Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

boomsupersonic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 531 posts

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#231

Post by jjk166 »

samstave wrote: post #107
cjrp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turbofan (what's on most commercial jet aircraft), not turboprop (jet engine driving a propeller, generally on smaller commercial and some private aircraft).

r/noStupidQuestions ; Can these be 'stacked' - Can you have a turboFan in line with a turboProp such that the output of the wash of the Fan feeds into the Prop, but with a portion of the wash spinning to thrust on the outer ring of output.=, via a design in the cowlings which is hyper directed thrust vents (think the grid of straws used to funnel water into a cohesive column, which can be directed) Imagine a small di…

Technically yes but it would make performance worse. Props are efficient because of their large size, which allows them to push a lot of air, if you shrink it then you give up that advantage. If you had extra power left over to turn a prop, you'd want to use it to turn a bigger fan, or just leave that power in the exhaust.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#232

Post by danans »

hadlock wrote: post #207
awb wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> over water All the imagined routes are over large bodies of water. Is it key to the functionality or intent of the aircraft in some way? Why not NYC to LAX in 3 hours?

When space shuttle Challenger broke up over Dallas, Texas about 20 years ago it came in really low (steep angle of attack) and there was a sonic boom, felt like a garbage truck had driven into the side of the house at full speed. Woke me up from sleep at about 6am. Got out of bed to see what was going on, turned on the TV to find out it was the space shuttle. People will tolerate a sonic boom once a quarter or so, bu…

> When space shuttle Challenger broke up over Dallas, Texas

That was Columbia, not Challenger. Challenger exploded on launch from Cape Canaveral.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#233

Post by m4rtink »

cortesoft wrote: post #214
tedivm wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone claiming you are wrong hasn't bothered to google. Literally the first response for "overture turboprop" is a series of articles confirming what you said. > The Overture supersonic aircraft will be powered by three turboprop engines, which includes two that will be mounted under each wing, while the third engine will be fitted at the end of the fuselage. https://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/overture-…

There is no way you could go supersonic with a turboprop

Maybe in a steep dive ? ;-)

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#234

Post by kloch »

gbronner wrote: post #106
akmarinov wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only very expensive, but basically coach class all the way through, even for the rich people.

Concorde was not very pleasant to sit in from what I've heard. Great food, but the seats were basically economy 2x2.

There is a Concorde on display at the Museum of Flight near Seattle. You can walk down the aisle but the seats themselves are protected by plexiglass.

The seats do look very cramped and the windows are very small.

The museum of flight is amazing and much more interactive than most air museums.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#235

Post by pythonguython »

makz wrote: post #227

And how does it align with agenda 2030 and the goal to reduce carbon emissions?

Aviation makes up a rather small portion of transportation emissions. I don’t think there is much point in focusing on clean air travel when cars and trucks produce such a massive amount of carbon emissions in comparison.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-...

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#236

Post by ARandomerDude »

willyt wrote: post #77
gruturo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is achieved without afterburners (as I understand it is), then yes, this is an immense difference in fuel consumption and radically impacts the economics.

Concorde only used afterburner(en_us)/reheat(en_uk) for a small part of the acceleration phase of the flight not for cruise.

So afterburner then. 'Merica.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#237

Post by mshook »

cjrp wrote: post #223
mshook wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it doesn't really work. It could almost work flying west then east to get home but regular Concorde flights couldn't give you the option to fly back the same day. BA001 LHR 10:30AM -> JFK 09:25AM BA002 JFK 08:30AM -> LHR 05:15PM AF002 CDG 10:30AM -> JFK 08:15AM AF001 JFK 08:00AM -> CDG 05:45PM That's why flying westbound supersonic is less of an advantage. Because as you can see, flying west, your day is still…

Seems doable if the schedule was tweaked though? LHR 9:30AM - JFK 8:25AM, JFK 1:30PM - LHR 10:15PM

You're right but I'm sure both companies had good reasons for their schedules (for instance noise restrictions at night).

And realistically, from your plane at JFK to Manhattan, that's got to be a least an hour and a half (immigration and cab/limo). And assuming you'd have to be at JFK just an hour before your flight (and for an international flight that's ballsy), plus with transportation still taking an hour, you just wasted 3.5 hours commuting forth and back to the airport.

That schedule wouldn't work unless you flew to Manhattan. And even then, it'd be tight.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#238

Post by everforward »

afavour wrote: post #151
rtpg wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are definitely people who can get work done in a flight, but honestly I have a hard time imagining logging 7 hours. Maybe if you have a lot of reading to do?

I do too, but I also don't have a huge amount of experience sitting in an incredibly comfortable first class seat. I imagine I'd get a lot more done than I do in coach. I think if I had a decent internet connection (happening more and more) and comfortable seat I'd happily take a 7/8 hour flight over a 5 hour one in a coach-style seat.

I fly first class a fair bit, and I struggle to get anything done on the plane (in the terminal is fine, though).

For me, there's no way to take a good break on a plane. I can't really get up and stretch my legs (unless you try to pace the aisle), and any kind of distraction is going to be on a screen.

It is more comfortable than coach, but it's still not really comfortable. Coach is actively uncomfortable, first class is just kind of neutral; not actively comfortable or uncomfortable.

I usually get more done sitting in the terminal than I do on the plane itself.

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#239

Post by Turing_Machine »

snovv_crash wrote: post #208
Turing_Machine wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CAN-LAX is 6,284 nm. Just add a refueling stop at ANC, the same as most cargo flights today (and the same as most passenger flights in the past). According to a Great Circle mapper, CAN-ANC-LAX is only about 250 km longer than CAN-LAX.

Descending and climbing again will take a lot of fuel, jets are only efficient at high altitude. Plus of course the extra takeoff and landing adding cycles to the airframe.

Sure, but if it's the difference between "can" and "can't"...

It's a small enough issue that it's the routine route for cargo flights between China and the U.S. West Coast.

Anchorage is the second-largest cargo airport in the United States (after FedEx's home base in Memphis).

Re: American Airlines agrees to purchase Boom Supersonic Overture aircraft

#240

Post by Rackedup »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #225

IMHO a better title would have been: "American Airlines to buy 20 Overture aircraft from Boom Supersonic" When reading the original title, I had the impression that the company was going to be acquired by AA. Instead, it's "just" an order of 20 aircrafts. Note that this is not a new move by Boom, they played this card when raising money when they pitched at YC demo day, and they're doing it again. The problem I have…

> When reading the original title, I had the impression that the company was going to be acquired by AA.

Same... at least they should put an S to aircraft... but then again maybe they hit the strict character limit...

Post reply on HN