What are the chances this gets off the ground?
At least a flying prototype.
>naming your company Boom™
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-21/this-aerospace-company-wants-to-bring-supersonic-civilian-travel-back
Pic related, their concept.
An aviation company named boom, in a world where aviation is the edgiest about terrorist attacks. Ok
Anyways, as long as they have the funds, it'll probably take off at some point.
I can't help feel that calling an aircraft company "boom" was probably misguided.
>civilian supersonic aircraft
>BOOM
Cheeky cunts
>>936117
Zero chance of commercial success.
>>936117
If the 2707 can drive Boeing nearly bankrupt, then this is going to do the same to these guys.
Thank the lawd for the 747.
>the sweep on those wings
The thing looks like it will have to land stupid fast to avoid stalling. faster than the Concorde does. They're going to need fucking drogue chutes for that thing.
>>936269
>fucking drogue chutes
Kek
That would be a wild sight on a passenger jet. Would love to watch that thing land at the airport.
they will need tens of billions in venture capital to get a factory, testing parts, and a prototype built.
then you need to get super sonic flight opened up over land.
>>936289
They identified over
ocean routes only that they figured best suited the plane and revenue.
That's really the least of their problems per the examples you posted.
>>936300
You won't get the muslim airlines buying them if they can't fly supersonic over asia and europe.
>>936549
You won't get any airline buying them because they don't make any economic sense.
>>936117
>Founded by an amateur pilot who is a former software drone from silly con valley, who cashed out of his startup.
Homeboy has zero experience developing hardware, period. Not even consumer electronics. Waaaaay out of his depth.
>11 employees
>Plans to have a 1/3 scale plane flying by next year
Lolno
>Boom’s software can also run millions of computer simulations a day on its designs, so the startup doesn’t have to spend months tweaking things in wind tunnels.
Yeah that doesn't matter for shit if you don't know what you're doing. CFD is really powerful, but garbage in, garbage out. I bet they're making a bunch of pretty pictures, though...
>"we'll tweak an existing engine for supersonic flight"
hahahahahahaha no. Engine selection is a critical part of the design process. If they've picked the size of the aircraft, they'd better have a fucking engine in mind, because it's not going to magically appear.
That said, from this article: http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a20089/boom-supersonic-passenger-jet-of-the-future/
>It was announced today that Virgin Group has signed an option to buy 10 planes from Boom for roughly $2 billion if everything goes according to plan. Virgin Galactic's spacecraft manufacturer The Spaceship Company will also be assisting with the design and development of the prototype plane.
>"We can confirm that The Spaceship Company will provide engineering, design and manufacturing services, flight tests and operations and that we have an option on the first 10 airframes," a spokeswoman for Virgin Group told The Guardian
That's no joke. If they're basically using TSC as a contract house for engineering consultation and running all of the manufacturing, maybe they have a shot.
I still have a lot more confidence in Aerion, though
>>936210
Yeah the whole Twitter-era Millennial "Lets give every new company a quirky name!!" thing is really weird.
Just combine your last names like McDonnell Douglas or something.
>>936952
Not everyone has a glorious Anglo name. If you're an Asian-American engineer you might not want to name your company Xiaoping Aircraft. Check your white privilege.
>>936636
>Aerion
>Unswept wings on an SST
>Fussing over viscous drag in a flight regime dominated by wave drag
Anon...
>>937132
>>Unswept wings on an SST
Looks like a scaled-up F-104 to me. It had no problem going supersonic. It had every other imaginable problem, but not that.
>>937143
>It had no problem going supersonic.
It needed afterburners and shitloads of fuel flow to go supersonic and could only do so for a few minutes. The F-104 wasn't even remotely comparable to an SST.
>>937151
>needed afterburners and shitloads of fuel
So did all aircraft of the era because engines. Supercruising is a matter of having powerfull engines.
The wing design was actually modelled to be the most efficient wing at supersonic speeds. The downside as opposed to swept, long wings or deltas if incredibly shitty low speed characteristics. Lift to drag at supersonic speed is excellent.
>>936117
More likely pic related. Aerion hopes to get their prototype flying by 2019. The've done extensive wind tunnel testing but not really much else.
The do have a shitton of orders already though, which is impressive.
>>937132
Look at this schmuck
Mach 2, son
>>937132
>>937290
Oh at I almost forgot, 7,270kph. Suck it.
>>937260
That thing looks nowhere near as elegant as the Concord.
But hey, if it works it works.
Quick question tho. Why are the wings so far back? Won't all the lift be at the rear making it want to keep its nose down? Even with the weight of the engines all set at the tail end it still seems extreme.
>>936117
The tickets are way cheaper and the seating is way more Luxurious than the Concorde. 40 Windows , 40 seats, ample room.
Good head start on the failure that was the Concorde, this will be good for businessmen that can't afford to charter a Rental private jet and you'll get to your location a lot faster than a private jet.
>>937290
That thing killed more Germans than Eisenhower.
>>937291
That's not even a jet, it's a rocket plane.
>>937366
But look at the wings, wingnut.
>>937318
>Why are the wings so far back?
Perspective and geometry is fucking with your mind.
>>937397
That is a bit different then the rendering.
> T-tail
> much longer tail
> Chine/window relation
>>937423
The three-view is newer than the rendering above; they changed the configuration to T-tail within the past year.
>>937397
>Perspective and geometry is fucking with your mind.
Thanks
>>937642
Damn it.
>>937643
I'm assuming you're the same poster I just replied to and this is the example of the different view showing that it was, in fact set very far back (wings).
Looks silly imo. I have little clue about aero but why would a company release a bunch of drawings/stylized art that was wrong?
You would think that they would not release such a glaring error that other engineers in the industry could spot it and not take it seriously.
This is wrong, right?
Or am I delirious because it's late and I can't sleep.
>>936953
gb2 tumblr, faggot.
>>937701
>I have little clue about aero but why would a company release a bunch of drawings/stylized art that was wrong?
Those are artistic concept renderings not showing the design they're actually working with. Anything without the T-tail is out the window long ago.
You need to start selling/marketing the product even while your engineers are stuck at the wind tunnels, so you let some artist loose with a bit of artistic license even if the exact proportions aren't set in stone yet.
Said artist thought an oversized set of stabilisers looked cooler than wings. Engineering probably doesn't get to veto marketing material.
>>937715
Thanks, makes sense.
>>937260
>>937397
>>937643
>nose takes up one quarter of aircraft's total length
>>936117
This shit's going to be a bomb!
>>936549
>muslim airlines
>>937397
>6.7 nautical miles tall
Ambitious
>>937643
it remind me of this
>>936953
>Check your white privilege
>>938824
>straight wing on supersonic aircraft
fake and gay
>>938858
You're an idiot.
>>938858
Look up the F-104
>>938874
Could only make supersonic dashes on full afterburner. Not relevant.
Pic related - what a real supersonic wing looks like. (Ty-144)
>>938880
>Ty-144
*TU-144
>>938894
Please re-read the Týпoлeв brochure.
>>938895
All right, Konkordski it is.
>>938880
Did the ruskies ever design anything themselves or do they consider spying "espionage engineering"
>>938973
c.f.: their entire space program until the Buran
The Japanese also developing a supersonic jet.
Cruising speed about mach 1.3-1.4 to contempt the noise.
>Pan Pan Airlines
>>942128
LOL
I still don't see the economic opportunity for mass supersonic air travel. Concorde failed with the benefit of sponsorship by major international airlines, and now startups want to try their hand at finding profitability with much smaller fuselages?
As far as I'm concerned the only fully sustainable private option for supersonic flight will be built by Gulfstream for billionaires, whenever they get around to it.
>>938809
they're the only ones with the dosh to waste on SST.
everyone else is only interested in moving the most people on the least amount of fuel.
