London to New York in One Hour, Mach 5

Register to hide this ad
And if it makes any more noise than a 737-400 NY and NJ will ban it. See Concorde and noise.

I found all the complaints about the noise Concordes made at takeoff pretty specious. I spent three weeks near the Heathrow flight path in 2003. The Concorde did have a particular note to the engines, but it moved so much faster than the other kites it was like "WHOOSH" and it was gone. You want noisy, try a B-1B. Everyone in the Vegas valley knows when one of those was loaded up and using afterburner to get out of Nellis.
 
I recall reading in the late 80s about a hypersonic passenger jet that would fly from New York to Tokyo in two and a half or three hours.

Still waiting for it to show up.

The issue is making it economically feasible.
 
I like E3T, going coast to coast for a few pennies in power. Evacuated Tube Transportation Technology.
Is that like Hyperloop? Those clowns took Federal and local government money and flushed it who knows where at a facility just outside the Vegas valley. That's not what you will read on Wikipedia, but the local papers here were all over it.
 
I once saw a real Concorde on the ground at the American Airlines maintenance facility in Tulsa. That was sometime in the late 1970s. I don't remember why I was at the AA facility or why the Concorde was there because AA never had a Concorde in its fleet. Still, it was impressive to get close to one on the ground.
 
....
The European Space Agency (ESA) recently jumped into the burgeoning space-plane sector, announcing funding for a new research program called Invictus, which will develop a hypersonic space plane capable of Mach 5 (3,386 mph). The aircraft could fly from London to New York in an hour. If plans stay on track, it could be operational by 2031.
....
The Invictus team is tasked with having a viable concept ready in 12 months and a working hypersonic jet by 2031.

So did anyone in this thread actually read the article? It says nothing about carrying passengers, or really anything at all about what this craft's mission is. "London to New York in an hour" is simply an example of speed that people can wrap their minds around, as opposed to a goal. It would appear to be nothing more than a concept demonstrator. To quote from the TV series Firefly, "I'm smellin' a lotta 'if' comin' off this plan."
 
And if it makes any more noise than a 737-400 NY and NJ will ban it. See Concorde and noise.

I found all the complaints about the noise Concordes made at takeoff pretty specious. I spent three weeks near the Heathrow flight path in 2003. The Concorde did have a particular note to the engines, but it moved so much faster than the other kites it was like "WHOOSH" and it was gone. You want noisy, try a B-1B. Everyone in the Vegas valley knows when one of those was loaded up and using afterburner to get out of Nellis.
I was at Floyd Bennet Field in Brooklyn and had a Concord from JFK that had just taken off fly over. It was VERY LOUD! Way louder than any other planes, at least on take-off.
 
So did anyone in this thread actually read the article? It says nothing about carrying passengers, or really anything at all about what this craft's mission is. "London to New York in an hour" is simply an example of speed that people can wrap their minds around, as opposed to a goal. It would appear to be nothing more than a concept demonstrator. To quote from the TV series Firefly, "I'm smellin' a lotta 'if' comin' off this plan."
The way Reaction Engines folded was peculiar. It makes me think there is either a fundamental problem with SCRAMJET engines nobody wants to admit, or there is a desire by some group to see that the technology is never developed. I'm thinking back here to the mysterious cancellation of the German supersonic stealth fighter and the Canadian Avro Arrow projects.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top