Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   LA to NYC in 46 minutes? Welcome to the future of hypersonic flying   (npr.org ) divider line
    More: Cool, Los Angeles, Space Museum, Pratt & Whitney, Concorde, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, hypersonic flight  
•       •       •

13406 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Aug 2012 at 2:37 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



112 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-08-13 12:13:19 PM  
Hm. That's gonna make joining the mile high club an even trickier endeavor.
 
2012-08-13 12:16:32 PM  
Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.
 
2012-08-13 12:18:33 PM  

markie_farkie: Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.


what a beautiful world it would be.
 
2012-08-13 12:26:46 PM  
Make that 146 minutes, because snowflake ears will require flying from NY to LA over Panama.
 
2012-08-13 12:26:51 PM  

FlashHarry: markie_farkie: Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.

what a beautiful world it would be.


Undersea by rail.
 
2012-08-13 12:32:50 PM  
Wake me up when it's more than just some slow day news report about an advanced prototype test

/like when they start taking reservations
 
2012-08-13 12:33:08 PM  
Didn't one of the other hypersonic jet testbeds vibrate itself apart when it got itself up to speed?
 
2012-08-13 12:33:50 PM  

propasaurus: FlashHarry: markie_farkie: Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.

what a beautiful world it would be.

Undersea by rail.


Eternally free, and eternally young.
 
2012-08-13 12:34:36 PM  

RexTalionis: Didn't one of the other hypersonic jet testbeds vibrate itself apart when it got itself up to speed?


And it stole a bucks worth of quarters, too
 
2012-08-13 12:39:37 PM  
Now if they could only get it down to 26 minutes, I could be at the gym in time.
 
2012-08-13 12:39:55 PM  
You won't make it through security in 46 minutes.
 
2012-08-13 12:55:43 PM  
"After about 300 seconds, the test craft is supposed to break up and fall into the ocean."

Um.
 
2012-08-13 12:57:34 PM  

RexTalionis: Didn't one of the other hypersonic jet testbeds vibrate itself apart when it got itself up to speed?


Screaming out for a "your mom"

//evokes images of your mom screaming out, ect.
 
2012-08-13 01:28:30 PM  
"Imagine being able to fly from Los Angeles to New York City in less time than it takes to commute from most of Long Island into Manhattan."

What are: paragraphs that have opened Popular Science articles for 75 years?
 
2012-08-13 02:39:11 PM  
I have been wondering when the super rich would get tired of 20hour flights in huge super jets and instead had a 5-6 hour flight in an 8 person jet.

Seems like it's starting to happen.
 
2012-08-13 02:40:00 PM  

Pocket Ninja: Hm. That's gonna make joining the mile high club an even trickier endeavor.


I'd have to figure out what to do with the other 44 minutes.
 
2012-08-13 02:42:10 PM  
One hour trying to park at the airport

45 minutes waiting for the shuttle to take you to the airport

One hour in line, waiting for the ticket agent

One and a half hours waiting in line for your TSA grope

Two hours waiting for the hypersonic jet to arrive from Cleavland ("Good news everybody! The pilot has reported that he has departed Fort Worth! He only has to stop at Little Rock, Indianapolis, Dayton,...")
Two hours sitting on the runway waiting for clearance from Clarence.
 
2012-08-13 02:42:13 PM  
I didn't have time to read the article, because I have to be in NYC in 46 minutes.
 
2012-08-13 02:42:27 PM  

RexTalionis: Didn't one of the other hypersonic jet testbeds vibrate itself apart when it got itself up to speed?


i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-08-13 02:43:05 PM  
This will never happen for a few reasons....

1) The actual time of the flight is a small portion of the travel time door to door. It may take you 10 hours door to door to do a 4 hour flight. Cut that down to 1 hour and you've only shaved 30% off your travel time.

2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

4) Pollution. Same as noise. This thing is going to dump huge amounts of bad stuff into the upper atmosphere.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.

If it does happen, it'll be a small business jet with a small production run for those without anything else to do with their money. Normal people like you and I will never benefit from something like this.
 
2012-08-13 02:43:19 PM  
Imagine a world where energy costs are low enough that supersonic flight is economically viable.

/First we have to eliminate 60% of energy users.
 
2012-08-13 02:44:41 PM  
bbsimg.ngfiles.com
 
2012-08-13 02:44:59 PM  
Yawn.

We called that back in the 70s.

27-28 July 1976 : SR-71A sets speed and altitude records (Altitude in Horizontal Flight: 85,068.997 ft (25,929.030 m) and Speed Over a Straight Course: 2,193.167 miles per hour (3,529.560 km/h))

and

the "Speed Over a Recognized Course" record for flying from New York to London distance 3,508 miles (5,646 km), 1,435.587 miles per hour (2,310.353 km/h), and an elapsed time of 1 hour 54 minutes and 56.4 seconds, set on 1 September 1974

Child, please.
 
2012-08-13 02:45:05 PM  
It will take longer to get through security and have TSA feel the 'nads.
 
2012-08-13 02:45:24 PM  
Bu..bu.. but chemtrails!!!
 
2012-08-13 02:45:28 PM  
That whole dropping the rocket thing would seem rather problematic.
 
2012-08-13 02:45:32 PM  
Sounds familiar....

horyaalmedia.com

Oh yeah.
 
2012-08-13 02:46:03 PM  
FTA: "it will accelerate to about 3,600 mph"


The X-15 was doing 4,000+ mph 50 years ago, and we still don't have airlines anywhere near that speed. I don't think this is going to do much for commercial air travel. Cool, though.
 
2012-08-13 02:46:20 PM  

Pocket Ninja: Hm. That's gonna make joining the mile high club an even trickier endeavor.


I guess farkers will just have to settle with being twice daily members of the solo 8 feet under club.
 
2012-08-13 02:49:15 PM  

EatHam: You won't make it through security in 46 minutes.


Came here to say this. ^
 
2012-08-13 02:50:06 PM  
Give up on the scramjets, they only ever end up disintegrating or shaking themselves apart. Hybrid rocket engines are where it's at, a la Skylon.

Please, America, take this forward, because if it's left to us Brits it'll just plane never get off the ground.
 
2012-08-13 02:50:33 PM  

wildcardjack: Imagine a world where energy costs are low enough that supersonic flight is economically viable.

/First we have to eliminate 60% of energy users.


Just put a nuclear reactor in each one. They'll pay for themselves when they hook up to the grid between flights!
 
2012-08-13 02:50:40 PM  

95629: This will never happen for a few reasons....

walloftext


Yes, all of those reasons. And the fact that the aircraft in the article is unmanned and launched from the wing of a B-52. That also plays a minor role.
 
2012-08-13 02:51:35 PM  

95629: This will never happen for a few reasons....

1) The actual time of the flight is a small portion of the travel time door to door. It may take you 10 hours door to door to do a 4 hour flight. Cut that down to 1 hour and you've only shaved 30% off your travel time.

2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

4) Pollution. Same as noise. This thing is going to dump huge amounts of bad stuff into the upper atmosphere.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.

If it does happen, it'll be a small business jet with a small production run for those without anything else to do with their money. Normal people like you and I will never benefit from something like this.


Even though it's not feasible for civil aviation, this has military applications which means it'll have all the development funding that the developers ask for it.
 
2012-08-13 02:51:36 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: FTA: "it will accelerate to about 3,600 mph"


The X-15 was doing 4,000+ mph 50 years ago, and we still don't have airlines anywhere near that speed. I don't think this is going to do much for commercial air travel. Cool, though.


Pretty much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_2707
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_L-2000

Even at our cheap energy peak, with the full Space Age going on, it made no sense.
 
2012-08-13 02:52:11 PM  

95629: 1) The actual time of the flight is a small portion of the travel time door to door. It may take you 10 hours door to door to do a 4 hour flight. Cut that down to 1 hour and you've only shaved 30% off your travel time.

2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

4) Pollution. Same as noise. This thing is going to dump huge amounts of bad stuff into the upper atmosphere.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.


6) Engineering. It's gonna be a cast iron biatch of a problem to make a passenger cabin that will withstand those speeds. I remember reading about the Blackbird, and how one of the biggest issues they had was figuring out how to keep the pilots from literally cooking.
 
2012-08-13 02:54:01 PM  

JolobinSmokin: I have been wondering when the super rich would get tired of 20hour flights in huge super jets and instead had a 5-6 hour flight in an 8 person jet.

Seems like it's starting to happen.


Pssh, 5-6 hours is way too long. They're going to go this way:
Spaceships!

A Dutch company is working on passanger travel via suborbital spaceships.
 
2012-08-13 02:54:25 PM  
This is great except:

1) the lawyers will have a field day with the enviro-earth-huggers tying this up in court.

2) the lawyers will have another field day the first time someone's snowflake dies in an accident, or is potentially injured in a potential accident

3) The lawyers will sue when a country, (AAAAAACHinaOOOO!!!), excuse me, will create the same thing, but it will cost 1/2 the price, being unburdened by pesky regulatory safety rules regarding manufacturing or operating such a craft.

So, as Shakespeare once wrote, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers!"
 
2012-08-13 02:54:47 PM  

czei: "After about 300 seconds, the test craft is supposed to break up and fall into the ocean."

Um.


"Flight 43 now arriving at Oahu...Midway...Guam...Palau...Manila..."
 
2012-08-13 02:55:15 PM  

EatHam: You won't make it through security in 46 minutes.


Yeah, no kidding. You're gonna have to spend like 3 hours taking a cab over there, baggage check-in, security, and general "buffer zone" time. Your plane will probably be delayed anyways. You may end up on the tarmac for 4 hours. The fact that your trip a few states over will only take 20 min is irrelevant, it's still basically your entire day.
 
2012-08-13 02:57:27 PM  
How fast can it do the Kessel run?
 
2012-08-13 03:00:35 PM  

FlashHarry: markie_farkie: Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.

what a beautiful wonderful world it would be.

 
2012-08-13 03:02:25 PM  

czei: "After about 300 seconds, the test craft is supposed to break up and fall into the ocean."

Um.


Yeah, its a test flight to test an engine. It doesn't have any landing abilities and couldn't slow down to land if had them, creating an aircraft that could would be probably 10x the cost. So its options are 1) keep flying till it crashes somewhere in Asia, or 2) Self Destruct.
 
2012-08-13 03:04:10 PM  
Barry Newman unavailable for comment.
bucketfountain.com
 
2012-08-13 03:04:29 PM  
Given the amount of fuel this will use, it's going to be military-only for the foreseeable future.
 
2012-08-13 03:04:36 PM  

95629: This will never happen for a few reasons....

1) The actual time of the flight is a small portion of the travel time door to door. It may take you 10 hours door to door to do a 4 hour flight. Cut that down to 1 hour and you've only shaved 30% off your travel time.

2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

4) Pollution. Same as noise. This thing is going to dump huge amounts of bad stuff into the upper atmosphere.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.

If it does happen, it'll be a small business jet with a small production run for those without anything else to do with their money. Normal people like you and I will never benefit from something like this.


I wouldn't worry about it. It will never be a people mover. It will be used to push warheads around the globe in record time.
 
2012-08-13 03:06:03 PM  

dericwater: what a beautiful wonderful world it would be.


Yes, blowing dwindling energy on ferrying around rich white people for thrill rides. That's what makes a wonderful world for you?
 
2012-08-13 03:06:30 PM  

emersonbiggins: czei: "After about 300 seconds, the test craft is supposed to break up and fall into the ocean."

Um.

"Flight 43 now arriving at Oahu...Midway...Guam...Palau...Manila..."


She's starting to shake.
She's starting to "shimmy"....
She's starting to... to...
"Shudder", Ted?
She's starting to SHUDDER!

/well at least she's not starting to "break up"
 
2012-08-13 03:08:22 PM  
web-omnibus.com

Space Elevators, yo!

More fun as well.
 
2012-08-13 03:08:50 PM  

EatHam: You won't make it through security in 46 minutes.


Came for this and not really looking forward to the hypersonic patdown by the shortbus security.
 
2012-08-13 03:09:46 PM  
phasers.celsius1414.com

Would you like the chicken or the fish?
 
2012-08-13 03:10:03 PM  

WelldeadLink: Make that 146 minutes, because snowflake ears will require flying from NY to LA over Panama.



Not to mention all the folks who will have their windows shattered between those places every time it flies over. I remember sonic booms being a multiple daily occurrence over San Diego. My uncles house outside of Del Mar had the old Phantoms, the F-111s and later the F-14s fly over 20 or more times a day under 500 feet altitude, pushing up right against trans-sonic speeds and sometimes going over that. The resultant boom being well over 130 Db and shattering glass. This wasn't outlawed until 1972 and the pilots pretty much still ignored the regulations for 10 years after that. It wasn't until the area got built up with tract houses and mini-malls and such that they cracked down. It used to be rural, now it looks like Malvina Reynolds worst nightmare.
 
2012-08-13 03:12:46 PM  
You guys are crazy. No way this is being designed for transport due to the reasons pointed out in all of these comments.

This is clearly a weapons/surveillance platform.

Satellites are expensive to move and that moving uses a finite amount of fuel stored on board.

Need to know what is happening over a small portion of the world 7,000 miles away that isn't normally covered by satellite or won't be covered for another 8 hours? No problem, we'll have eyes on target in an hour. Decide that the target 7,000 miles away needs eliminated? Slam your payload into it at 3,000mph and you'll make quite the crater just from kinetic energy alone.
 
2012-08-13 03:14:54 PM  

95629: 3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.


I don't believe you can hear the sonic boom from inside the plane, if that's what you're getting at.
 
2012-08-13 03:16:23 PM  

Harry Freakstorm: One hour trying to park at the airport

45 minutes waiting for the shuttle to take you to the airport

One hour in line, waiting for the ticket agent

One and a half hours waiting in line for your TSA grope

Two hours waiting for the hypersonic jet to arrive from Cleavland ("Good news everybody! The pilot has reported that he has departed Fort Worth! He only has to stop at Little Rock, Indianapolis, Dayton,...")
Two hours sitting on the runway waiting for clearance from Clarence.


Yeah, but none of those are as annoying as sitting in the plane. I *hate* sitting in a plane for more than an hour... I'm antsy.
 
2012-08-13 03:16:30 PM  

LordOfThePings: [phasers.celsius1414.com image 333x385]

Would you like the chicken or the fish?


Yes, I remember, I had the lasagna.
 
2012-08-13 03:20:21 PM  
They will still lose your luggage in Atlanta.
 
2012-08-13 03:22:29 PM  
i172.photobucket.com

Still waiting.
 
2012-08-13 03:22:32 PM  
Gimme on o' them engines. I got an Impala

Jato car
 
2012-08-13 03:22:38 PM  
i270.photobucket.com

Can't wait.
 
2012-08-13 03:22:54 PM  

GungFu: [web-omnibus.com image 692x545]

Space Elevators, yo!

More fun as well.


Reality, yo!

Not as fun, but there you go.
 
2012-08-13 03:29:05 PM  
Gonna make a hypersonic make outta youuuu
Don't stop me now...
 
2012-08-13 03:30:06 PM  

95629: This will never happen for a few reasons....

1) The actual time of the flight is a small portion of the travel time door to door. It may take you 10 hours door to door to do a 4 hour flight. Cut that down to 1 hour and you've only shaved 30% off your travel time.

2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

4) Pollution. Same as noise. This thing is going to dump huge amounts of bad stuff into the upper atmosphere.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.

If it does happen, it'll be a small business jet with a small production run for those without anything else to do with their money. Normal people like you and I will never benefit from something like this.


It will never happen because hypersonics are mostly going to be used for drone attacks and missile intercepts. Plus, they still have to be carried aloft by an ordinary B-2. The hypersonics so far can't take off from the ground and hit warp speed; they have to be lifted into the stratosphere for maximum speed. There'd be zero advantage in a faster cross-country flight if you first had to board a B-2 style plane to reach cruising altitude.

So dream on, geeks, but we won't see ground-to-ground hypersonic travel any time soon.
 
2012-08-13 03:33:50 PM  

AbbeySomeone: Gonna make a hypersonic make man outta youuuu
Don't stop me now...


dammit
 
2012-08-13 03:34:38 PM  

wildcardjack: Imagine a world where energy costs are low enough that supersonic flight is economically viable.

/First we have to eliminate 60% of energy users.


^ came here to say what he said, in so many words. This is the winnah
 
2012-08-13 03:39:14 PM  
The 80s called, they want their supersonic jets and original concept back.
 
2012-08-13 03:43:56 PM  
Kit Fister
The 80s called, they want their supersonic jets and original concept back.


Did you warn them about 9/11? You bastard!
 
2012-08-13 03:45:08 PM  
Imagine a world where it is so easy to trick people, that all you have to do is talk about flying really fast from one major city to another, and all the sudden, everyone forgets what this thing is supposed to be.

It's a farking missile you morons. It's never going to carry passengers, it was never designed for passengers. Besides, you wouldn't survive the acceleration anyway, so I'm not sure why you want to take a ride.

This thing isn't a test bed for a new hyper fast people carrier. It's a test bed for the next generation of ICBMs.
 
2012-08-13 03:49:09 PM  

EatHam: You won't make it through security in 46 minutes.


I do.

TSA Pre.
 
2012-08-13 04:02:20 PM  
but is it faster than someone shooting off a load??
 
2012-08-13 04:05:12 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: FTA: "it will accelerate to about 3,600 mph"


The X-15 was doing 4,000+ mph 50 years ago, and we still don't have airlines anywhere near that speed. I don't think this is going to do much for commercial air travel. Cool, though.


Nah, boyee, you must have added a zero to that speed, *wikis the X-15 as he types* 'cause I ain't never heard of something that... fast... before...
...
Two. Kilometers. A. Second.
???
What the fark?!?!
 
2012-08-13 04:16:37 PM  

AbbeySomeone: AbbeySomeone: Gonna make a hypersonic make man outta youuuu
Don't stop me now...

dammit


You heard about my girlfriend's nickname for me, huh?
 
2012-08-13 04:19:47 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: How fast can it do the Kessel run?


12 Parsecs.
 
2012-08-13 04:27:47 PM  
What hypersonic flying might look like

www.pinkvengeance.com
 
2012-08-13 04:30:10 PM  
So, one step closer to a public reveal of the Aurora program?
 
2012-08-13 04:32:00 PM  
pixhost.me
 
2012-08-13 04:53:25 PM  

GungFu: [web-omnibus.com image 692x545]

Space Elevators, yo!

More fun as well.


and I can just parachute to my destination!
 
2012-08-13 05:18:06 PM  
Won't you pretty much have to make the plane out of one piece, if you're gonna expect it to carry any significant amount of weight, just so that it will hold together?
 
2012-08-13 05:42:11 PM  

downstairs: 95629: 3) Noise. People already complain about the super quiet airliners we have today. They'd never let something like this fly, especially with the sonic booms associated.

I don't believe you can hear the sonic boom from inside the plane, if that's what you're getting at.


I can assure you that was not the point. It's the sonic boom from the outside that gets certain people's knickers in a twist. I remember there was a nationwide campaign to keep the Concorde from flying cross-country back in 1977 due to the perceived disruption the sonic boom would cause. Engineering efforts have been underway for a good while now to help minimize or even eliminate the boom using materials and nosecone shapes.
 
2012-08-13 05:45:45 PM  
We should build this. After all the planet is now for the super rich.
 
2012-08-13 05:51:02 PM  
Plus six hours getting through airport security, baggage and trying to find your rental car.
 
2012-08-13 06:10:00 PM  

skodabunny: Give up on the scramjets, they only ever end up disintegrating or shaking themselves apart. Hybrid rocket engines are where it's at, a la Skylon.

Please, America, take this forward, because if it's left to us Brits it'll just plane never get off the ground.


SABRE is not a hybrid. It is a combined cycle engine. SpaceshipOne used a hybrid.
 
2012-08-13 06:33:30 PM  
Why bother with the risk of constant high-temp and pressure hypersonic flight and just launch into LEO and then re-enter for a shorter duration heat-generating flight phase?
 
2012-08-13 07:34:09 PM  
THEY HAVE TO PET? who does
THEY do.
 
2012-08-13 07:35:02 PM  
Yes.
 
2012-08-13 07:44:35 PM  

Deathfrogg: WelldeadLink: Make that 146 minutes, because snowflake ears will require flying from NY to LA over Panama.


Not to mention all the folks who will have their windows shattered between those places every time it flies over. I remember sonic booms being a multiple daily occurrence over San Diego. My uncles house outside of Del Mar had the old Phantoms, the F-111s and later the F-14s fly over 20 or more times a day under 500 feet altitude, pushing up right against trans-sonic speeds and sometimes going over that. The resultant boom being well over 130 Db and shattering glass. This wasn't outlawed until 1972 and the pilots pretty much still ignored the regulations for 10 years after that. It wasn't until the area got built up with tract houses and mini-malls and such that they cracked down. It used to be rural, now it looks like Malvina Reynolds worst nightmare.


Thunderstorms and Space Shuttle booms don't destroy windows ten miles away. They're just noise.
 
2012-08-13 07:48:24 PM  

pennysdeuce: wildcardjack: Imagine a world where energy costs are low enough that supersonic flight is economically viable.

/First we have to eliminate 60% of energy users.

^ came here to say what he said, in so many words. This is the winnah


Consider it done, after it gets done carrying all the previously described warheads.
 
2012-08-13 07:58:26 PM  
What ever happened to flying cars?
 
2012-08-13 08:11:53 PM  

Deep Contact: What ever happened to flying cars?


They already exist.

*cue link*
 
2012-08-13 08:49:00 PM  

Tubesteak: [i270.photobucket.com image of hot airline stewardesses]
Can't wait.


That won't happen, at least not in America, because of the airline attendents union. Coinciding with life-prolongation and a rising retirement age, the average stewardess will be be 80 years old on these high-value international flights.
 
2012-08-13 08:56:40 PM  
Will people finally shut up about kids on a plane now?
 
2012-08-13 09:04:34 PM  

Deep Contact: What ever happened to flying cars?


People can't drive safely in 2D, you want them yakking on their phones and doing makeup in 3D too?

It's hard to get a pilot's license for a reason.
 
2012-08-13 09:07:32 PM  

Ass Exploder: [pixhost.me image 413x300]


What is this from?
 
2012-08-13 09:28:27 PM  

ZombieApocalypseKitten: Will people finally shut up about kids on a plane now?


Wasn't that a Samuel L Jackson movie?
 
2012-08-13 09:36:45 PM  
It'll be hard to bring this scramjet to reality, when the vast majority of the world's experts on the subject are evidently yakkin' on Fark.
 
2012-08-13 09:48:22 PM  

rico567: It'll be hard to bring this scramjet to reality, when the vast majority of the world's experts on the subject are evidently yakkin' on Fark.


You'd be surprised, mocker.
 
2012-08-13 11:26:13 PM  
What fun is that? Trying to avoid stopping in bat country is half the fun of traveling.
 
2012-08-13 11:40:18 PM  
Came for the Spaceballs/gone plaid reference. Leaving satisfied.
 
2012-08-14 12:18:24 AM  
It would take some engineering breakthroughs and significant capital investment to create a commercial implementation, but I think the long term future of high speed transit is in vacuum/maglev trains. You could theoretically achieve speeds with that that would leave hypersonic flying in the dust, and without a lot of the pollution problems.
 
2012-08-14 12:23:37 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: The X-15 was doing 4,000+ mph 50 years ago, and we still don't have airlines anywhere near that speed.


Pedantic but significant point: the X-15 was rocket powered and ran out of fuel a little under a minute and a half after the engine was fired. This scramjet won't be as fast, but if they manage to reach the 300 second goal, it's a big step up from the X-15's capabilities.

/this does not invalidate the X-15's status as coolest flying thing ever, though
 
2012-08-14 12:49:17 AM  
As the Concorde has proven, there are not enough people who have the need and can pay the price for commercial supersonic travel.

OTOH the military would love something that goes faster
 
2012-08-14 12:59:29 AM  
It's really a missile. How quickly can it hit Iran?
 
2012-08-14 01:26:12 AM  

kkinnison: As the Concorde has proven, there are not enough people who have the need and can pay the price for commercial supersonic travel.

OTOH the military would love something that goes faster


There are enough but the SST fleet was at the end of their airframe duty cycle. The had to be retired and because there were no new airframes in the design pipeline due to lack of investment there wasn't an alternative than to scrap the program.
 
2012-08-14 03:42:16 AM  

the_innkeeper: skodabunny: Give up on the scramjets, they only ever end up disintegrating or shaking themselves apart. Hybrid rocket engines are where it's at, a la Skylon.

Please, America, take this forward, because if it's left to us Brits it'll just plane never get off the ground.

SABRE is not a hybrid. It is a combined cycle engine. SpaceshipOne used a hybrid.


Ahem. Also tomato, tomatoe
 
2012-08-14 06:15:22 AM  

Indubitably: rico567: It'll be hard to bring this scramjet to reality, when the vast majority of the world's experts on the subject are evidently yakkin' on Fark.

You'd be surprised, mocker.


Most people don't spell it that way.......
 
2012-08-14 07:55:52 AM  

lohphat: due to lack of investment


Say, why would that be?
 
2012-08-14 08:46:04 AM  

95629:
2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.


Plus if you put those two together the cost has to be low enough where this is actually worthwhile option for the people who can afford it. For example my sister had a job where she was working for a boss where they had to travel a lot. If there were enough people travelling (I think it was around 6 or 7). it got to the point that if you compared the cost of 6 full fare tickets it was sometimes actually worth it to just rent a private jet. And for that cost instead of having to fly commercial, deal with a commercial airport and sit in an airline seat, you got to leave on your own schedule, sit in a super comfy ass private jet and not deal with the hassles of an airport. Now it would be the same thing with a hypersonic plane, would the increased cost be worth it to anyone when the people who can afford it can probably just as easily afford to charter a private jet. And although a jet is slower, you leave when you want to, not when the plane departs, and you don't have to share the space with 100+ other people.
 
2012-08-14 10:04:52 AM  
They need to design a craft that has about a 20 mph forward speed, but goes up and down very well. Just shoot people straight up and wait for the earth to rotate around and then they come down. Wouldn't need TSA or long lines. Great for going east to west, but LA to NY would take a day.
 
2012-08-14 11:56:38 AM  

dericwater: FlashHarry: markie_farkie: Meh.. Let me know when it's 90 minutes from New York to Paris, and everyone gets Spandex jackets.

what a beautiful wonderful world it would be.


huh?

On that train all graphite and glitter
Undersea by rail
Ninety minutes from New York to Paris
Well by seventy-six we'll be A.O.K.
What a beautiful world this will be
What a glorious time to be free
 
2012-08-14 01:25:40 PM  
mechgreg: 95629:
2) Cost. People have shown that they'll make more to get less, not pay more to get more. Air travel is headed towards being a bus in the sky rather than the other direction.

5) Time value. When the Concorde was created, the idea was that people who valued their time could save it by spending more on a fast plane ticket. That is rapidly changing today with the ability of people to communicate remotely (video/teleconferencing/email/etc). In addition, planes are getting WiFi. Time in flight is no longer "dead time" to a businessman. He can work there just like he would in the office... he's not losing out on that time as much and therefore the cost isn't worth it.

Plus if you put those two together the cost has to be low enough where this is actually worthwhile option for the people who can afford it. For example my sister had a job where she was working for a boss where they had to travel a lot. If there were enough people travelling (I think it was around 6 or 7). it got to the point that if you compared the cost of 6 full fare tickets it was sometimes actually worth it to just rent a private jet. And for that cost instead of having to fly commercial, deal with a commercial airport and sit in an airline seat, you got to leave on your own schedule, sit in a super comfy ass private jet and not deal with the hassles of an airport. Now it would be the same thing with a hypersonic plane, would the increased cost be worth it to anyone when the people who can afford it can probably just as easily afford to charter a private jet. And although a jet is slower, you leave when you want to, not when the plane departs, and you don't have to share the space with 100+ other people.


By the time you factor in the getting to the airport like a couple of hours early for security theater, the flights never leaving on time, finding your luggage on the other end etc,(not to mention layovers if you can't get a direct flight) a private subsonic jet can probably get you there in about the same door to door time as a supersonic commercial like the concorde.

Hell on anything short of a full coast to coast in the continental U.S. you are doing good to get there faster than you could drive there in a car if you look at full door to door time, especially if you have to lay over.
 
2012-08-15 09:28:56 PM  

rico567: Indubitably: rico567: It'll be hard to bring this scramjet to reality, when the vast majority of the world's experts on the subject are evidently yakkin' on Fark.

You'd be surprised, mocker.

Most people don't spell it that way.......


Macher, then, no?

;)
 
2012-08-16 08:33:37 PM  

Medic Zero: Ass Exploder: [pixhost.me image 413x300]

What is this from?


The Cremaster Cycle (Cremaster 1 I think)
 
Displayed 112 of 112 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report