperature-resistant materials to SpaceX for the Falcon 9 rocket among other programs, is supplying an epoxy-based material system for cooler airframe parts and a higher-temperature-resistant material to handle the hotter stagnation temperatures at the leading edges and nose. On a standard day, the temperature of the latter is forecast to be about 307F.

The airframe will be primarily carbon/epoxy, with intermediate-modulus carbon fibers. Some high-modulus fibers are expected to be used on the wing spar caps, while bismaleimide prepreg will likely be used for the high-temperature leading edges and ribs. “The basic structure is pretty straightforward and we will be using fuel as a heat sink, so the environmental control system will dump the cabin heat into the fuel,” says Scholl.
http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/jal-options-20-boom-supersonic-airliners
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
The media has been drinking the kool-aid and fell to the hype. At least that was a brief distraction from Johnny Hallyday. ::)
Didn't knew about them,
checked the wikipedia page
not very convinced about them.
By the way, Aerion changed the design of their aircraft ? also the name ?
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
755
Reaction score
16
let's sum it up:
- they have excellent management and are surrounded by a team of professional
- They are presently building a technology representative airframe that will be de-facto the fastest civil aircraft built to date since Concorde
- They have attracted serious interest from the industry like (a serious airline) (foreign)

Obviously not your typical startup born just to fail.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
Ever heard of Xcor and their Lynx ? they had everything you mention, yet they failed. That Boom company is backed by Richard Branson, and Space Ship Two... well better not to talk about it.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
98
The Return of Supersonic Flight

The return of supersonic transport over oceans will do something similar for supersonic transport overland. As soon as it is possible to fly from San Francisco to Tokyo faster than it is to fly from San Francisco to New York, people will begin to ask questions. And when they hear the noise—the thump—on which the overland flight ban is based, moves to overturn it won’t be far behind, and a new generation of entrepreneurs will make history.
http://www.brinknews.com/the-return-of-supersonic-flight-2/
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
Archibald said:
Ever heard of Xcor and their Lynx ? they had everything you mention, yet they failed. That Boom company is backed by Richard Branson, and Space Ship Two... well better not to talk about it.
Why?
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
The 2007 explosion
the 2014 crash
The never ending promises to fly "the next year" since 2006
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
Archibald said:
The 2007 explosion
the 2014 crash
The never ending promises to fly "the next year" since 2006
So what you're saying is space is easy for everybody else? I guess SpaceX should fold up the tent since they've been promising the first flight of the Heavy for years eh?
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
No, I didn't said that.
I said that Branson is not serious while Musk is.
So far SpaceX has accomplished far more, to orbit and beyond, than Branson. They started from zero in 2002 while Branson started from X-prize in 2005.
Orbit is different from suborbital. Mach 3 vs Mach 25.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
Archibald said:
No, I didn't said that.
I said that Branson is not serious while Musk is.
Based on what? Branson has his hands in more pies than Musk (hard as that is to believe). That doesn't mean Virgin Galactic isn't "serious".

Archibald said:
So far SpaceX has accomplished far more, to orbit and beyond, than Branson. They started from zero in 2002 while Branson started from X-prize in 2005.
Orbit is different from suborbital. Mach 3 vs Mach 25.
None of which supports the notion that Virgin Galactic "isn't serious".
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
Yes it does mean that. See "The Space Review" all the way back to 2003 to 2018. That's a serious publication, there are 146 results for "Branson" in the search engine. You can really see all the hype and how much their schedule slipped by an entire decade, up to the point that Blue Origin got out of nowhere from 2013 and is currently closer from passengers flights than VG.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,616
Reaction score
112
Archibald said:
Yes it does mean that. See "The Space Review" all the way back to 2003 to 2018. That's a serious publication, there are 146 results for "Branson" in the search engine. You can really see all the hype and how much their schedule slipped by an entire decade, up to the point that Blue Origin got out of nowhere from 2013 and is currently closer from passengers flights than VG.
Still not seeing it. What they're doing is a bit more complicated than launching a rocket from a launch pad. (They're manned for one thing. Has SpaceX got a person to space yet? No.) I get it, you hate Virgin Galactic. Don't let that get in your way of being objective.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,206
Reaction score
27
Completely ad hominem attack, hence completely stupid. If realism is foreign to your mind, I just can't help you. Keep drinking the kool-aid.

Tell me when Space Ship Two makes any meaningful powered flight. Next, when it carries passengers as promised since a decade. Also above 50 miles, since the engine is not powerful enough.

:(
 
Top