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.

(BBC-US)   Something... something... supersonic. Scratch that... hypersonic   (bbc.com) divider line 12
    More: Cool, hypersonic flight, supersonic speed, Commercial aviation, U.S. Air Force  
•       •       •

20333 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Oct 2012 at 5:46 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-14 07:21:48 PM
2 votes:
We already have the tech to send someone across the pond in about 10 minutes, but they'd be a mass of pink goo when they arrived. Flinging highly trained and conditioned fighter pilots thru the air at several times the speed of sound is one thing, but you simply can't stuff grandma into a ballistic missile, subject her to 2-3 figure g-force, and still expect to be in business the next day. The whole concept is just a sci-fi pipe-dream that writers trot out every few years to sell newspapers and magazines.

In all honestly, nobody would give a shiat about how long it took to get somewhere if they'd get rid of the unions and enforce some reasonable age, weight, and surly-attitude limits on the sky waitresses, combined with a separate soundproof compartment to hold children, drunks, and general assholes. Hell, if I was getting steak and blowjobs from supermodels the whole trip, I wouldn't care if it took a week to go a hundred miles.
2012-10-14 06:17:30 PM
2 votes:

mark12A: A couple centuries from now, airplanes will be obsolete anyway, since we'll be zipping New York to Europe in 45 minutes in mag lev capsules running in vacuum tube tunnels suspended underwater in the Atlantic, going 15,000 mph....


I think a couple centuries from now we'll be too busy rediscovering electricity for all of that.
2012-10-15 12:39:36 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: werty789: The Concord failed because not enough people were willing to pay the much higher cost for the quicker flight. I predict this plane will have the same problem.

I thought that the aircraft were becoming to expensive to maintain.


That too...
And the fuel. And the only routes they could fly were mostly coastal cities to costal cities.
A concord cost about $650,000 to fill up at todays prices -- for a plane that only holds 100 passengers. A typical flight cost is about 1/3 fuel, 1/3 aircraft and 1/3 just running the airline. At the costs of the flight, it starts to get in the realm of private what a private jet costs.
2012-10-14 07:47:31 PM
1 votes:

soundguy: In all honestly, nobody would give a shiat about how long it took to get somewhere if they'd get rid of the unions and enforce some reasonable age, weight, and surly-attitude limits on the sky waitresses


You've flown Air Canada?
2012-10-14 07:33:32 PM
1 votes:

soundguy: We already have the tech to send someone across the pond in about 10 minutes, but they'd be a mass of pink goo when they arrived. Flinging highly trained and conditioned fighter pilots thru the air at several times the speed of sound is one thing, but you simply can't stuff grandma into a ballistic missile, subject her to 2-3 figure g-force, and still expect to be in business the next day. The whole concept is just a sci-fi pipe-dream that writers trot out every few years to sell newspapers and magazines.

In all honestly, nobody would give a shiat about how long it took to get somewhere if they'd get rid of the unions and enforce some reasonable age, weight, and surly-attitude limits on the sky waitresses, combined with a separate soundproof compartment to hold children, drunks, and general assholes. Hell, if I was getting steak and blowjobs from supermodels the whole trip, I wouldn't care if it took a week to go a hundred miles.


I don't know what you're selling, but I'll take a dozen.
2012-10-14 06:30:23 PM
1 votes:
We could cut 20% off travel time of New York to London just by fixing the clusterfark that is airport security. A flight from NY to Boston takes less than an hour, but the 3 hour train is typically faster door to door...
2012-10-14 06:23:53 PM
1 votes:
And it will cost $40,000 per seat or more and in this troubled economy no one will fly it dooming it from the start.

Let's not repeat the lesson learned from the Concorde.
2012-10-14 06:16:40 PM
1 votes:

mark12A: Sub orbital is the way to go. It costs too much energy to push your way through the atmosphere at supersonic/hypersonic speeds. Fling yourself out of the atmosphere, then arc unpowered, ballistically toward your destination.

A couple centuries from now, airplanes will be obsolete anyway, since we'll be zipping New York to Europe in 45 minutes in mag lev capsules running in vacuum tube tunnels suspended underwater in the Atlantic, going 15,000 mph....


that's what I was just thinking. gotta get rid of the pesky air friction. vacuum tubes would be the way to go
2012-10-14 06:01:45 PM
1 votes:
Now if we could cut the time that it takes to get groped.
2012-10-14 06:01:12 PM
1 votes:
Sub orbital is the way to go. It costs too much energy to push your way through the atmosphere at supersonic/hypersonic speeds. Fling yourself out of the atmosphere, then arc unpowered, ballistically toward your destination.

A couple centuries from now, airplanes will be obsolete anyway, since we'll be zipping New York to Europe in 45 minutes in mag lev capsules running in vacuum tube tunnels suspended underwater in the Atlantic, going 15,000 mph....
2012-10-14 05:54:32 PM
1 votes:
A Semisonic TransAtlantic flight from London is one where you don't have to go home but you can't stay here.
2012-10-14 05:41:58 PM
1 votes:
theamazingpage.com

/obscure?
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report