The need for supersonic travel
Posted by Constant_Surprise_84@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 34 comments
While everyone the world over is trying to “go green”, why is there a race for supersonic aircraft for passenger travel. When we already know the legislation does not allow sonic booms over populated areas and hence routes are limited therefore low potential for profits. Do the companies think that suddenly the people below will start accepting the sonic booms and regulators will change overflying rules? And what about the people saying aviation being a menace to the Earth
aviationevangelist@reddit
There is a lot of work going on in the background to overturn the legislation from 1973. Have a read on the piece I wrote. https://manirayaprolu.wordpress.com/2025/04/13/shockwave/
YMMV25@reddit
You understand that you don't have to fly over land right? In fact many of the most lucrative supersonic routes would be TATL or TPAC.
Constant_Surprise_84@reddit (OP)
Sure, like Concorde, how many city pairs would there be? TPAC, would there be range enough?
mmmmmmham@reddit
I think on their wikipedia page they predict 500 suitable routes and also 1000 planes by 2035. I think both numbers are absurd. I doubt think their designs will be successful and don't really care. I'm alright with watching a movie or two or reading a few hours. I would rather see air travel become more sustainable than faster and noisier
consciousaiguy@reddit
Yes, Boom Overture will have 4,250 nautical mile range.
RealPutin@reddit
SEA-NRT is 4150nm. Given how reliant that 4250 will be on an engine that doesn't yet exist and isn't being developed by any of the top engine manufacturers, I'm not really going to be convinced of transpac range until I see it.
RealPutin@reddit
I've worked for a couple OEMs and the general assessment has been that supersonic aircraft won't be profitable for airlines to deploy or in high enough demand for a profitable private jet R&D campaign unless they can go supersonic (or at least fly reasonably efficiently) overland.
OkBet5823@reddit
And my question is, even on the lucrative routes, are rich folk really going to want to sit in a tiny uncomfortable tube when they can rent hotel rooms that fly?
YMMV25@reddit
Yes, absolutely. For many, time is the most valuable asset. For someone flying TATL bi-weekly, assuming the roundtrip savings is roughly seven hours, you’re talking a difference of 182 hours in a year. That’s more than a week each year saved just in commute time.
J and F lie flats and suites are great products, but they’re not worth spending an extra week each year on.
OkBet5823@reddit
A mindset I truly hope to never understand.
consciousaiguy@reddit
You don't need a hotel room when you can fly Tokyo to Seattle in 4.5 hours or New York to London in 3. If you look at the interiors design you will find they are far from "tiny and uncomfortable". Boom's cabins are being set up as either all business class or all first class with 1-1 seating.
Constant_Surprise_84@reddit (OP)
To Booms credit, maybe they might take this into consideration and go 1-2 sitting unlike Concorde
coycabbage@reddit
Why does every tech development relate to “only rich people use it”. By that logic everything we take for granted in the 21st century should never have happened because initially it was too expensive and only rich people could use it. Even if it goes bust the technological progress could help our own airlines and who’s to say future aircraft can’t go supersonic with green fuel?
Potential_Wish4943@reddit
The sonic boom bans were largely sour grapes by the US government because their own supersonic aircraft program didnt take off and the airline industry pressured lawmakers to ban supersonic passenger flight so they didnt take their premium international or coast-to-coast market away.
My point being that you can bet when an american made supersonic passenger jet manifests, the law will go away. (Possibly you'll have to transition to supersonic flight in specificied airspace)
gromm93@reddit
That's interesting, because one of the largest sources of opposition were greenhouse growers in the south of England.
shock_the_nun_key@reddit
The X-59 program says there is more than boom going on.
Limp-Acanthisitta372@reddit
You get investments. You get grants. You play around with a prototype. You get no interest and don't build anything. You close the business down.
You made money in the process.
consciousaiguy@reddit
Boom has orders for 130 aircraft from American, United, and Japan Airlines.
Limp-Acanthisitta372@reddit
No aircraft exists.
consciousaiguy@reddit
You said, "You get no interest.....". They have interest and orders. Now they complete their R&D, build aircraft, and make a heck of a lot more money than your scenario.
Limp-Acanthisitta372@reddit
By December 2018, the MRJ90 had 213 firm orders plus 194 commitments.
Canceled in 2023. And that was a conventional regional jet project from an established aerospace manufacturer.
Orders don't mean shit when you're a start-up flying a tech demonstrator.
LetsGoHawks@reddit
Because billionaires want to shave hours off of their long trips. And most people don't actually give a damn about switching to green energy.
Even if they aren't able to fly over land, there's still a lot of trips over the ocean.
sarcasm_andtoxicity@reddit
theres no need. but as you can see by sales of luxury vehicles, organic food, etc. rich people tend to be ok with paying for more expensive things. so if you like aviation, and want to be on cutting edge technology, and still want to make money, i think super / hyper sonic travel (or weapons) hit all 3 of those dopamine receptors.
consciousaiguy@reddit
If you do some research into the projects developing these aircraft you will find that they didn't invest hundreds of millions of dollars into them before considering those things.
Constant_Surprise_84@reddit (OP)
Hence my question, are they sure the rules will be changed?
consciousaiguy@reddit
Work is being done towards that end. A lot of engineering effort is being put into softening and minimizing sonic boom, not just by private industry but also NASA, which is critical to getting those rules changed. Regardless, the Boom Overture for example will have a range of 4,250 nautical miles that will allow it to fly more than 600 routes around the world without any change to those rules. As such, they already have orders for 130 units from American Airlines, United, and Japan Airlines.
OkBet5823@reddit
In my opinion, the entire company is simply a black hole for venture capital. I think the best this company will ever produce is a small supersonic, business jet.
That video that they produced of the test flight was way over produced for what they were showing off. Two IMAX cameras? It was simply a performance for the next round of funding.
Constant_Surprise_84@reddit (OP)
I agree with you and hence this discussion. Other than being a black hole for venture and best case scenario being a VERY SMALL niche market for supersonic travel, i feel it’s just a marketing gimmick and people are getting way too excited over it.
OkBet5823@reddit
I don't know, I watched Scott Manley's video about the Boom flight and he did not seem excited. Maybe I was just projecting my own blase feelings, but he just did not seem sparky. I think the people who are most excited are the people who are getting paid.
Griffie@reddit
They’ve been working on designs to cut down the severity or eliminate the sonic booms.
Constant_Surprise_84@reddit (OP)
That’s one right step
thphnts@reddit
There isn’t a race for supersonic travel, only Boom and their mythical unicorn engines that do not exist.
shiftyjku@reddit
Because rich people, who are the intended customers of this thing, don’t give a shit what happens to the environment; they think their time is worth more money than the health of 1 billion others and – – on paper – – it is.
fakefootballmaster@reddit
I am highly skeptical supersonic commercial flights will take off with Boom for a variety of reasons; some of which you list.