That's due to stainless steel's unique properties.
Cost can be much lower than equivalent mechanically fastened joints. But how do you prove the glued joint is good? This is not sojethingbthats currently been done apart from types that have significant departures from normal manned airfraft safety targets e.g. aerial targets
Let us not forget LearJet, who pioneered the first all-CFRP commercial airframe, fell foul of exactly this kind of issue, and collapsed penniless. On the other hand, wiser manufacturers in the more traditional markets have been steadily adopting CFRP and do now turn out high-fibre diets, I mean aeroplanes. It can be done, but it is a lot harder to get right than good ol' metal-bashing.
Steel is not a bad aerospace material, it has good strength/weight. The trick is to use it in very thin sections. Its two main problems are corrosion and stiffness. It has been used successfully since the pioneer days, from Junkers to Blohm & Voss to the MiG-25 "Foxbat" to the Starship. For a step-rocket, it spends too little time in damp air for corrosion to be much of a problem, while doubling the structure as a fuel tank leverages the tank pressure to stiffen it like a party balloon.
Oh it has been done. Particularly with wings.
blog.boomsupersonic.com
worldairlinenews.com
Quite.
What is the reason for that? Bonded structures have always been around in one form or another and pretty much took over from bolts and rivets through the postwar era. They are mechanically cheaper, lighter and safer as they avoid the stress concentrations (in both work schedule and structure!) inherent in bolt- and rivet-holes.
techcrunch.com
Ah, but was the Scotsman drinking Irn Bru? If there were Messerschmitts, they would have to clean it up, sorry, couldn't resist.
I should have really just said that instead of letting myself get sidetracked. So apologies.
Not sure that Wallis ever banged on about cruise speed, noise and bypass ratio? OR.330, for which he submitted a Swallow design, called for Mach 2 cruise with Mach 3 sprint. I don't think his SST version was intended to cruise any slower or quieter, though I cannot find any performance estimates offhand.
Indeed, I think you just mixed up Wallis's employer Vickers with Armstrong Whitworth.
Take your pick for the lower-end of the speed range:
Boom is going about this the correct way, building a sub-scale demonstrator air vehicle to prove out their design, smart, lower risk. Business jets in general are luxury items but they also can make very nice special mission aircraft as well, a s-sonic special mission aircraft could offer significant capabilities as an example. I think supersonic biz jets will be a reality in the near future when boom mitigation/reduction is proved out. Aerion bit off more than they could chew, going right into a full-scale aircraft and not to mention big risk for the investors including their statement mentioning a potential Mach 4 aircraft, not smart at all. Also, smacked of Kistler Rocketplane, Kistler duped even some of the big guys into their funding black hole, big on promise but delivered nothing.
www.avweb.com
Since the flights are so short, you don't have to sit down. Tram handhold on the ceiling should suffice.
The overall length has grown from 170 ft to 205 ft. The foot print is getting real close to the size of the Concorde.
aviationweek.com
