• Carobu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Pretty sure we already had one of these and it was deemed not economically viable after like 30 years of operating at a loss basically.

    • expected_crayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It seems to be an attempt to solve one of the two problems with the Concorde - reduce the sound of the sonic boom so that it can fly at supersonic speeds over land and not just water. This would make the planes more economically viable as they can fly more routes. The other problem, though, which is not mentioned in the article, is the absurd amount of fuel the Concorde needed. Still going to be a major issue if they haven’t made these more efficient.

      • Rednax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        There exists a research paper claiming that a much more fuel efficient plane is possible: https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/6.2022-3314

        Problem is, it is locked behind a paywall that I cannot circumvent. But even if the paper is only half-true, it still implies a large efficiency gain is possible.

    • NotSpez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      But there is a Lego set of it coming out in a week or so and it is majestic.

    • rtk_dreamseller@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I wonder if Concorde would have been more feasible in the pacific with less worry about the disruptions caused by the sonic boom.