NASA says it will build quiet supersonic passenger jet

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_29695808/boom-technology-may-build-next-gen-supersonic-plane
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-21/this-aerospace-company-wants-to-bring-supersonic-civilian-travel-back

Branson is investing in a company that will try to build a 40 passenger supersonic plane. It would be nice if it could land at London City airport to make it extremely competitive to the CEO crowd.

Quote: Pacomartin

It would be nice if it could land at London City airport to make it extremely competitive to the CEO crowd.

It would be nice if it could be built.

I neglected to say the partners in this company have extensive aerospace experience and know-how. I didn't mention it because, unfortunately, that's largely beside the point.

The point is not "Can a supersonic passenger jet be built?" We know it can be. Concorde aside, many of the designs proposed over the decades have been sound. The point is "Can a supersonic passenger jet operate profitably?"

Among other things, the most important detail is: can enough planes be sold?

If Boom manages to sell 20 planes in 10 years, regardless of its efforts, then it will be a failure. I've no idea what the "magic" number is, and probably it cannot determined at the moment. Likely it's in the hundreds.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Quote: Nareed

I've no idea what the "magic" number is, and probably it cannot determined at the moment. Likely it's in the hundreds.

Every manufacturer tries to calculate the magic break even number, as it is one of the factors that determines whether to go ahead with the program. The A380 was 50 airframes, and so they wouldn't begin the development until they had 50 firm orders.



Out of the 6 customers two backed out eventually. ILFC and Virgin Atlantic (who has technically delayed for 16 years). Singapore airlines has taken 19 and has 5 more orders. Qantas took all 12 with 8 more orders, Air France took all 10 with 2 more orders. No one knows if the orders will actually be delivered.

But the "magic number" turned out to be a joke. Once the real world expenses were factored in there was no way to make a production line break even with only 50 planes. They've delivered 183 so far, and they probably won't break even unless they sell triple that number.

I think this Boom aircraft , especially if it can take off and land on a 7500' or 8000' runway will sell like crazy to private individuals, even if it costs $100 million.

Quote: Pacomartin

But the "magic number" turned out to be a joke. Once the real world expenses were factored in there was no way to make a production line break even with only 50 planes.

Not to mention that one goes to the expense and effort to design and build a plane just to break even. You'd be better off if you'd opened a savings account instead ;)

Quote:

They've delivered 183 so far, and they probably won't break even unless they sell triple that number.

that's 1) more than I thought, and 2) an insanely high magic number.

Quote: Nareed

2) an insanely high magic number.

I understand that the Dreamliner project may not break even with over 1100 orders

787-8 435
787-9 546
787-10 162
Dreamliner 1,143 orders

The narrow body projects, the B737 and A320 are profitable but only because they produce over 400 a year. About half of Boeing's profits come from the B777-300ER.

Quote: Pacomartin

I understand that the Dreamliner project may not break even with over 1100 orders

What is worse than "insanely high" for a number?

I'm guessing it's a twofold thing: 1) the 787 was a radically new design in that it used more composites and featured new interiors and a different type of engine plus, 2) that battery fire thing.

But the new interiors are being used in the current NG B737, and will be used in the 737 MAX line, along with more composites and the new kind of engine. So there's that, and the MAX ought to sell well, barring some battery fire thing or similar disaster.

Where Boeing will lose a bundle is with the 747-8

Quote: Nareed

Where Boeing will lose a bundle is with the 747-8

Development costs for the 747-8i were roughly $4 billion. It doesn't look good for making a profit. However, compare that to the A380.

Although I mentioned the 50 aircraft that was fairly early in the development state. Once the project got underway the A380 was expected to break even on cash flow at 250 deliveries, with targeted production rates of 45 aircraft per year. At the time, it seemed like a solid business case. Air travel demand around the world was growing at a substantial rate, and congested airports like Toyko Narita and New York JFK were increasingly running up against constraints. Long-haul traffic was concentrated in the hands of relatively few long-haul carriers (such as Singapore Airlines), who had undergone massive traffic growth over the previous decade as Asia’s air travel market awakened.

Once planned for Entry into Service (EIS) in 2005, the A380 didn’t enter service until 2007. Problems abounded during the manufacturing ramp up, most notably with cabin wiring. The first aircraft were delivered six tons overweight, missing on promised fuel burn performance by at least 3-4 percent. By EIS, the program’s development cost had ballooned to $25 billion.


Emirates has only 15 backlog for it's June 2010 order for the A380 with the Engine Alliance engines. These last 15 will take their fleet up to 90. Then Airbus is planning to start on Emirates Dec 2013 order of 50 A380's with the Rolls Royce engines. If Airbus doesn't come through with a neoA380 program Emirates will have to think twice about how sensible it is to acquire all 140 A380's with no planned replacements. Boeing has been beating down the door of Sheikh Mohammed, Emir of Dubai trying to convince him that the B747-8i is a less risky option that the A380.

Quote: Pacomartin

Development costs for the 747-8i were roughly $4 billion. It doesn't look good for making a profit. However, compare that to the A380.

[..] By EIS, the program’s development cost had ballooned to $25 billion.

Yes, but (naturally).

The -8 was a modification of an existing type with known characteristics and a long track record. The A380 was both brand new and without even much precedent (I know there are larger aircraft, but not many and not in large numbers).

Quote:

Boeing has been beating down the door of Sheikh Mohammed, Emir of Dubai trying to convince him that the B747-8i is a less risky option that the A380.

It can't replace every configuration used by Emirates, not to mention Etihad. Other airlines could easily downsize to an -8i. Except perhaps Korean Air, whom ironically enough is an -8i operator (funny that). In particular things like the shower and an overabundance of first class/business seats.

Emirates, though, can only pressure Airbus so much. Though a second generation Ugly Whale (I'm hoping the nickname will catch on) would be far less expensive to develop, it would still take some real money. Simply placing orders won't be enough. Emirates would have to commit to other Airbus models. Maybe some nice, fuel-sipping A350s to replace all those Boeing triple sevens.

This much is bleeping obvious. The real subtleties will tell the tale.

Quote: Nareed

Emirates would have to commit to other Airbus models. Maybe some nice, fuel-sipping A350s to replace all those Boeing triple sevens.

Well Emirates has almost twice as many B777's as they do A380's, and they cancelled their order of 70 A350s. So I doubt that they will become an all Airbus operator.

Quote: Nareed

It can't replace every configuration used by Emirates,...

The 90 A380's with Engine Alliance engines (75 delivered to date) will be with Emirates until 2028. There is no way that they will be "replaced". I am talking about not investing any more since they feel that Boeing has been more cooperative.

At the end of this year Emirates should retire 4 older models and will be operating only three different types of airframes.

Airbus A380-800 75 + new deliveries
Boeing 777-300/300ER 125 + new deliveries
Boeing 777-200 LR 10 (discontinued model) longest range aircraft ever built

Quote: Pacomartin

Well Emirates has almost twice as many B777's as they do A380's, and they cancelled their order of 70 A350s. So I doubt that they will become an all Airbus operator.

Then it's doubtful Airbus will throw any more good money at the A380.

No one knows what the future holds. The prediction for bigger jets as airports grow more congested and more people take to the skies was only half right. "Small" jets have grown larger. That is, short and mid-haul aircraft like the 737, A320 and regional jets have grown bigger and/or more dense. They're also taking up longer routes. But on the wide body front things haven't turned out that way. Instead the larger small planes are replacing the big planes on some routes.

The other thing we've seen is the rise of alternate airports.

So the inevitability of ever larger wide bodies seems eminently evitable. This doesn't bode well for a super jumbo beyond what exists today.