New SST?

Non-military aviation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Whiteman_B2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 05 May 2005, 21:13
  • Location: MO, USA

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 11:05

I wonder how much work is being done at Boeing and Airbus on a new SST design. The Concorde was a loser because it only loaded a 100 souls and it had to use fighter engines in afterburer to achieve top speed. I think the engines were a derivative of the early Mirage engine if I'm not mistaken. The thing is, with modern composite and super-efficient engine technologies, the SST should actually be a viable issue now, even with rising fuel costs. I would think that a composite 250 seat SST with say, F119 derivative engines could be built. Right? Wrong?
Offline
User avatar

LinkF16SimDude

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2431
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2004, 19:18
  • Location: SW Tenn.

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 17:03

As glamorous and cosmic and way cool as supersonic travel is, SST won't be addressed until a profitable market is designed for it. And we all know what state the airlines are in nowadays.

Concorde was priced out of the mainstream purely on price, and lasted as long as it did with help from the French and British governments.

There's also environmental aspects involved. Within the borders, SST would have to fly on restricted, supersonic-approved routes for noise abatement and even then it wouldn't be able to go supersonic for very long. So why bother? It's best avenue is overseas routes leaving from coastal airports (JFK, LAX, BOS, PDX, SFO) where it can get over water quickly and the stretch its legs, supercruise to a descent point, then slow to subsonic for the approach.

Is there a profitable market for that kind of profile? Sadly, not now, but perhaps in the next 10 to 20 years.
Offline

duplex

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 353
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2005, 16:30

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 20:00

I think the engines were a derivative of the early Mirage engine if I'm not mistaken


I am afraid you are mistaken..As far as I know,Concordes RR&SNECMA Olympus engines were based on Bristol Siddeleys engines which powered the subsonic strategic bomber Vulcan..They were 100% British design..But Synpa777 can answer this better..
Offline

Asif

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 2914
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 21:44

Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration
Offline

RyanCollins

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 651
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2004, 19:24
  • Location: Mar del Plata, Argentina

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 21:46

Vulcan: Engines : 4 Bristol Siddeley Olympus 101, 102 or 104
Concorde: Engines: 4 Rolls-Royce/SNECMA Olympus 593 Mrk610 turbojet

Source: Google.com
A circle is the reflection of eternity: It has no beginning, and it has no end...
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1550
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post20 Feb 2006, 22:17

Duplex, Ryan, right on. Also Asif. The last Vulcan Olympus engines were the 301s. This was basically a a 201 engine with an extra Low pressure compressor stage. Power could be wound up to 20,000lb X 4, although they usually ran at 18,000lbs thrust, only being cranked up to 20,000 on operations. The most powerful fitted to the Tin Triangle as it was known to it`s aircrew.

The Concordes engines were highly advanced versions of the engine with afterburners called Olympus 593 Mrk610 turbojets. Made by RR and SNECMA. With re-heat, thrust was about 38,000lbs. SNECMA provided the afterburner and exhaust section.

It is interesting to note that the afterburners were NOT needed after the Concorde pushed through Mach 1.7 or .8.
I think that the SST debate is a difficult one still.. If the cost of butts on seats cannot be brought down significantly, and sonic boom can`t be eliminated! I can`t really see a successful SST flying in the near future.
Only in business jet form. That seems possible.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

RoAF

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
  • Location: Romania

Unread post26 Feb 2006, 10:22

There are studies being made for a business SST. I know that Sukhoi is involved together with an American consortium, so far they provided only some computer generated images. I guess the Russians have some experience in this domain (Tu-144) and they even proposed in the 60's a "transport" version of the MiG-25 with a stretched fuselage for up to 6 passengers-it was intended for use by high-ranking officers and was intended to cruise at Mach 2.35-they only made a scale model however-I guess it was impractical to built.
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)
Offline

VMF-214

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005, 00:24

Unread post26 Feb 2006, 14:57

Soon will start the development of a SST BizJet, from Gufstream in parnersihp with LM, and possible Cessna.

8pax m 2.0 3200nm range supersonix, 5400nm high transonic (m .95)
BAH BAH ...
Offline
User avatar

LinkF16SimDude

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2431
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2004, 19:18
  • Location: SW Tenn.

Unread post26 Feb 2006, 20:08

A supersonic Cessna? WHAT is the world comin' to? :lol:
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1550
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post26 Feb 2006, 22:39

A six passenger Mig-25 is even stranger! but boy, what a ride that would have been! :lol:
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

ATC

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 01:06

Unread post03 Mar 2006, 23:03

LinkF16SimDude wrote:A supersonic Cessna? WHAT is the world comin' to? :lol:


Citation X tops out at .92 Mach on the books, I have talked to people who have had them faster without effort - particularly in a mountain wave over the rockies at flight idle, level flight.
Lord bless Charlie Mops
Offline

Whiteman_B2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 05 May 2005, 21:13
  • Location: MO, USA

Unread post23 Mar 2006, 00:51

RoAF wrote:There are studies being made for a business SST. I know that Sukhoi is involved together with an American consortium, so far they provided only some computer generated images. I guess the Russians have some experience in this domain (Tu-144) and they even proposed in the 60's a "transport" version of the MiG-25 with a stretched fuselage for up to 6 passengers-it was intended for use by high-ranking officers and was intended to cruise at Mach 2.35-they only made a scale model however-I guess it was impractical to built.

Yeah, but the Russian's experience with the "Concordski" (Tu-144) didn't turn out so well. :wink:

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2006-3-3_tu144crash.asx
Offline

RoAF

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
  • Location: Romania

Unread post23 Mar 2006, 09:55

True. It ended up carrying mail from Moscow to central Asian Soviet republics and the Russian far east! But in the late 90's one of them was made airworthy, re engined with the power plants of the Tu-160 with US financing (NASA?) and used for high altitude, hi-speed research. Anyone knows if it still flies?
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)

Return to Civil and General Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests