Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Aviation Technology
Boom XB-1 makes 1st flight >

Boom XB-1 makes 1st flight

Notices
Aviation Technology New, advanced, and future aviation technology discussion

Boom XB-1 makes 1st flight

Old 03-22-2024, 07:54 PM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,915
Default 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.
AirBear is offline  
Old 03-22-2024, 09:19 PM
  #2  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,005
Default

Pretty cool. I have to admit, I didn't think they would get this far.
JohnBurke is offline  
Old 03-23-2024, 06:47 AM
  #3  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,236
Default

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
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-23-2024, 10:45 AM
  #4  
Occasional box hauler
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,678
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
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
Not unless they get the government to pay them to deliver it late and over budget.
tnkrdrvr is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 07:03 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 983
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
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
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.

also, for those that didnít bother to read the article this was just a technology demonstrator using T-38 engines. Hardly a monumental leap in aviation technology.
PNWFlyer is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 07:20 AM
  #6  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,005
Default

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.
JohnBurke is offline  
Old 03-26-2024, 09:39 AM
  #7  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,236
Default

Originally Posted by PNWFlyer View Post
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.
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.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-26-2024, 09:44 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
2StgTurbine's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,278
Default

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.
2StgTurbine is offline  
Old 03-26-2024, 06:32 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 983
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
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.
sometimes I canít tell if you are serious. ďSomebodyĒ didnít 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 canít even get the 321 XLR certified.
PNWFlyer is offline  
Old 03-27-2024, 01:50 AM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2021
Posts: 319
Default

Originally Posted by PNWFlyer View Post
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.
She is not autistic and did not invent "reusable rockets" - Von Braun had the concept and McD (of all places) made the first reliable one with the DC-X (Space shuttle was also reliable but a grey area on comparison).

All Space Karen did was find a way to use it as a grifting mechanism.
​​​
4dalulz is offline  
Related Topics
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
AirBear
Hiring News
1
07-06-2018 09:32 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices