Second supersonic concept revealed at Le Bourget.

Well after years of false starts and hopes for a "son of" Concorde successor, yet another company has revealed a new SSBJ concept at this years Paris airshow. A company called Hypermach Europe has unveiled plans at the Paris airshow for a Mach 3.5 20 seat business jet that they claim will use a revolutionary sounding propulsion system and no overland sonic boom. The powerplant appears to be a variable bypass ratio turbofan driving a high power generator system to as they put it in their words.

...produce sufficient power to operate the multi-stage counter rotating, superconducting, dual ring motor electric bypass fans and superconducting electric ring motor axial compressor, power generation and thrust comes from 5-stage superconducting axial turbine...

This is the first I have heard of this technology and even if it also comes to nothing like every other SSBJ concept of the last 10-15 years it at least provokes thought into thinking outside the square.

Flightglobal story

Hypermach.com

Comments anyone?

LEE.

Hypermach is a ridiculous name.

If people are willing to pay more for a ticket, there is a niche for supersonic passenger aircraft.

reply to post by thebozeian


I agree. What a stupid name. They should have gone with UberMach.

Nice design. Too bad its only for the rich and powerful. $80,000,000 per plane with only 20 seats. I'm afraid to ask how much a ticket would cost.

Eventually, supersonic or suborbital flight will be the norm for laymen. That's if we don't kill ourselves before then.

Have they even built a prototype of this thing yet? It looks like a pretty sleek yet radical design

My main concern with the aerodynamics is in the way most of the mass seems to be forward of the wings. While the somewhat lifting-body design would probably compensate well at supersonic speeds... I have to wonder what take-off and landing would be like - especially landing, as most of your fuel would have been depleted from reserves that I can only imagine being in the aft.

That said - they use the word superconducting quite a few times.... not sure how they plan to do that in a jet engine since the superconductors we know of still have to be at cryogenic temperatures... but, hey, if they can pull it off - good on them.

Got a feeling we may see a variation of this project filling the Concorde replacement role first?

www.reactionengines.co.uk...

Iirc the project has recently been examined by the European space agency who couldn't find any problems so far. And the engines are reputed to be close to testing in the very near future?

reply to post by solidshot


Probably not, who would want to pay for a ticket in that thing? No way, absolutely, NO WAY will there be something like that in the next decade, you cannot make money off of something that ridiculous, and that is what really matters in this day and age.

Who would want to buy a ticket on that thing? Are we kidding here? Just about any uber rich businessman who wanted to get to the other side of the world and fast would want it. Who do you think the vast majority of Concorde's passengers were? As for 80 million a pop and only 20 seats, has anyone here bothered to see what the list price on a Gulfstream G650 is these days? It's about the same. And plenty of people have been queuing up to by the BBJ and ACJ, cost is not much of a factor here to these people, time is.

IF they can pull this off at the price and performance level they are claiming it will eat alive every other large corporate jet offering out there. Think about it, 80 million, 20 seats, 6,000nm, Mach 3.5, no boom, and able to cruise above all the other traffic. It's a no brainer.

LEE.

reply to post by thebozeian



Same as a Gulfstream, not happening. The only reason the Concorde had some success is because it could carry a decent amount of passengers. Unless we have world dominating super companies replacing governments in the next decade, this business jet is just fantasy. Purchase cost is one thing, imagine maintenance, engine overhauls, and the freaking insurance. VLJ's have a good chance of success, but not this thing. I can guarantee not even Walmart would want one, especially when you take into account that there will be commercial holograms available for virtual meetings in a few years. Any benefit from meeting clients in person will not justify the purchase of an aircraft like this.

I have a few current and former CEO's and directors in my family, who have managed companies who operate Gulfstreams and Citations. We got onto the subject of supersonic business jets just last week over dinner and I asked what they thought of it, I got the same answer I'm telling you now.

They killed off concord!
and never let any thing take its place.
why?
I dont think this will happen.
they dont wont the public in space with a window.

It looks like one of those planes out of "Thunderbirds", a puppet show from the 60's lol

Originally posted by Aim64C
That said - they use the word superconducting quite a few times.... not sure how they plan to do that in a jet engine since the superconductors we know of still have to be at cryogenic temperatures... but, hey, if they can pull it off - good on them.

Yhea that did get me thinking too... Mind you if the thing is up there on the edge of space??? I got nothing

Here is the patent application for the S-MAGJET see if that helps anyone understand. It seems to be quite something, loads of power and right up there in the thin air where a conventional jet would struggle.

edit: If I have this right the exaust plasma sipns a set of blades that instead of turning intake blades at the front end of the engine with the traditional co axial shaft running through the length of the jet engine the rear blades generate huge amounts of electrical power (suppose this is where the superconducting comes in so as to not loose a drop of that electrical juice?) that power then drives the intake blades - the blades are not directly driven, they are induced to spin (correct term???) in a powerful magnetic field................. maybe

Hi everyone,
Here are some interview and press conference announcements that give some more background to the technology behind the Hypermach concept. At first I was a little skeptical of the idea but after looking at the interview I am a little more convinced. Also it appears that they have been peer reviewed and NOT found wanting so make of that what you will.
Le Bourget announcement

Hypermach chairman Richard Lugg

LEE.

reply to post by thebozeian


Very interesting, but I still don't see a market for this. There are much more practical and cost efficient methods to meet people in the 21st century.

reply to post by ZIVONIC
ZIVONIC,

If it were all about the practicality and cost Mr Lear would never have developed his now famous biz jet. It isn't really cost effective for a senior executive, or anyone else for that matter to fly in first class but they do it. For the uber rich it isn't always about meetings or even about time, it's about having something that nobody else does. There is no practical or cost effective argument on earth to justify having a large VIP/VVIP jet but that hasn't stopped Airbus and Boeing from selling custom built versions of the A380 and 747 to rich Arabs and Russian oligarchs, both of which cost many more times the $80 million being touted here. As I already said, people who are building intercontinental range business jets in the same size as the Hypermach concept cant crank them out the door fast enough.

I therefore find your relatives stance on corporate jets curious. It may be that the business they were in just couldn't justify them and that airline travel would suffice. It may have been a reaction to the risk averse, tight money, bad corporate image times that US business is going through (remember the Automotive bosses who fronted up to Washington cap in hand for loans in their Gulfstream's and Citation's? That image didn't go down so well with the Government or the man in the street). Or it could be that what they were looking at is the "why own the whole thing when you can use fractional ownership?" argument.

As for holographic meetings in 10 years, well I have been hearing that one for about 30. It will happen and we can video teleconference now but there is no substitute for one on one meetings. I dont see that changing for a very long time to come.

At the end of the day people want something new and if they have the money they will pay for it. Especially the opportunity to travel 3 and a half times faster than we can now. That is precisely why corporate jet manufacturers have been pushing there designs cruise and max speed virtually to Mach 1, people want that.

LEE.