Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed? • Hacker News Board

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#21

Post by rbanffy » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:48 AM UTC

Stratoscope wrote: post #8

I will never understand why Boom chose such a terrible name. Of course it is a novelty to hear a sonic boom once or twice, but who wants to hear them repeatedly? I imagine they will fly mostly overwater like Concorde, but why remind people on the ground of the most annoying thing that a supersonic flight does? Much worse, as safe and reliable as they can build and fly these airplanes, eventually there will be a fligh…

> I will never understand why Boom chose such a terrible name.

It’ll be the core of countless jokes. I remember a TV series called “Fireball XL5” about a spaceship with that name and I always found it amusing someone would want to board something named like that.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#22

Post by rbanffy » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:50 AM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #19

short_sells_poo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also like to know which Tesla can get to 250mph (400kmh). The 100PD tops out at a "measly" 155. Only the most extreme hypercars can reach 250mph, and even out of those, a small handful are road legal.

Of course the Roadster in space is doing something like 20,000 mph relative to the earth but that also isn't 250 mph.

> 20,000 mph

And that on a single battery charge!

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#23

Post by willyt » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:50 AM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #12

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #4

"...where Concorde failed?" Hold on, when did Concorde "fail"? Concorde was profitable: https://simpleflying.com/did-british-airways-make-a-profit-f... ---- The reasons for Concorde's discontinuation are legion - I think even if it weren't for the 2000 Air France crash it would have been discontinued simply due to the age of the fleet, what other airlines are still running 50+ year-old airframes today? Let alone thos…

> Concorde was profitable Your own article points out that it really, really wasn't, especially not for the parties investing in its development, not their customers who profited mainly because they got the aircraft at knockdown prices (and operated it without any supersonic competition) in what was later described as one of the worst deals ever negotiated by any government $3bn was spent developing an aircraft they…

But it jump started Airbus, a hugely successful aircraft manufacturer, the difference between Airbus and Boeing is the dependence on fly-by-wire a technology that was first used outside the military in Concorde. So yes it was £3BN down but Airbus supports > 100,000 jobs in Britain, France and Germany. If you compare it to the current Space Launch System, which is a vapourware project which exists to provide a channel for government subsidy to the US Aerospace industry it makes more sense.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#24

Post by rbanffy » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:51 AM UTC

thedrbrian wrote: post #5

Jabbles wrote: post #3

> Boom plans to use fuel made from carbon removed from the atmosphere, meaning that supersonic travel will be carbon neutral from day one. If this is economically viable - say, within a factor of 3 of current fuel prices - it sounds like it would be the solution to climate change. I am skeptical.

It’s not BOOM but Rolls Royce have an idea of using one of their Small Modular Reactors to generate synthetic aviation fuel at only double the cost of normal stuff. https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Rolls-Royce-on-t...

So, if you remove the nuclear and couple it with wind or solar, it may end up cheaper than the liquid dinosaur stuff.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#25

Post by iso1210 » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:53 AM UTC

short_sells_poo wrote: post #14

henrikschroder wrote: post #2

> To put that into perspective, a Tesla travels at 250 miles per hour Is this how you write super-relatable PR pieces now?

I'd also like to know which Tesla can get to 250mph (400kmh). The 100PD tops out at a "measly" 155. Only the most extreme hypercars can reach 250mph, and even out of those, a small handful are road legal.

155mph is 250km/h, I suspect that's where they miscalculated

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#26

Post by willyt » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:59 AM UTC

bell-cot wrote: post #13

Wikipedia notes that a 1/3 scale Boom demonstrator plane is expected to begin flight testing in 2021. Otherwise, it sounds like they've produced zero planes that actually fly so far. Even the hype-ridden article admits that their founder/CEO has zero experience delivering real-world physical products. Then there's the huge "SPACEX KILLER" banner at the top of that article...which has zero logic behind it, and is foll…

And the whole thing is full of factual errors as well. I’m not in aviation, but I’m quite interested in it and I know enough to get the sense that the only research this article was based on was some notes taken during a drunk hyperbolic conversation with the founder in a bar.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#27

Post by j-pb » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:59 AM UTC

> Boom is building for reliability from day one, and by simplifying the design of the plane and using software solutions wherever possible, they should be able to avoid many of the pitfalls that the Concorde faced.

Oh boy.

Given softwares track record when it comes to reliability and safety I think that's a mistake.

I do trust engineers, I don't trust software engineers.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#28

Post by notahacker » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 9:59 AM UTC

willyt wrote: post #23

notahacker wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Concorde was profitable Your own article points out that it really, really wasn't, especially not for the parties investing in its development, not their customers who profited mainly because they got the aircraft at knockdown prices (and operated it without any supersonic competition) in what was later described as one of the worst deals ever negotiated by any government $3bn was spent developing an aircraft they…

But it jump started Airbus, a hugely successful aircraft manufacturer, the difference between Airbus and Boeing is the dependence on fly-by-wire a technology that was first used outside the military in Concorde. So yes it was £3BN down but Airbus supports > 100,000 jobs in Britain, France and Germany. If you compare it to the current Space Launch System, which is a vapourware project which exists to provide a channel…

I agree, indirectly it lead to another company being hugely successful, which was probably a net win in terms of indirect tax revenues for the government (less because of the tech innovation and more because despite writing off £3bn on the project itself they also see returns from Airbus and every other domestic aerospace supply chain company that came afterwards, and all profitable airline operations, and all businesses aided by more available, cheaper flight)

But if Boom did likewise their investors won't see a penny. Viewed from that perspective, Boom only succeeds if they make and deliver aircraft at a profit (or get strategically acquired by Boeing or Airbus).

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#29

Post by hannob » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 10:01 AM UTC

"Boom is leveraging advances in engine design that yield greater fuel efficiency, which will mean cheaper ticket prices. But they aren’t stopping there. Boom plans to use fuel made from carbon removed from the atmosphere, meaning that supersonic travel will be carbon neutral from day one."

You can have cheap tickets and don't give a shit about the climate or you can claim you use extra expensive synfuels made from carbon removed from the atmosphere. You can't have both, except if you're talking bullshit.

Re: Can Boom Supersonic Succeed Where the Concorde Failed?

#30

Post by banskdlI » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 10:08 AM UTC

iso1210 wrote: post #25

short_sells_poo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also like to know which Tesla can get to 250mph (400kmh). The 100PD tops out at a "measly" 155. Only the most extreme hypercars can reach 250mph, and even out of those, a small handful are road legal.

155mph is 250km/h, I suspect that's where they miscalculated

With these kinds of miscalculations, I hope the Boom can glide well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider#Miscalculation_du...