- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Would you fly on a supersonic plane? Supersonic travel making a comeback...
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:38 pm
quote:
Aeronautics engineers at Nasa are working to define a new standard for low sonic booms and are presenting their work at Aviation 2014, the annual event of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, in Atlanta. They have been busy gathering data in order to create new, quieter planes that could help overturn the current ban on supersonic flight over land.
quote:
‘Lessening sonic booms - shock waves caused by an aircraft flying faster than the speed of sound - is the most significant hurdle to reintroducing commercial supersonic flight,’ said Peter Coen, head of the High Speed Project in Nasa’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Washington. ‘Other barriers include high altitude emissions, fuel efficiency and community noise around airports.’
LINK
7
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:39 pm to NYNolaguy1
In before BOOM!
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:41 pm to soccerfüt
So she someone says "in before_____" can I still say it? Or is it now taken and ultimately illegal to use in the current thread?
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:42 pm to NYNolaguy1
Absolutely yes.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:46 pm to NYNolaguy1
done it before, why not?
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:47 pm to Fun Bunch
Gulfstream/Sukhoi partnered up on technology sharing several years ago but Gulfstream designed and built the G650 which can cruise at .93 Mach for over 6000 nautical miles efficiently. So unless technology allows for much faster and efficient air travel, ain't happening.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:47 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
n before BOOM!
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:48 pm to NYNolaguy1
I sure would. Quick travel is the shiznit
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:48 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
BOOM!
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:49 pm to LaFlyer
quote:
G650 which can cruise at .93 Mach for over 6000 nautical miles efficiently.
Supercruise is where it is at. Supersonic flight is just not very fuel efficient.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:50 pm to NYNolaguy1
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:53 pm to NYNolaguy1
I'm not going to be happy unless I'm going Mach II with my hair on fire.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:56 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Supercruise is where it is at. Supersonic flight is just not very fuel efficient.
For regular jet engines- sure.
Anyone think Virgin or SpaceX or one of these companies are crazy enough to strap a scamjet to one of their jets and get people going hypersonic (mach 2+)?
From the article:
quote:
Once Virgin Galactic is fully operational, Richard Branson has also set his sights on supersonic travel and has plans to create supersonic planes aircraft enough to travel from New York to Tokyo in less than an hour, CNBC reported. ‘After we've done the space program, we will be producing supersonic planes, which will go far, far, faster than Concorde…You could be traveling at 19,000 miles per hour orbitally,’ he said.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:56 pm to TU Rob
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:57 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Supercruise
quote:
is
quote:
Supersonic flight
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:58 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Anyone think Virgin or SpaceX or one of these companies are crazy enough to strap a scamjet to one of their jets and get people going hypersonic (mach 2+)?
At this point, I would consider those spacecraft - "space taxis" maybe, but spacecraft nonetheless.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 5:13 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
quote: Supercruise quote: is quote: Supersonic flight
I think he might of meant more efficient supersonic because of no use of the afterburners.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 5:20 pm to LaFlyer
quote:
I think he might of meant more efficient supersonic because of no use of the afterburners.
Yeah - I guess I'm behind the times - I thought no afterburner meant no supersonic.
By supercruise, I mean efficient high-speed flight with no afterburner.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 5:36 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
By supercruise, I mean efficient high-speed flight with no afterburner.
the raptor can exceed the Mach with no burner, even the old SST didn't use it in cruise, they just needed it to get to where they could get a high true airspeed, and that's 50's technology, the technology is pretty much there, question is will the market support it, Boeing proposed a couple of pretty good models of airliners that were pretty efficient, and would cruise just under the Mach years ago, but there was no market interest
Posted on 6/24/14 at 6:01 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
777Tiger
Would you fly on a supersonic plane? Supersonic travel making a comeback... quote: By supercruise, I mean efficient high-speed flight with no afterburner. the raptor can exceed the Mach with no burner, even the old SST didn't use it in cruise, they just needed it to get to where they could get a high true airspeed, and that's 50's technology, the technology is pretty much there, question is will the market support it, Boeing proposed a couple of pretty good models of airliners that were pretty efficient, and would cruise just under the Mach years ago, but there was no market interest
What Mach do you cruise the 777 and at MTOW standard day what will she climb to.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News