

New supersonic passenger jet being designed - edw519
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38371099/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/

======
philwelch
With only a dozen passenger capacity, this is less of a supersonic airliner
and more of a supersonic business jet. Regional jets (50-100 passengers),
Concordes (92-128 pasengers), and even Concordskis (70-140 passengers) carry a
lot more people.

A supersonic business jet is a better idea than a supersonic airliner, because
executives and billionaires are generally better customers than airlines--less
bureaucratic, more spending power, and just enough desire for high status to
cover price-performance gaps.

------
nitrogen
I felt like a small part of humanity died when we lost commercial supersonic
transit, as I hate seeing our race lose any kind of technological capability.
Though I doubt I'd use it myself, I'm glad to see someone is trying to bring
supersonic flight back, and targeted at those who will benefit most:
executives whose time costs more than plane tickets.

------
hugh3
Important information missing from the article: who is bankrolling this?

As far as I can tell, Aerion Corp is a rather small-looking company based in
Reno which has never actually built a jet. They have a website which says
"Copyright 2007", some renderings of what a jet might look like, and a few
photos of people meeting with each other. I can't figure out who is funding
them.

So I'm really not going to get my hopes up for the success of this project.
Wake me when they have a working prototype, or even enough money to build a
working prototype.

~~~
_delirium
This article from 2004 has some early information on the company, though it's
still not a lot: <http://www.aviationweek.com/shownews/04nbaa/topstor02.htm>

As of 2007 they were soliciting preorders:
[http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/SUP...](http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/SUPE11147.xml)

From what I can dig up on them, I'm vaguely suspicious that the company
doesn't _really_ exist yet, though, or at least hasn't started engineering in
earnest. In that 2004 piece, they estimated it'd take 5 years from launch to
service entry, and the linked article here is estimating service entry... 5
years from now.

Edit: Though this article claims they had (as of 2008) 20 letters of intent
secured by $250k deposits each:
[http://www.avweb.com/news/acrossthepond/across_the_pond_12_n...](http://www.avweb.com/news/acrossthepond/across_the_pond_12_new_year_196807-1.html)

------
jameskilton
The "fate of the Concorde" was a massively stupid design flaw where the engine
intake was BEHIND the rear wheels. Looking at one up close it's very easy to
see why the thing exploded. The tires blew during take-off (expected to happen
on any airline at some point) which sent rubber and metal shrapnel into the
engine, causing a catastrophic explosion.

This new design "avoids the fate" simply because the engines are on top of the
wings.

Why there's so much regulation behind "wanting to go faster" is mind boggling.
The Concorde had some technical flaws, but the plane did a great job at what
it was built for: getting people places faster. I hope this plane is able to
bring back what we lost.

~~~
gmac
Do you have a reference for that? I recalled it being a fuel tank problem, and
Wikipedia seems to agree:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590>,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde>

------
SkyMarshal
_"If you look at the straight wings of the new jet and those on the Lockheed
F-104 “missile with a man in it" of the late ‘50s and early ‘60s you’ll see a
family resemblance."_

The F-104 Starfighter was the first thing I thought of when I saw the pic in
the article. Another of Kelly Johnson and the Skunkworks' triumphs, still
informing aerospace design half a century later.

------
bosch
That's the kind of thing I'd love to work on. Not only is it cutting edge tech
but you would probably learn a ton of new things!

The one thing I have learned reading articles about aviation is the fact that
wing design makes a huge difference - not only in speed but also in fuel
consumption which is pretty crazy.

------
fondue
I vaguely remember that after the concorde was in service a few years some
engineer said that there was no way it could be repeated. He was asked,
"Because of the technology?" and replied, "No, there are so many regulations
now it would be impossible to complete a design."

