Originally Posted by
hwilker
Right - here is a longer explanation on why hypersonic airliners are a no-no:
antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2015/01/why-were-not-going-to-see-sub-.html
Interesting link
Clickable link to Charlie's diary Based on 2 assumptions Charlie feels hypersonics will not happen:
1. Security will need to be ultra tight because the hypersonic aircraft cannot be caught/intercepted if hijacked. Not sure that is an issue - but one to think about.
2. Hypersonic aircraft will operate so unlike 'conventional' jet aircraft that they will be unable to share airports so will operate from remote 'spaceports' so all travel saving is lost. Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) designs are also developing and it is quite possible that by the time of commercial services they will be able to operate from normal airports. After all the requirement for large remote areas is linked to 'debris fields' and accepted failure rates of 1 in 100 operations - which are not really compatible with commercial passenger operations.
There is a whole new field of 'Space Traffic Management' (STM) coming into being looking at the integration of RLVs into normal air traffic. The idea of closing off half of Florida - the current approach - for every commercial launch will not be acceptable commercially by the airlines that get the monetary hit of delays and reroutes. It is the same for all the current planned launch sites. So RLVs must start to fit in with existing traffic. Or they will not be commercially viable. STM is intended to provide this safe integration.
Lots of research in this area if anyone is interested :
Embry Riddle Aeronautical University - Space Traffic Management