A totally hypothetical question...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 53
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A totally hypothetical question...
Folks, this is just a bit of fantasy fun, so apply your minds openly!!
If Airbus (or Boeing...or even BAe) dug out the original plans for Concorde, and set about updating them with whatever technology is currently available, what would be the result?
Would enhanced engine technology over the Olympus originals allow Concorde 2 to fly any faster, or more economically? Probably most critically, could any powerplant be made to provide similar performance to the original, whilst meeting current noise (excepting sonic boom of course) and emissions legislation?
Would modern materials science provide any benefits over the original materials (if any improvement has been made!).
And how much would such an adventure cost? I am guessing that the development costs, plus the small capacity, plus the small customer base would make this adventure a non-starter anyway, but please speculate to your heart's content!
If Airbus (or Boeing...or even BAe) dug out the original plans for Concorde, and set about updating them with whatever technology is currently available, what would be the result?
Would enhanced engine technology over the Olympus originals allow Concorde 2 to fly any faster, or more economically? Probably most critically, could any powerplant be made to provide similar performance to the original, whilst meeting current noise (excepting sonic boom of course) and emissions legislation?
Would modern materials science provide any benefits over the original materials (if any improvement has been made!).
And how much would such an adventure cost? I am guessing that the development costs, plus the small capacity, plus the small customer base would make this adventure a non-starter anyway, but please speculate to your heart's content!
Guest
Posts: n/a
There would not be any reason for them to go any faster than Mach 2.0 because that´s the limit for aluminium, heatwise, i.e. the Brits designed an airliner restricted by the material, and found out that airspeed greater than M 2.0 (approx) resulted in too much friction heat thus weakening the ship.
The Americans (Boeing SST R.I.P) decided to go faster. The rest is history, Boeing quit their plans after realizing their fundamental error and millions squandered. Of course there are better materials now but they are probably off limits financially for mass produced airliner. So, I´d presume we´d be flying M 2.0 again.
The Americans (Boeing SST R.I.P) decided to go faster. The rest is history, Boeing quit their plans after realizing their fundamental error and millions squandered. Of course there are better materials now but they are probably off limits financially for mass produced airliner. So, I´d presume we´d be flying M 2.0 again.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NASA carried out some trial flights on the TU144 a few years ago and concluded that engine technology that would provide the necessary oomph yet comply with current noise, environment and fuel efficiency demands was still at least 10 years off.
That's what I remember from the articles in the various magazines like Flight, Aviation Week etc. (They were looking at other technological aspects of SS flight as well).
That's what I remember from the articles in the various magazines like Flight, Aviation Week etc. (They were looking at other technological aspects of SS flight as well).
