"Supersonic flight isn't the barrier it use to be"No? Laws of physics changed recently?
The laws themselves? Silly question, you know the answer to that one.
Our Ability to accurately model these same physical laws for engineering and design? That increases every day. As does our technological and engineering capability to adhere to the physical laws in a beneficial way. Just the other day there was news that MIT had developed ionic thrusters with the capability to produce more thrust per unit of energy than any Trent1k. [url= http://inhabitat.com/mit-developing-ionic-wind-thrusters-as-efficient-alternative-to-jet-engines/ ]Take a look, it's awesome.[/url]. Then there's things like [url= http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/07/skylon_study/ ]Skylon[/url]. And loads of other stuff that this thread isn't the place for.
We are not in the future. The future is much more awesome. It just doesn't look like Concorde.
The future is much more awesome. It just doesn't look like Concorde.
The future doesn't look like 1960s technology? Wow, who could of guessed?*
*Rhetorical question, no need to answer 'anybody with an IQ above that of a carrot'.
Nearest i've been to Speedbird in the air was the landing of the fleet at Heathrow during the Grand Tour before decommissioning - stood at the end of the runway with lots of other folks, a sad day indeed. And the visit to Farnborough Air Show (95/6 ?) when i was at the takeoff end of the runway during ,er, takeoff... possibly the loudest thing i've ever experienced 😀 And the Brooklands walk/talk-through too - nice to get up close to one.
I have been on the second fastest passenger airliner tho. The VC10.
VC10 goes out of service too next month
You never asked. Instead, you repeatedly claimed that which isn't true.
I'm not the one saying that something obviously useful to many, either as a means of transport, or something to be simply admired as a feat of engineering has absolutely no use.
Shove that in your chocolate teapot.
"Supersonic flight isn't the barrier it use to be"
No? Laws of physics changed recently?
No but aerodynamics in the transonic regime are now well understood.
Materials science and engine design has also improved quite a bit.
The sound "barrier" isn't the technical hurdle it used to be.
Designing a successor to Concorde would be fairly straightforward from an engineering point of view - not trivial by any means but nothing like the engineering challenge it was for the original.
Commercially though there is no demand so it won't happen. Remember Concorde was as much a government vanity project as it was a serious airliner. With no state ownership of airlines a successor seems unlikely.
The sound "barrier" isn't the technical hurdle it used to be.
Indeed, but it's always going to require a shedload of extra fuel, which is expensive and in short supply these days.
Just in case anyone thinks i'm anti "widebody":
[img] 
[/img]
Will you look at the wing on that! Practically sexual curves! 😉
British wings too, from Filton (home of Concorde.... 😉
The company i work (occasionally) for, did a lot of the build tooling for the wing construction, and the tolerances were epic. Something like +- 0.1mm over 40m span !
It has a massive forehead.
[img] 
[/img]
as an economic, technological, aspirational, statement it was unsurpassed, and very much of it's time. The future will be better, we can achieve anything kind of way.
now a more fitting statement would be having a noodle cup on a ryanair flight to Benidorm that you paid for with a Wonga.com loan.
