2007-01-16 11:38:41 · 17 answers · asked by Gilly 4 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Aircraft
not me. more focus needs to go on planes that are enviromentally friendly. a 747 flying across the atlantic uses the same amount of fuel as a family car does in 30+ years. need to try and build more economical engines and ones that pollute less.
2007-01-16 11:42:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Faster, even with new technology would be extremely difficult - it did fly at Mach 2.5 which is plenty fast enough!
Bigger and better (more economical and quieter) would be achievable with the latest tech.
However, the sonic boom is really not an environmental issue. bearing in mind that Concorde only ever broke the sound barrier over the atlantic - it's just a noise in of itself it doesn't harm the environment.
It was an extremely commercially successful product for both AF and BA in the last 10 years of service as the cost of the airframes had been written off by then.
Just for the record - it was not the airlines that withdrew them from service, it was the manufacturer (Airbus in effect) that decided to stop parts/spares manufacture and, in effect withdraw the aircraft from service.
2007-01-17 03:39:55 · answer #2 · answered by MPatrinos 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's technically possible to build a better supersonic airliner, but there's no market for it so it won't happen. Concorde never really made money for BA or AF, despite the sky-high ticket prices. No company is going to invest the capital necessary to develop such an airliner unless there's a reasonable chance of making a profit. Then of course there are the enviro-whackos to deal with.
If you compare subsonic airliners of the 60's vintage with those of today, you see that the technology is vastly superior now. The same would be true of a new supersonic airliner...lighter, faster, more economical. I'd love to see it. Too bad it won't happen.
2007-01-16 20:10:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have a look at Reaction Engines website and the amazing Skylon rocket plane. Created by Allan Bond and using a hybrid air breathing rocket engine, Skylon can put 12 tons into low earth orbit, or it could be fitted out with a pressurised container in the hold to transport people. Imagine London to Australia in about 40 Min's and travelling to the edge of space. This is cutting edge technology, using a unique engine advanced composite materials (not dodgy heat insulation tiles). It takes off and lands like an aeroplane and its environmental impact is zero as it burns Hydrogen and Oxygen together, so its only exhaust is water. Finally it would put Britain in the forefront of space technology.
2007-01-17 04:40:40 · answer #4 · answered by Darmok 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Concorde was perfect as it was.
In 1962 the Americans were sending men up to 60,000 feet in air tight suits and masks to see if it was humanly possible to fly like that.
In 1972 the British and French were sending over 200 suited businessmen on a similar mission armed only with an exceptionally good wine cellar.
Bigger???...Better???...Faster than the Concorde???
Forget it laddy....The best has been done...and thrown away by cowardly politicians who wouldn't know the biggest, the best and the fastest if it was doing it to their wives.
2007-01-16 19:51:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely.
If they can crack the sonic boom problem then I think it would be an economic winner.
Even if they couldn't then it would still make some money although it could only travel over water at supersonic speeds.
I wonder if the research that involves firing a laser from the nose to disperse the air will pay off. I am not sure if what I have heard is accurate, but its supposed to get the air ready for whats coming thus reducing the sonic boom.
2007-01-16 19:46:41 · answer #6 · answered by footynutguy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh, you !!!! Just what point are we trying to make here??
Carbon emissions say "NO"
People for celebrating mankind's achievements, and getting places fast ,with no regard to sonic pollution ,or any other kind, say "YES" ( only just keep it as it was , and build a few new ones)
I never had a flight on Concorde, so I don't "miss" it in a practical way.
M : )
2007-01-16 19:46:40 · answer #7 · answered by mesmerized 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes with hardpoints for 6 sidewinder or similar and 40 X 1000lb Bombs, Should scare the Mussies shiite less.
2007-01-16 21:14:09 · answer #8 · answered by Tom Cobbley 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Technically, the russians did, about 30 years ago. Have a google for the TU-144.
2007-01-17 03:48:26 · answer #9 · answered by Steven N 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be nice, but the real gotcha is the fuel bill. It takes about three times as much fuel to fly supersonically as it does to fly subsonically. In these days of high oil prices, that is a really big hit.
2007-01-16 19:45:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be cool to see, but i want my transatlantic flight as long as possible unlike the rest of the world.
2007-01-16 23:04:52 · answer #11 · answered by *unknownuser* 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋