It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Next Generation Supersonic Jet (new Concorde)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Hi all, this is my first post and I hope you like it.






Supersonic jet launch 'successful'
October 10, 2005 - 11:49AM

Japan has hailed the test of a supersonic jet in South Australia's outback as a success.

The model of the supersonic jet, planned to be a successor to the Concorde, was launched from a site near Woomera in SA's north about 7am CST today.


I hadn't seen anything on this posted here so thought I'd put it up. I dunno about any of you, but I sure would love to see something like the old Concorde back in the air again - and even better to boot! I was watching TV and saw the reports coming in live when she crashed in 2000, and it was a very, very sad day. I'm just glad it appears the age of supersonic passenger travel may not yet be over.

Here's a link to the news article: www.theage.com.au...

And another link to the project website, which has some stats: www.ista.jaxa.jp...

Peace.




posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Yup, that was a test of a scale model. I think the first one crashed, if I remember right. The success of any commercial aircraft in the near future, will be it's fuel mileage, or it's ability to burn fuels other than conventional jet fuels.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Great first post


I saw this on TV, it looked cool...hopefully there will be a new supersonic transport plane soon (I think they said this one might be ready in 15 years), one that will have a greater range and profitability than the Concorde.

[edit on 10/10/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 10:36 AM
link   
As far as I understood it, concorde was doomed to failure by the banning of supersonic flights over land. Since this problem has yet to be resolved, I don't see any way a future supersonic airliner can be viable (until of course the legislation problem is solved).



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   
As most trips to and from Japan are over water, I don't think the Japanese are too worried about that. And the problem of sonic booms over land has largely been resolved, thanks to technology developed in the QSP project, which diverts the bulk of the sonic boom's acoustical energy upwards. With a properly-shaped fuselage, a supersonic aircraft need no longer be much louder than a conventional jet.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Is supersonic flight over land banned then? Or just breaking the sound barrier over land?

If it is supersonic flight that is banned over land then that is a very unfair artificial obstacle to SST development, after all, the sonic boom only occurs at the point where the sound barrier is initially breached so there should be nothing to prevent an SST accelerating over the sea to mach 2 or whatever and then contiuing at that speed to its destination.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 09:57 AM
link   
The first test did end in disaster, although it was nothing to do with the actual model, it was some sort of malfunction in the rocket it was piggybacked on to get it up to the test altitude. From the footage that has been shown here on TV, it's quite clear, as it was barely 3-4 seconds off the ground before the twisting began.
I actually tend to find that quite encouraging, as they obviously thought this concept was still worth putting more money into, despite the setback.
I'm really not too sure about regulations banning supersonic flights over land. Is this an American thing? European? Air routes? Global? Anyway, as xmotex pointed out, Japan actually doesn't need to worry about that too much due to their position. Also, on the project website, a specific aim is:


* has environment-friendly characteristics
-low noise emitted from engine and body
-clean exhaust gas with low NOx and without smoke


So if these goals are realised and an aircraft that can seat 300 and travel at over Mach 2 becomes a reality in 15-20 years, AND with fares comparable to business class, what do you see as possibilities?

Tell you what, I'll put in my 2 cents and say I can imagine business and first class going supersonic, while the rest of us are confined to slow cattle-car jets. Remember Airbus saying if fitted out correctly, the A380 could take over 800 passengers?

Peace.

Mod Edit: Fixed Tags.

Please use [quote] not [code] tags. Thanks

[edit on 11/10/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:27 AM
link   
That's cool... How big is it and how many passangers does i carry...?



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos

Is supersonic flight over land banned then? Or just breaking the sound barrier over land?

If it is supersonic flight that is banned over land then that is a very unfair artificial obstacle to SST development, after all, the sonic boom only occurs at the point where the sound barrier is initially breached so there should be nothing to prevent an SST accelerating over the sea to mach 2 or whatever and then contiuing at that speed to its destination.



The boom is generated whenever the aircraft is supersonic (anything at or above Mach 1), and will propagate to the ground.



One of the two waves eminating from the (bullet in this case) leading edge will meet the ground, at that point, you would hear a 'sonic boom' on the ground.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4for4
I'm really not too sure about regulations banning supersonic flights over land. Is this an American thing? European? Air routes? Global? Anyway, as xmotex pointed out, Japan actually doesn't need to worry about that too much due to their position. Also, on the project website, a specific aim is:


Tell you what, I'll put in my 2 cents and say I can imagine business and first class going supersonic, while the rest of us are confined to slow cattle-car jets. Remember Airbus saying if fitted out correctly, the A380 could take over 800 passengers?

Peace.


Definitely limitations over US soil, that I'm sure of. I think its the same over France, not sure about England.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   
This test was just a 11.5m model, and not based on a finalised design, so even if I could find any other statistics, they'd probably be all wrong if/when this comes to be.
That said, in the article from The Age:


No budget projections have yet been made for the entire project, which Japanese hope will produce a supersonic passenger jet capable of flying from Tokyo to New York in just under six hours - less than half the current time of a Concorde.
...

Japan aims for the supersonic jet to carry 300 passengers, three times as many as the Concorde, and travel at Mach 2 which is twice the speed of sound.


Mod Edit: Fixed Tags.

Please use [quote] not [code] tags. Thanks



[edit on 11/10/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   
If they wanna go from Toyko to New York (in 6 hrs) they will have to overfly US soil supersonically. Unless the US government has given them assurances if the sonic boom carpet is below certain levels, its a very risky program.

Also, Concorde flew at M 1.8 for airframe heating reasons, so I would imagine much of the same limitations would apply to this design to make it economical (i.e. aluminium based frame instead of titanium)



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   
kilcoo, it appears that I have misunderstood the characteristics of a sonic boom. As far as I was aware you simply got a loud 'BANG!' as the speed of sound was exceeded, this is all I have known anyway, but in the light of your post I did a bit of a google on it and I have seen sources that back up your own version.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   
No it flew faster than mach 2, IIRC mach 2.2

The US won't lift the ban on booms untill there is a domestic rival.

But the real problem is the market, how much is a few hours of your time worth, especialy if for the same price you can get a flat bed or even a cabin on a A380 or future BWB.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nacnud
No it flew faster than mach 2, IIRC mach 2.2



Your right, me bad - cruises at 'over Mach 2' some say M 2 itself, others 2.2. Perhaps it 'cruises' at M 2, and is flat out at 2.2 I dunno, either way, its not 1.8



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I think we'll see the restrictions on supersonic flight over land dropped as the first supersonic business jets start to enter production, a development I expect to precede the return of full-scale commercial SST's. I deal with many bizjet travelers at work, and to these people, time is money - cutting the flight time of a trip in half or more is worth the extra expense to them.

[edit on 10/11/05 by xmotex]



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Nifty - and yes folks, the "boom"is a continuous pressure wave at anything over Mach 1 and travels along the ground as a wavefront. You hear a boom as the wave front passes....

Side note - living in LA I was looking out the French doors for the shuttle coming in to Edwards and the pressure wave caused the windows on the doors to bow in about and inch - freaked me out and a few seconds later the boom boom... and that shuttle was probably up at 60,000 ft at the time....

Also the economics have shifted on these puppies. The net and related technologies i.e. Fedex, video conference, e-mail, IP phones, fax, etc. have reduced the need to "be there" quite a bit. Also, many firms have insurance restrictions on how many exec's can be on the same plane - goes down so does the company kinda thing.

While the Concords were profitable on a per flight basis, they were not if you factored in the huge development and build costs that were eaten by the British and French gov's....




top topics



 
0

log in

join