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

XB-1's wings are officially closed out

blog.boomsupersonic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 180 posts

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#161

Post by benhurmarcel »

ricardobeat wrote: post #27

This is quite scary for a non-engineer. You're telling me that this little supersonic plane has the whole wing structure held together by a handful of 4mm thick metal struts, manually glued to the wing surface, with wire pulleys running on the inside :O

Traditionally in aircraft design, you can't rely on adhesives for primary structural integrity. It's mainly because it's hard to ensure you glued right, it's hard to inspect.

Also we don't like it too much because it's harder to repair.

Adhesives are used, but normally for secondary structure, or as reinforcement to fasteners. So for example you'd ensure that a failure of the adhesive wouldn't lead to catastrophic failure, but it may lead to early cracks that would be detected in regular maintenance.

In the case of Boom they seem to rely more on adhesives than the traditional airframe methods. At the same time they are making a one-off demonstrator here, so they can afford to choose methods that need particular care and inspection, even if it would be unrealistic to expect that level of quality on a real production line.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#162

Post by thomas »

dmos62 wrote: post #157
fragmede wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data-point for the elephant in the room: Aérospatiale/BAC Concorde - $169M 150 passengers. Cruising speed: Mach 2 The Concorde was a thing of beauty. Massively expensive to produce and run, and fuel inefficient, it was a passenger airliner that could outrun fighter jets. Fighter jets of that era could get to mach 2 using afterburner, but that's especially fuel inefficient so they could only keep up for 15 minutes…

One of my great travel-related discoveries has been that if I can find a train that takes even about the same amount of time, it will always be much more pleasant and less energy-draining than air travel.

All so true. The actual flight time is a non issue for me given the hassle of the airport. But I’m guessing this is for higher end travel, where skipping lines is the norm.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#163

Post by benhurmarcel »

badfrog wrote: post #115
earthtourist wrote: post #75

I like the idea of supersonic passenger jets existing again. I'm not sure I really see the point though. Would you rather fly in business class comfort for 8 hours or with less comfort for 4 hours? Almost doesn't seem worth the expense and risk of going supersonic. I would be so much more excited about an airplane that was large enough that economy class seating was as comfortable as business class seating is today.…

> Would you rather fly in business class comfort for 8 hours or with less comfort for 4 hours? I'd take the 4 hours any day. At that point, it's reasonable to take a trip to Europe for a long weekend.

If I had the money for a supersonic round-trip on a weekend, I'd have the money to take Monday off.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#164

Post by tim333 »

xvilka wrote: post #156

There also exists a Boom rival - Spike Aerospace[1]. They successfully completed and operated flight demonstrators (SX-1) and working on delivering a production plane now. [1] https://www.spikeaerospace.com/

There's something a little sketchy seeming about Spike if you look at their website. The Boom demonstrator in this article is a real, hopefully supersonic aircraft with lots of photos etc, but Spike seem to have zero photos of the SX-1 which is/was apparently a subsonic radio controlled aircraft.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#165

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #106
chrischattin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airplanes are very strong, but very delicate. Really amazing works of engineering.

Have you seen that F15 perform a carrier landing with one wing mostly blown off? https://youtu.be/M359poNjvVA

Carrier?

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#166

Post by elil17 »

adwn wrote: post #139
chrismorgan wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And these bonds can be stronger than the base materials, so that it’s actually least likely to break where you glued it.

Cue the obligatory "Then why don't they build the entire plane out of that glue?"

I mean, they kind of do. That's what carbon composite is, in a way: thin strands of carbon held together in a mass of resin (glue).

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#167

Post by gsnedders »

myrandomcomment wrote: post #103
babesh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are targeting $5K for round trip tickets between NY and London. It is really just making it faster for the rich to travel for fun or work. Supposedly it is inherently 3X as expensive as subsonic planes from a cost per seat mile point of view. It is basically a cheaper replacement for the Concorde. Also it seems that their biggest difficulty is coming up with suitable engines. The engines that they need don't exi…

JAL is one of their planned customers that invested. I make the SFO to Tokyo flight every month. This takes that flight from 11 hours to 3.5. It is not about being rich. At the same cost of a business ticket it means that I do not have to leave on Saturday in SFO to make a Monday meeting (leave Sat. at 3pm and land in Tokyo at 7PM Sunday). I get more time at home with my family.

With all due respect, anyone talking about frequent travel at business-class costs is rich.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#168

Post by gsnedders »

molszanski wrote: post #122
lmm wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't commercially successful enough to continue operating - partly because it wasn't permitted to fly supersonically over the continental US, through some combination of being too noisy and not being made in the US. Boom is the next iteration that addresses that.

Can it be less noisy? Don't think so. They should climb higher to be less noisy. To climb higher they have to go faster. To go faster they must have blackbird class body and engines. This is a very high ask

Yes; we know for a fact that we can make much quieter supersonic aircraft, even for large transport aircraft (existing smaller aircraft of the same period as Concorde were already much quieter, and we've improved on that since). Note however no current proposal for a SST is anywhere near as big as Concorde, which already gives them an inherent advantage.

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#169

Post by stainforth »

njarboe wrote: post #133
earthtourist wrote: post #75

I like the idea of supersonic passenger jets existing again. I'm not sure I really see the point though. Would you rather fly in business class comfort for 8 hours or with less comfort for 4 hours? Almost doesn't seem worth the expense and risk of going supersonic. I would be so much more excited about an airplane that was large enough that economy class seating was as comfortable as business class seating is today.…

Single day round trip flights New York to London for business meetings would be a big seller. Leave NYC at 6am, get in at 3pm London time, have meetings till 7pm, get home at 8pm New York time. No jet lag and sleep in your own home. Huge value. Not sure how you can desire better safety. The last fatal crash of a US airline flight was in 2009.

I don't think the environmental cost is worth "business meetings"

Re: XB-1's wings are officially closed out

#170

Post by credit_guy »

thomas wrote: post #162
dmos62 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my great travel-related discoveries has been that if I can find a train that takes even about the same amount of time, it will always be much more pleasant and less energy-draining than air travel.

All so true. The actual flight time is a non issue for me given the hassle of the airport. But I’m guessing this is for higher end travel, where skipping lines is the norm.

I once had the opportunity to fly a business-only airplane. There was no line skipping. There was a whole dedicated terminal for these airplanes. As soon as you entered the terminal someone would welcome you like at some luxury resort. The passport and ticket thing was a breeze, then they would guide you to the lounge, if you were early. If you timed your trip accurately, I guess you could find yourself from the terminal door to sitting in your comfy seat within 15 minutes. Champagne glass on the tray in front of you, of course.
Post reply on HN