51–60 of 254 posts
There are perhaps 3 companies on Earth that could conceivably provide engines for this application. RR was one of them. Where to now?
Boom is wasting their time building an airframe but what they really need to win is an engine. They should have built the engine first.
My understanding is that the only profitable part of being a modern commercial jet engine manufacturer is service contracts - on actually-in-service jet engines. Vs. Boom Supersonic has never built a plane which actually managed to take off. And even their 1/3-scale "technology demonstrator" plane is 5+ years behind its original schedule. (And has yet to taxi along a runway, if I read Wikipedia right.) My guess - Boo…
Which is to say: Boom is aimed at the wrong product. The High Tech part of efficient supersonic transport is the engines, not the airframe. If there was an off the shelf engine solution, they could just buy it on investor money. The dirty truth is that there isn't.
My understanding is that the only profitable part of being a modern commercial jet engine manufacturer is service contracts - on actually-in-service jet engines. Vs. Boom Supersonic has never built a plane which actually managed to take off. And even their 1/3-scale "technology demonstrator" plane is 5+ years behind its original schedule. (And has yet to taxi along a runway, if I read Wikipedia right.) My guess - Boo…
Which is to say: Boom is aimed at the wrong product. The High Tech part of efficient supersonic transport is the engines, not the airframe. If there was an off the shelf engine solution, they could just buy it on investor money. The dirty truth is that there isn't.
There are perhaps 3 companies on Earth that could conceivably provide engines for this application. RR was one of them. Where to now?
Mentioned this elsewhere, but it belongs better here: If there's a market for a product that existing suppliers don't want to provide, that sounds like exactly what a startup should be doing. Boom is wasting their time building an airframe but what they really need to win is an engine. They should have built the engine first.
The grifters work on the final product, the movers work on the first step, having a plan to make that profitable, so they can build toward the final product. SpaceX is probably the example that comes to mind, even if they did borrow engines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like GE and P&W are bad choices given the fact that they made some of the best military jet engines in this world. While comparing fighter jet with large aircraft might not be fair, I think B-1B Lancer will be a good analogy in this case (similar size, 4-engine layout, and twice the takeoff weight). And B-1B Lancer use engines from GE.
They're not bad choices at all, and I'm sure Boom would love to work with either of them. But the question is whether or not GE or P&W are interested in working with this vaporware company.
GE gets skittish about a project when the government has already given them billions to develop it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safran could probably make an engine for this as well.
Eh. Maybe. They haven't developed a clean sheet supersonic turbofan since the 80's. This Boom "Overture" thing is going to need an entirely new design for long duration super-cruise; Boom needs engine people with a lot of depth.
There are perhaps 3 companies on Earth that could conceivably provide engines for this application. RR was one of them. Where to now?
There is no engine that will make economic sense for either the engine manufacturer or the airline operator based on the technology we have. This was always a fools errand.
Which is it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is to say: Boom is aimed at the wrong product. The High Tech part of efficient supersonic transport is the engines, not the airframe. If there was an off the shelf engine solution, they could just buy it on investor money. The dirty truth is that there isn't.
Engine manufacturing is much more profitable, and seemingly challenging than airframe manufacturing. The engines they'll use are unlikely to be very different from those in other applications, so I'm not sure there's room for a new entrant. Keep in mind that the R&D and capital costs of becoming a turbine engine manufacturer are immense, and likely much higher than the costs to develop a new aircraft.
1. They are a Theranos-style operation
2. They are a Madoff-style operation
I, a lone aerospace engineer working out of my garage in my spare time, have a better chance of achieving supersonic flight than Boom does.
Even their technology demonstrator is an obvious scam. It demonstrates nothing. It does not demonstrate the ability to design, build, or maintain a supersonic passenger airplane, and it doesn't demonstrate any new technologies or materials.
The bloatiest of bloated old-school defense contractors can throw together a supersonic prototype for less than $100 million, in fewer than 7 years.