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  
•       •       •

13400 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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
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 12 of 112 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


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