21–30 of 124 posts
I really hope they are successful. So sad not to have this option for ocean crossing flights.
It's not going to be an option, tickets will be tens of thousands of dollars
So about what a Golden Era international flight cost, inflation adjusted [1]. Not bad.
[1] https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-o...
[flagged]
[flagged]
Even if the noise pollution can be solved (or, as others have said, just run it only over the ocean), I don't see how this thing wouldn't pump out an immense amount of CO2. It's definitely cool and would make flying nicer, but in an era where we're trying to decarbonize, get sustainable aviation fuel going, optimize flight paths to avoid contrail warming, etc... I can't lie, there is a big part of me that hopes it do…
[flagged]
Even if the noise pollution can be solved (or, as others have said, just run it only over the ocean), I don't see how this thing wouldn't pump out an immense amount of CO2. It's definitely cool and would make flying nicer, but in an era where we're trying to decarbonize, get sustainable aviation fuel going, optimize flight paths to avoid contrail warming, etc... I can't lie, there is a big part of me that hopes it do…
You don’t see an ultrapremium flight option improving chances for synthetic jet fuel?
[flagged]
A 2-3 hour reduction in flight time is appealing for approximately everyone who needs to fly.
A 2-3 hour reduction in flight time is appealing on its own, but probably not at a significant price increase.
[flagged]
I just love spending time in rush hour traffic \s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the noise pollution can be solved (or, as others have said, just run it only over the ocean), I don't see how this thing wouldn't pump out an immense amount of CO2. It's definitely cool and would make flying nicer, but in an era where we're trying to decarbonize, get sustainable aviation fuel going, optimize flight paths to avoid contrail warming, etc... I can't lie, there is a big part of me that hopes it do…
The biggest problem in my opinion is the same problem concord had. You had to have two planes in every source location in case one of them has problems because your customers *will not accept a delay*.
I’ve never seen this cited as a major problem for the Concorde. Assuming the tickets are under $50k, it wouldn’t be a problem today—someone paying $10 to 30k for first class isn’t kept a back-up jet for their convenience. Flying was immature in the Concorde’s era.
In what way will this be better than the Concorde? Definitely not cheaper.
Why?
[flagged]
I would love a 2-3 hour faster flight over the Atlantic when I visit family. Or even more saving when going over the Pacific. But yes, it will be affordable for only a very small group of people I am not part of. I can't even afford first class for these flights.