Boom Supersonic Overture M1.8 SST

Best part, or: How To Hit The Nail Right On The Head.

It sounds like the company was ultimately unable to bridge what’s often referred to in defense tech as “the valley of death” — the period between R&D and commercialization. This is a well-known problem for vendors looking to sell to the Department of Defense, and a place where venture capitalists have said they could step in — unless they don’t.
Click to expand...

We have a winner here.
 
viewfromthewing.com

Rejected By The Industry, Boom Supersonic Raises $100M To Prove Critics Wrong—But At A Cost - View from the Wing

No one will invest in building an engine for Boom Supersonic. So they're going to fund the development themselves. They've raised money in a 'down round' to pay for this. Two years ago they'd supposedly come to an agreement with three companies to provide an engine.
viewfromthewing.com viewfromthewing.com

Another capital raising this time only 100 mil for engine development.

Like throwing a hot dog down a hall, doesn't touch the sides :cool:

Regards,
 
How can the TB (awesome) get posted and I am in the dogbox o_O for going off-piste.

The wicked web we weave????????????

Boom will go boom shortly.

Regards,
 
Halcyon66 said:
How can the TB (awesome) get posted and I am in the dogbox o_O for going off-piste.

The wicked web we weave????????????

Boom will go boom shortly.

Regards,
Click to expand...
You posted news about a different project here, without any reference to its relevance to the topic, twice.

These posts were better placed in the correct topics.

You could totally start a new general topic comparing these different current SST projects together if you want to do that.
 
As earlier they are all connected to the subject.

How is TB revenant?

Seems strange you can have multiple threads on supersonic passenger airframes, yet they have supposedly have nothing in common.

Anyway, will only post direct Boom info so not to create issues

On another note, not sure how to do this quote thingy will work on it so as not to cause confusion.

Regards,
 
It's alive !
GiZKt9SWQAA1xdl
 
www.twz.com

Boom! The XB-1 Demonstrator Jet Has Gone Supersonic

Hitting the Mach 1 milestone is an important development and makes Boom Aerospace the first private company to fly a supersonic civil jet. Hitting the Mach 1 milestone is an important development and makes Boom Aerospace the first private company to fly a supersonic civil jet.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
Kiltonge said:
"The first civil aircraft to break the sound barrier since Concorde "

Citation X and Global 8000 got there first.

Well done Boom, but no need to exaggerate.
Click to expand...
The Citation and the Global are technically capable of breaking the sound barrier. I guess that technically correct is the best kind of correct, but let's not pretend that these are actual supersonic aircraft.
 
Not sure how I missed responding to this when it was originally posted...

Halcyon66 said:
Correct, yet they are not verifying the actual end use airframe, they are verifying a single seat aircraft that has little in common with a 60 to 80 seat airframe.
Click to expand...
The XB1 does match to an earlier concept for their SST, and that earlier design was virtually tested by Booms computer model(s).

By flight testing the XB1, Boom makes sure that their computer model(s) predictions match reality.

Then, when the FAA finally comes up with a specification for maximum footprint noise level and profile (not just sheer overpressure or decibels, but whether one large boom or multiple smaller booms etc), Boom will have confidence that what their computer models say will happen actually will happen on the full scale prototype.

For example, Boeing's computer model predicted some stores separation issues on the Super Hornet, so they angled the wing pylons outward a little. Then, they ran the Legacy Hornets through that same computer model, and it also predicted stores separation issues. Stores separation issues that have NEVER BEEN OBSERVED over some 20-30 years of operating Legacy Hornets. Ergo, the computer model was wrong.
 
djfawcett said:
I think you had an oppsss on your front view. The horizontal span is not the same as the wing span. Nevertheless, I love your drawing!
Click to expand...
You're right!
My bad.
I will update the artwork.

Thank you for the tip Sir....
 
Scott Kenny said:
The XB1 does match to an earlier concept for their SST, and that earlier design was virtually tested by Booms computer model(s).

By flight testing the XB1, Boom makes sure that their computer model(s) predictions match reality.
Click to expand...

Couldn't they just have modelled the T-38 and then carried out flight tests to compare? That would have saved a *lot* of work and money.

I'm just baffled as to the point of the XB-1, beyond being a hype-maker.
 
Kiltonge said:
Couldn't they just have modelled the T-38 and then carried out flight tests to compare? That would have saved a *lot* of work and money.
Click to expand...
Too many potential grey areas in the data gathered that way to produce reliable computer models, I suspect.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Wouldn't you want to have an airframe as close to ready-to-build-the-FSD as possible once the FAA announces the sonic boom levels allowed? Have several virtual models each with different boom levels?
Click to expand...
That is if they are building with sonic boom suppression in mind. Boom is not. They are building for routes where sonic boom is not an issue - i.e. - over water for the most part.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom