Page 1 of 1
Hypersonic passenger jet
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:40 pm
Re: Hypersonic passenger jet
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:21 pm
Holy crap. I'd pay anything to be able to do that. My trips home generally take in excess of 26 hours
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:07 am
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:14 pm
From the article:
Current research, however, focuses on sustained hypersonic manned flight within the Earth's atmosphere, which has not yet been achieved.
I wonder has that anything to do with the fact that such speeds in the atmoshere always result in the object being, well, burned up? Interestingly, the article also mentions Concorde. Just remind me - why are we no longer using that machine?
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:08 am
Because it crashed once. Which may not sound huge, but when you take into account that the Boeing 737 does more passenger miles per week than the Concorde did its entire life, that is a pretty bad statistic. Added to that the huge cost of maintaining a 1970s aircraft, it never boded well for the Concorde.
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:13 pm
Concordes fate was sealed early on in its career I believe. When it came into service and people on the ground realised the noise pollution it would cause, it resulted in multiple world wide bans from flying over significant land areas on a scheduled basis. This decimated its market and in the end the only 2 countries who used it were its inventors. And they only used it over the ocean, London-New York and Paris-New York.
I'm not sure this Hypersonic jet (if indeed it is a jet) will not have the same problem. Unless it flies so high that the air is thin enough to fail to carry the noise. In which case the wing design will need to be super efficient at those altitudes. It still leaves the problem with the time getting to cruise level and back down again at normal, quieter, speeds. Even late in Concorde's career it was subject to a successful law suit by people in Devon in South West England that meant it had to throttle back 15 mins earlier than previous as it approached the coast of the UK. This, naturally, added minutes to the flight which eats away at its competitive advantage.
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:02 am
Yeah, the maglev trains look fairly cool. I reckon the train itself would be the least expensive part.
As for the maglev train track, it seems to be fairly costly for the track. But even before laying the train track, land is required for the route that the track will take and this needs to have a low curvature for such a high speed train.
If Ireland is to aim towards getting a high speed train of any sort, it could start by planning and making provisions for acquiring the land needed for suitable routes for laying down track with low curvature.
Maybe in years to come!
But, the point is, what the hell are those useless politicians doing...
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:15 pm
I read an article there recently about how Branson was thinking about using SpaceShipTwo for long distance commuting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Com ... aceShipTwo
and if anyone wants to read about hypersonic jets, the technology they normally use are SCRAMJet's
it's basically a Jet engine that doesn't use a compressor at the front of the engine thus enabling them to work at very high velocities