PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Could the Boom Overture have a Military Application? (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/658225-could-boom-overture-have-military-application.html)

tdracer 23rd Mar 2024 22:17


Originally Posted by Captain Dart (Post 11622340)
'Boom' demonstrator has flown, with the military interested. They must have read Davef68's post!

https://www.twz.com/air/booms-xb-1-s...s-to-the-skies

Wake me up when it goes supersonic and they have a chance to measure fuel burn and sonic boom footprint.

Then I'll take another nap while they raise the many billions of dollars needed to put something into production.

V_2 23rd Mar 2024 23:40


Originally Posted by Ninthace (Post 11618324)
Surely they still have the same issues as Concorde had?

I thought the issue Concorde had was that by flying at Mach 2, the military version would fly so fast that when firing missile or bullets, it would suffer the small misfortune of flying back into them and shooting itself down. Or so the joke went

IFMU 24th Mar 2024 02:05


Originally Posted by Captain Dart (Post 11622340)
'Boom' demonstrator has flown, with the military interested. They must have read Davef68's post!

https://www.twz.com/air/booms-xb-1-s...s-to-the-skies

Well done. I am curious if they had any up elevator left. The videos and pictures seem to show most or all of the up elevator being used.

whowhenwhy 25th Mar 2024 20:59

It's worth noting that neither the demonstrator nor the Overture aircraft will utilise 'low boom' technologies currently being researched by NASA through their X59 program. Overture will be a 'traditonal' SST in the sense that it will boom.

The company originally aimed for M2+ but derated the performance requirement to M1.7 around 18-months or so ago. About the same time that Rolls Royce pulled out of their agreement with Boom as the engine development partner. It's hoped to eradicate some of the handling foibles associated with Concorde to allow the aircraft to be operated and managed in much the same way as any other airliner.

Thud105 25th Mar 2024 21:54

I also noted the significant and near permanent application of lots of up elevator.

Ninthace 25th Mar 2024 23:11


Originally Posted by whowhenwhy (Post 11623424)
It's hoped to eradicate some of the handling foibles associated with Concorde to allow the aircraft to be operated and managed in much the same way as any other airliner.

Given both ac have similar wings, though the Overture has the addition of a tailplane, what handling foibles would these be and how do they hope to eliminate them?

tdracer 26th Mar 2024 00:35


Originally Posted by whowhenwhy (Post 11623424)
It's worth noting that neither the demonstrator nor the Overture aircraft will utilise 'low boom' technologies currently being researched by NASA through their X59 program. Overture will be a 'traditonal' SST in the sense that it will boom.

If it's a 'proof of concept' prototype, what good is it if it doesn't address the show-stopping aspect of the 'boom'? After all, we've been building supersonic aircraft since the 1950s - the basic technology is well known and understood - so why go through all the trouble and cost of building a prototype if it doesn't demonstrate the technology that's consider new (and - most importantly - critical) to the success of the concept?
Or is just something to show prospective investors to trick them into thinking their money would be going into a viable concept?

artee 26th Mar 2024 01:36


Originally Posted by IFMU (Post 11622394)
Well done. I am curious if they had any up elevator left. The videos and pictures seem to show most or all of the up elevator being used.

Maybe Boeing could let them use MCAS.

petit plateau 26th Mar 2024 11:54


Originally Posted by whowhenwhy (Post 11623424)
It's worth noting that neither the demonstrator nor the Overture aircraft will utilise 'low boom' technologies currently being researched by NASA through their X59 program. Overture will be a 'traditonal' SST in the sense that it will boom.

The company originally aimed for M2+ but derated the performance requirement to M1.7 around 18-months or so ago. About the same time that Rolls Royce pulled out of their agreement with Boom as the engine development partner. It's hoped to eradicate some of the handling foibles associated with Concorde to allow the aircraft to be operated and managed in much the same way as any other airliner.

DARPA keep hoping that they can leverage civil funds to develop M2.2 x 5,200 mile range, (i.e. transpacific) at low (civilian) costs as opposed to high (military) costs and thereby open up large civilian volumes to get a virtuous circle of industrial development & application restarted for the benefit of the USA. Whilst the current paradigm has a fairly static commercial frontier (exemplified by Airbus, perhaps we can stil include Boeing) the competition can pull closer, i.e. China with Comac etc. This worris DARPA as they well know how exposed Boeing is in civil aerospace market, as is increasingly becoming publicly obvious.

In contrast pretty much every time realworld civilian money is at risk on the table they realise that the outcome is M1.7 x 4,250 mile (i.e. goodly transatlantic/etc) and that to push further requires acceptance of very steep cost & technology increases and commensurate programme risk, without a commensurate civilian return reward.

It is quite fun to watch DARPA/etc struggling with this. Repeatedly.

Ohrly 26th Mar 2024 12:01


Originally Posted by tdracer (Post 11623524)
If it's a 'proof of concept' prototype, what good is it if it doesn't address the show-stopping aspect of the 'boom'? After all, we've been building supersonic aircraft since the 1950s - the basic technology is well known and understood - so why go through all the trouble and cost of building a prototype if it doesn't demonstrate the technology that's consider new (and - most importantly - critical) to the success of the concept?
Or is just something to show prospective investors to trick them into thinking their money would be going into a viable concept?

It is also using J85s to power it, whereas the real deal is meant to be powered by engines designed and built by Boom themselves. Really I suspect it is just to keep investors happy and the company in the media spotlight.

waito 26th Mar 2024 15:30

Oh, here we are. Had to ultimately searchtool for a thread discussing the XB-1 prototype firstflight

Now I see the reason for the underwhelming response of this kinda milestone. Really not anyone believe they will achieve some breakthrough advancement? Will it just be a rich peoples' toy at smaller scale, thus reducing the boom by some %?

​​​​​​
​​

Commander Taco 27th Mar 2024 03:17


Originally Posted by Ohrly (Post 11623855)
It is also using J85s to power it, whereas the real deal is meant to be powered by engines designed and built by Boom themselves. Really I suspect it is just to keep investors happy and the company in the media spotlight.

Your comment forms much of what the “Check Six” podcast dwelled on.

whowhenwhy 28th Mar 2024 22:31


Originally Posted by Ninthace (Post 11623487)
Given both ac have similar wings, though the Overture has the addition of a tailplane, what handling foibles would these be and how do they hope to eliminate them?

Probably mis-lead you by using the word "handling". Things like transferring fuel around the aircraft and thermal management of the airframe.

Ninthace 29th Mar 2024 00:43


Originally Posted by whowhenwhy (Post 11625491)
Probably mis-lead you by using the word "handling". Things like transferring fuel around the aircraft and thermal management of the airframe.

Thanks.
Concorde always flew pretty well in the wind tunnel I worked in, especially after the addition of a strake (running board) below and aft of the cockpit. (Don’t see one on Overture, perhaps they will add it later :))

Asturias56 29th Mar 2024 08:17

"Concorde always flew pretty well in the wind tunnel I worked in,"

how long before they found you a desk in an office?

Ninthace 29th Mar 2024 08:25


Originally Posted by Asturias56 (Post 11625651)
"Concorde always flew pretty well in the wind tunnel I worked in,"

how long before they found you a desk in an office?

:D
They never did, I worked on the models, getting them ready for the tunnel and helping out in the control room. Research and playing with planes, great fun for a young lad.

324906 30th Mar 2024 07:25


Originally Posted by Asturias56 (Post 11625651)
"Concorde always flew pretty well in the wind tunnel I worked in,"

how long before they found you a desk in an office?

boom, boom!

MechEngr 30th Mar 2024 15:43


Originally Posted by Asturias56 (Post 11625651)
"Concorde always flew pretty well in the wind tunnel I worked in,"

how long before they found you a desk in an office?

It kept his desk cleared of clutter.

Asturias56 31st Mar 2024 11:46

"The real deal is meant to be powered by engines designed and built by Boom themselves."

Sure - of course you can design, build and certify a new supersonic engine for about £ 10 I understand................


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:31.


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