Boom XB-1 makes 1st flight
03-22-2024, 07:54 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,919
Boom XB-1 makes 1st flight
https://myfox8.com/news/north-caroli...edium=referral
-hit an altitude of 7120ft and airspeed of 273mph
-"Overture" will be 3x as big and be built in GSO. Will carry 64-80pax at Mach 1.7.
-hit an altitude of 7120ft and airspeed of 273mph
-"Overture" will be 3x as big and be built in GSO. Will carry 64-80pax at Mach 1.7.
03-23-2024, 06:47 AM
#3
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,289
Yes, seemed like a high bar for a startup. Good for them.
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
03-23-2024, 10:45 AM
#4
Occasional box hauler
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,683
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes, seemed like a high bar for a startup. Good for them.
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
03-25-2024, 07:03 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 986
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes, seemed like a high bar for a startup. Good for them.
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
But I guess spacex just flew something that grosses out over 10 million pounds, to 500,000+ feet at mach 25.
There may be some benefit to starting with a clean slate (engineering and philosophically)... boeing sure isn't going to be building any SST's
also, for those that didn’t bother to read the article this was just a technology demonstrator using T-38 engines. Hardly a monumental leap in aviation technology.
03-25-2024, 07:20 AM
#6
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,025
Some of us did bother to read the article. Whether or not passengers buy tickets, is at this stage, irrelevant.
What is impressive, however, is that the start-up got as far as they did. They have an actual vehicle in flight which is more than engines; it's a flying airframe in a test program, and and not idealistic prognostications and artists rendering mockups on a web site.
What is impressive, however, is that the start-up got as far as they did. They have an actual vehicle in flight which is more than engines; it's a flying airframe in a test program, and and not idealistic prognostications and artists rendering mockups on a web site.
03-26-2024, 09:39 AM
#7
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,289
Originally Posted by PNWFlyer
news flash, neither Boeing or Airbus are going to build SSTs. They know there is no market for it. Sure people will buy tickets, but if you buy a ticket you expect to go. That is what killed the Concorde, spare aircraft. That problem is hard to solve, flying around empty airplanes cuts into your margins.
I suspect with 21st century technology you can make an SST which is economically viable, for some market niche somewhere, even if it's only for billionaires.
03-26-2024, 09:44 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,278
The airframe isn't the issue right now. Making a subsonic commercial jet engine is already a long and expensive process. Those engines get sold in the hundreds and thousands. I just don't see how a new commercial supersonic engine can be developed for such a small market.
03-26-2024, 06:32 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 986
Originally Posted by rickair7777
ULA and arianspace would never build space launch boosters which can return to launch site (as opposed to ditching in the ocean) for rapid reuse either. Until somebody else did it, and disrupted the conventional industry economics.
I suspect with 21st century technology you can make an SST which is economically viable, for some market niche somewhere, even if it's only for billionaires.
I suspect with 21st century technology you can make an SST which is economically viable, for some market niche somewhere, even if it's only for billionaires.
Airbus can’t even get the 321 XLR certified.
03-27-2024, 01:50 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2021
Posts: 319
Originally Posted by PNWFlyer
sometimes I can’t tell if you are serious. “Somebody” didn’t make reusable rockets from scratch. The richest person in the world, who happens to be autistic did. Boom is not financed by even one of the top 10 richest people in the world. Even Elon has said the FAA is regulating us out of innovation! So how is a startup going to create an airframe and engine out of thin air and get it certified by the FAA? EVER?
Airbus can’t even get the 321 XLR certified.
Airbus can’t even get the 321 XLR certified.
All Space Karen did was find a way to use it as a grifting mechanism.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
chancechumley
Part 91 and Low Time
8
07-18-2018 03:45 AM
takingmessages
Flight Schools and Training
8
07-07-2018 11:11 PM
