Wikiposts
Search
Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

The Sonic Cruiser

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 13th Jun 2012, 00:13
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Sonic Cruiser

Trying to get away from the current QF debate. Thought I might try this:

About 18 months ago I read that the "break-even" cost for the A380 for Airbus was around 650 hulls. To my knowledge, slightly less than 200 have sold (no expert here).

No sure what this has done to Airbuses bottom line - will have to dig up the latest annual report. It may be a white elephant or a very long term investment.

Is the world ready for the sonic cruiser OR is a plane with the range for any city on the planet the next step forward?

I think 2030 would prob be reasonable for the sonic cruiser if it was given the go ahead today?
crystalballwannabe is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 01:14
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep, I think Airbus has sold about 200 A380s and is always banging on about having commitments for more, but these never seem to mature.

I read somewhere break-even used to be around 300, but with all the program's troubles, that has soared above 500!

I'll be buggered how anyone is supposed to make money out of long haul...if the fuel isn't too expensive, the competitors aren't predatory, and the Euros aren't trying to tax you to hell, you might stand a slim chance...
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 02:28
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
Posts: 4,785
Received 44 Likes on 20 Posts
The big problem with the Sonic Cruiser idea was simple enough- the cost of fuel.

The proposed 777-8LR has London-Sydney range with a decent payload, and would no doubt have a nich market, as the current 777-200LR does.

But the money is always going to be in heavily patronaged, medium length routes on which you can put a decent sized aircraft and fill it, without having to use to much fuel.

Range becomes a diminishing return because of the extra fuel-burn required just to caryy the fuel in the first place, and speeds above aroung .85 necessarily bring a penalty in burn, no matter how clever the design.

The A380 order book stands at about 260 and hasn't budged since it was launched (I think it's been a net reduction over the last couple of years) and 90 of those are for Emirates. if EK canceled, it would probably end the program.

It will never make a cent for Airbus.

Last edited by Wizofoz; 13th Jun 2012 at 02:30.
Wizofoz is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 03:37
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Classified
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rumour(!) has it that EK's 90 A380's was a "shock and awe" tactic played on the industry - apparently the length of the delivery schedule is such that the second 45 airframes are just replacements for the first 45.

Rumour #2 EK have four A380's sitting at Toulouse and they are refusing to take delivery "until the wings are fixed" but the real reason is a business slowdown.

Anyone from the sandpit care to confirm the above?

As for the Sonic Crusier - one sexy beast:


and proposed performance here: HowStuffWorks "How Sonic Cruisers Will Work"

The official reason Boeing dropped the Sonic Cruiser was the price of fuel but there was some speculation at the time that Boeing was never serious and the whole thing was an elaborate ploy by Boeing to distract Airbus while the real game changer - the 787 program "slipped under the radar".

Of course the 787 program hasn't quite gone as well as Boeing had hoped - at least they have a huge order book to try and make a $ at the end of the day.

Last edited by D.Lamination; 13th Jun 2012 at 03:38.
D.Lamination is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 05:47
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 3,040
Received 26 Likes on 10 Posts
Wiz, you have to stop listening to Boeing FM all the time. 4 380s ordered in 2009, 32 ordered in 2010 and 19 ordered in 2011.

Ek have been having wings fixed prior to delivery and will be receiving another 9 prior to the end of 2012. Over 40 380s in the fleet prior to the end of 2013 so the rumours by D.Lamination seem a bit suss.

The Don
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 11:25
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sand and dust, I hate the dust and I hate the sand
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sexy beast...yeah!

18 hours cramped up in that little KY tube, nup!

At least in the Walrus you can go for a jog, bog and a... warren.

Bring on the MACH 6 son of Concorde, skipping off the ozone, hyper something, no big bang, sort of thingy
MASTEMA is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 21:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just my thoughts, but as I see it, the A380 contributes to increased congestion at major hubs and is pivotal to the schedule of every other aircraft around it for on-carriage. Boeing's intent was/is to provide capabilities to airlines to avoid hubs or at least to level demand for resources. As a passenger, I hate multiple flight legs if I can do the flight non-stop. There are not many things worse than a stopover, but a stopover with a long wait between flights ranks right up there. I think Boeing focussed on aircraft designs that allow for considerably more scheduling flexibility (more frequency rather than greater volume) than the A380 allows and aren't so dependent upon other flight schedules and vice versa. I assume it allows airport operators to schedule ground resources better as well.

Re: the sonic cruiser...18 hours from NY to SYD in a thin tube? Might work for first class passengers, but I'd be going crazy. Non-stop would be okay, but 18 hours!!! Short of a seat that reclined into a double bed with an inbuilt barfridge and onboard showers, I think I'd prefer to be sharing a jail cell for the same time. After 14 hours in economy, I'm busting for a stretch, a wash, a change of clothes and to focus my eyes on a range of objects further away than 5 metres. Don't know what the psychs would say, but 14 hours seems close to my limit. After 18 hours, the cabin staff would have to get me with a stretcher.

Last edited by Lodown; 13th Jun 2012 at 22:31.
Lodown is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 22:22
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 573
Received 69 Likes on 17 Posts
I think Boeing are closer to that blended wing thingy than the Sonic Cruiser. The blended wing has pax sitting like pegs on a clothes-line in the leading edge. Fascinating stuff, not much of a view in icing conditions though. A bird strike could cause a change in religion/underpants.
By George is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2012, 22:33
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think I'd like a seat in the flap section. Seats recline for take-off and landing. It'd suck to be in the outboard seats in turbulence.
Lodown is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2012, 01:14
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
Posts: 4,785
Received 44 Likes on 20 Posts
Yo Don!

Yes all true- but who were most of those orders from?

I didn't spread the above rumours re EKs deliveries- it appears it's back to "Flank speed and to hell with the ice-burgs"- hope that works out for us!!!

I've never said other than that the Whale will make money fo EK on the right routes- I'm still skeptical there are 90 Airframes worth of those, but we'll see.

I maintain it will NEVER show a profit for Airbus, and even the figures you quote mean they haven't sold nearly enough.
Wizofoz is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2012, 02:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've never said other than that the Whale will make money fo EK on the right routes- I'm still skeptical there are 90 Airframes worth of those, but we'll see.
EK is not just in the business of making profit, its also in the business of costing others profit. Sucking up all the volume of traffic will soon send others broke.

I maintain it will NEVER show a profit for Airbus, and even the figures you quote mean they haven't sold nearly enough.
They don't care. Airbus is an EU project, meant to counterbalance Boeing and the US. The A380 was always a politically based development meant to project EU power by building the biggest jet. Airbus is to big to fail. The taxpayer will bail it out in the end if it all goes pearshaped.
sierra5913 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2012, 04:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: WA
Age: 71
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They don't care. Airbus is an EU project, meant to counterbalance Boeing and the US. The A380 was always a politically based development meant to project EU power by building the biggest jet. Airbus is to big to fail. The taxpayer will bail it out in the end if it all goes pearshaped.
As the GFC proved, "too big to fail" is a fallacy. And with the scarcity of money in the money go round that is the Eurozone, bailing out whole countries might prove more attractive than bailing out prestige projects. But, who knows? I don't think Airbus could fail merely on the unprofibility of that one design.
ranmar850 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2012, 07:24
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AIRCRAFT CONFIGURATION - Patent application

This link has some interesting stuff regarding the Sonic Cruiser. The last patent for some of the technology was filed in April 2012.

Basically looks like a concord with engines on top of the wing. Looks like it would go a lot faster than the original 0.95M suggested.
crystalballwannabe is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2012, 15:35
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: International
Age: 76
Posts: 1,394
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
The VFW-614's engines were mounted on top of the wing !.
B772 is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2012, 21:34
  #15 (permalink)  

Eight Gun Fighter
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Go Boing

Rollingthunder is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2012, 23:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
bailing out whole countries might prove more attractive than bailing out prestige projects.
I dont know about that, the Large Hadron Collider is still sucking up huge amounts of EU money (no pun intended) and it doesn't actually do anything.
Arnold E is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2012, 04:49
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,872
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Another option for the B797


Posted By George:
I think Boeing are closer to that blended wing thingy than the Sonic Cruiser.
Posted by Lodown:
It'd suck to be in the outboard seats in turbulence.
I believe that motion sickness (for pax in outboard seats) during turns and turbulence is an issue that will have to be resolved before this fuel efficient design becomes reality.

Last edited by Going Boeing; 16th Jun 2012 at 04:56.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2012, 05:01
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 308
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the Large Hadron Collider is still sucking up huge amounts of EU money (no pun intended) and it doesn't actually do anything.
Oh, I don't know. All those colliding Hadrons must be doing something.
Reminds one of the processes within Fair Work Australia.
Captain Gidday is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.