Back to Squawk list
  • 54

American Airlines Agrees to Buy 20 Supersonic Planes from Boom

प्रस्तुत
 
American Airlines has agreed to purchase 20 supersonic Overture planes from Boom Supersonic, the companies announced Tuesday. (www.cnbc.com) और अधिक...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


mbrews
mbrews 16
A couple of reality checks from the article -

"The deal is the second firm order in the last two years for Boom, still years from building its first commercial airplane. " ...

"Still, Overture is years away from becoming a reality. "


No mention of the dollar value of the so-called nonrefundable deposits from the agreements.
Nor discussion whether cheap stock or stock options were given to entice ostensible aircraft buyers;

Such stock purchases, if any occurred, would give a new meaning to the phrase " Boom or Bust " :)
jeffinsydney
jeff slack 21
I am old enough to remember the USA's SST and all of the airline sign-ons and the Concorde and all of the sign-ons.

........... and where did all of this go?
Nowhere.
bidrec
Richard Haas 21
I am old enough to remember when Pan Am took deposits for tickets to the moon.
ThePumpkin
ThePumpkin 3
Ha! Ha! Beautiful 🤨🤣
laserguy0
Bill Cunningham 5
Ya I think they found Alice Kramden
MDer
MDer 5
From one Boomer to another, A-OK !
;)
joepre
joepre 2
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 5
Boeing delivered the 747 instead. Worked out pretty well if you ask me.
mikehe
Mike Hindson-Evans 3
That was a Boeing failure to deliver... 2707.
mbrews
mbrews 0
Some might consider that it benefited society, to NOT deliver an expensive, polluting chariot for the billionaires.
speedbird9
Marty Martino 4
We’ll be get a decent idea when/if the XB-1 test article finally flies.

I imagine now it’ll have be redesigned to accommodate Overture’s 4 engine design. And they still need engines similar to what Concorde 1.5 (or B) would have been…supersonic speed without afterburners.

I have high hopes for it..though I’m not sold the redesign.
mbrews
mbrews 17
According to a Wall Street Journal report of August 16, the Boom concept passenger aircraft does NOT yet have a designated engine design or manufacturer. They report -

" Boom has had discussions with Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc, and a spokeswoman said Tuesday that Boom is now evaluating the results of Rolls-Royce’s work and assessing market requirements and design alternatives. "

Does anyone think it will be possible to travel supersonic without a suitable engine ?

Put yourselves in the shoes of Rolls Royce or GE. Ask yourself how much engine development cost you are willing to risk, for a one-of-a-kind aircraft designed by beginners with no track record.
mattwestuk
Matt West 7
Totally agree. Neither of those companies have become world leaders by playing fast and free with resources and talent (save for the F35 engine alternate that they surprisingly joined forces for).
rmchambers
rmchambers 5
Given the state of commercial airlines, will AA still be around when these things show up on the flight line? They have a ton of debt and are managing to piss off customers on a routine basis. My last trip on AA was a bit of a shit show with cancellations and maintenance issues.
stan0832
Stanley Owen 3
Your last trip sounds like mine on AA 1666
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 0
There will be so much fine print in the T&Cs that American or any other early supporter will be commercially unscathed should Boom execute its business plan and actually survive to be purchased by an existing mainframe developer. At this point, it is mutual hyping of all parties with marketing and bulking up for a possible IPO. This is more "money" than "engineering" at this point. IMHO
Ohio2Montana
Ohio2Montana 1
Exactly...the announcement benefits both companies quickly.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 0
correction, , , Boom NOT execute its business plan , , , ,
wastiegreen
Alex Green 14
Living in West London, I witnessed all the superb technology that went into Concorde, all of which were designed before computers were available to the draughtsmen. Everything was designed by human beings, including those amazing engines and the delta wings. Even on board, a human engineer needed to travel in the cockpit to fine-tune the fuel load that was distributed around the aircraft to maintain the centre of gravity. But that is history - sad though it may have been when I watched the last British Airways aircraft land at Heathrow before being distributed to museums just half way through their working lives and having just been completely refurbished and made safer around the fuel tanks.

But the finances of the design, construction and operation of such aircraft were impossible to overcome, as were the laws of physics. Concorde was restricted to 100 passengers (less on the Paris route) to keep the weight down but that payload is financially insane. The heat that the aircraft generated by friction, even in the thin air at 55,000 feet, expanded the aircraft and all its internal fittings by 13 inches - all drag to be paid for in fuel burn.

Concorde was dramatically restricted in its route availability by the sonic boom which nothing that can be engineered by mankind will be able to solve. Country after country pulled their advance orders for Concorde on the grounds of cost and the restrictions placed on its routes with no country in the world allowing the plane to cross their borders supersonically over land - even the UK and France restricted the speed when near the land/sea borders.

The US would have nothing of it, partly I suspect to keep out a new European aircraft manufacturer ready to compete with Boeing, but also because it could not fly anywhere useful. It was not allowed to fly supersonically over US or Canadian territory and the range of the aircraft was useless over the Pacific and the Atlantic except to London and Paris where BA and AF would already be flying in a very niche market of film stars and bankers.

Today's available market needs to be closely examined. Concorde was flying at the peak of popularity in the banking centres of London and New York. Tragically 9/11 saw the British Airways passenger list reduced by no less than 40% in those few dreadful hours. And they were never really replaced. The Paris to New York route always struggled and was kept alive by national pride until 9/11 gave it the chance to withdraw from the market under another pretext. Business air traffic declined permanently and the Coronavirus restrictions broadened everyone's minds to Zoom meetings thus affecting all sorts of business-related facilities such as office accommodation, hotels, restaurants, rail travel and air travel. If it had still existed, supersonic air travel would have been decimated.

The history of Concorde was one of immense Anglo-French national pride in the post-war era, with brilliant engineering overcoming the problems of the day and the political and manufacturing co-operation between the two countries over Concorde being the bedrock of the success of today's Airbus manufacturing. But the crazy finances that were heavily supported by national governments both in its build and sales for a few highly restricted routes in the world will never be able to be successfully transferred to the private finance market.

So where does AA believe that they can find viable routes to operate 20 supersonic airliners with those physical limitations on cost and routings? And how will Boom manage to overcome physics and the much-reduced need for such a plane in the post-pandemic world?
mcrossbow24
mcrossbow24 5
Good reminder. This is not about history.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 4
AA will have nothing to lose and if by chance the design sees the light of day, they will have early bragging and acquisition rights. This is all pre-IPO pumping.
joepre
joepre 10
Most people that have been involved in Aviation for the last 20+ years have witnessed promises, upon promises from new exciting aviation platforms that have gone by the wayside along with the investors cash. So one can't be surprised by the skepticism from those of us that have witnessed it.
I hope they are successful, but considering these sound breaking aircraft platforms have been out there looking for investors since around the mid to late 2000s, I too fall into that camp. If I'm not mistaken. one of them just declared bankruptcy and again swallowed their investor's cash.
Apparently the decision makers at United and AA have very short memories.
dwight666
D Chambers 5
I was fortunate to ride Concorde on Air France in 1999. It was always on my top ten list, and well worth it. But wait! It gets better: I used Delta Miles, 200,000 each way. I then bought a videotape of how to fly the thing, 2 hrs each way on BA, explaining every knob, switch, and dial. The video might still be around. Me? I feel glad that I got this goal done, before the program was shut down. I know a lot of people who also really wanted to do this.
sparkie624
sparkie624 6
it was a great plane... I got to see one up close once, but never on one... It had such a Tragic ending... The plane was in a class all its own.
bidrec
Richard Haas 2
I saw many up close---from below. I shared a house one summer on The Far Rockaways in Queens just south of JFK, right under the landing path. They were deafening even subsonic. This was NYCBG---New York City Before Giuliani when fireworks weren't illegal and fireworks would go off all night so maybe the noise did not matter then. Giuliani made fireworks illegal, and that was a good thing.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 4
There will be enough CYA in the Terms and Conditions that we will never see that will cover the commercial investors including AA. When they do their IPO however which had to have some big name supporters, it is the small investors that will get soaked. Very traditional model, just a different widget.
dfhines
Don Hines 2
I saw Concorde several times coming in to land at Grantley Adams in Barbados. A beautiful sight.
TexasKid747
JW Wilson 8
When the cash changes hands and the first flight takes place, let me know.
speedbird9
Marty Martino 8
Here’s hoping Overture doesn’t turn out to be Vaporware.
speedbird9
Marty Martino 5
Just to be clear, we all know what vaporware is, right?
mbrews
mbrews 3
The Boom paper airplane is the exact definition of vaporware. 90% huckster marketing a few pretty pictures to venture capitalists + 10% glorified high-school science project by first-timers
srobak
srobak -3
nasdisco
Chris B 5
Probably accompanied by seed money to keep effort afloat. What they are trying to achieve is immensely complicated. Even trying to get a "simple" GA approved consumes more cash and time than any investor wants. Look at the Epic aircraft saga as an example
mbrews
mbrews 2
Also look at the history of the Aerion supersonic business jet concept on wikipedia. The developers managed to squander about $USD 1 billion before pulling the plug on the ill-considered 12-passenger concept

Effort ended with a thud, even after involving various partnerships with Airbus, Lockheed-Martin, and Boeing. Count me as skeptical of the hype by Boom company. Seems like a boom-doggle IMO
sbartelski
Stefan Bartelski 5
Of course, this aircraft will become obsolete as soon as SpaceX manages to get its Starship human rated and into service for point-to-point service. New York to Sydney, London or Tokyo is an hour or even less, at Business Class prices, not Premium First Class. No SST can compete with that.
pilotjag
pilotjag 5
American Airlines Press Release...
https://news.aa.com/news/news-details/2022/American-Airlines-Announces-Agreement-to-Purchase-Boom-Supersonic-Overture-Aircraft-Places-Deposit-on-20-Overtures-FLT-08/default.aspx
KineticRider
Randy Marco 5
The negativity is EPIC on this board.... if this were the 1800's you would all be saying human flight is impossible.
md69
Martin Dennett 2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boom_XB-1#Development

Read the Development and Testing sections.

Initially intended to make its first subsonic flight in late 2017. Almost 5 years later and it's not even moved under its own power yet. And this is only a one third scale model.

Search for the development history of other aircraft which eventually led to Concorde. The Fairey Delta 2 was used to test the ogee delta wing that ended up being used on Concorde. The FD2 first flew in October 1954. Concorde wouldn't take to the skies for another 18½ years.

This plane from Boom won't make it into airline service. Ever.
mcrossbow24
mcrossbow24 8
No prototype, no engine, no FAA cert process: paper airplane.
jensensteve165
Steve Jensen 4
Boom has yet to fly their 1/3 scale prototype. Target date has been pushed forward several times...
speedbird9
Marty Martino 1
Needs to be redesigned now. XB-1 doesn’t resemble a scaled down Overture enough for test data to be worth it.
oldfolkie
Iain Girling 4
(IF) this ever gets past the drawing stage, I wonder if any Countries will now allow supersonic flight across their territory. That was only one of the problems faced by Concorde.
mutrock
Mark Kortum 7
I hope they succeed. I will be an early passenger if it happens in my lifetime. I wanted to fly Concorde and procrastinated until it was too late.
rtd8450
Robert Donnelly 3
From an AAL POV, great strategic PR. 'Makes the Company "sound" proactive and forward thinking, while at the same (and ignored by MSM) time gives them a good DECADE to "rethink", quietly and without fanfare...
stratofan
stratofan 10
Ahh, more handwringing and whining from the eco-terrorist crowd. What if the Wright Bros. had listened to those who said if humans were meant to fly, they would have wings? I remember a celebrity who used to end his show with "Keep your feet on the ground, but keep reaching for the stars!" How true!
jbermo
jbermo 5
Watch as the regulating agencies of the future enact new atmospheric emission restrictions - all of which will undoubtedly mess with such travel.
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -6
Unfortunately, it appears heretofore free people are good with a future run by elites who have convinced them things like digital ID and draconian (and destructive) climate rules, race theory and gender confusion are the way to go.

Check out with which groups the climate czar hypocrite John Kerry has aligned himself.

Air travel itself along with all modern public mobility is on the line.

If you doubt it, read the goals of the climate marxists.
sbartelski
Stefan Bartelski 3
Thnak you for being brave and forthright in posting the truth
organfreak
Scott Hawthorn 1
Please refrain from posting your stupid political theories!
baingm
Gary Bain 3
What, exactly, is stupid about Alan's comments. Do you live in a bubble?
usrepeaters
Rob Palmer -1
And reflect the pettiness and jealosy of lesser developed countries who envy the more successful ones. They want to be in charge!
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -9
Unfortunately, it appears heretofore free people are good with a future run by elites who have convinced them things like digital ID and draconian (and destructive) climate rules, race theory and gender confusion are the way to go.

Check out with which groups the climate czar hypocrite John Kerry has aligned himself.

Air travel itself along with all modern public mobility is on the line.

If you doubt it, read the goals of the climate marxists.
owengrzanich
Owen Grzanich 0
tailwindjets
skip sciarra 2
Jaime1949
Jaime Terrassa 2
who is going to fly them they keep on saying that they don't have pilots or crew
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 1
Good questions but irrelevant at this time as it is questionable if this ever sees the commercial light of day. Still an entrepreneurial wet dream.
jwelder3
jwelder3 2
Looks a bit like a re-do of Boeing's once-upon-a-time proposed SST.
watkinssusan
mary susan watkins 3
this is very interesting..i do remember the concorde and the big push for airlines to buy and use it..time marches on as they say,and if this company has yet to find a manufacturer for the engines,i think it will be many years down the road before its "flying days" come to fruition..
rmchambers
rmchambers 7
Sure, Supersonic travel can be done, Concorde proved it. And designed by engineers with slide rules. It was a feat of engineering back then and nothing commercial has come close in the 40 odd years since it happened. Had it not been for government funding of that project it may never have happened but it did and what a sleek aircraft it was.
goriordan40
Gerard ORIORDAN 1
😂😂😂😂😂
dennisbryant
Dennis Bryant 1
Getting there a a few hours quicker is not worth the damage it will cause to the environment. Climate change is real even when you deny it.
srobak
srobak 1
This aircraft is more efficient than the intercontinental aircraft that are currently in the sky. It will actually do less damage to the environment.

Climate change/global warming is real - but not for the reason you think. In short: it is not man's fault.

No matter where you are currently standing - not terribly long ago (at least in the span of a planet's life) it was covered by 150 feet or more of ice. As the planet has aged and evolved - long before man, or airplanes - it has also changed and warmed. That ice has melted and receded as a result. It did so regardless of man, and it will continue to do so - regardless of man.

The sooner you and all the other alarmists come to grips with that and stop the thinking that you can stop, slow, alter or reverse a planet's natural evolution and lifecycle - the sooner we can all focus on figuring out how to get off this rock and over to a cooler one, that is somewhat younger in it's evolution.
rwoollams
Richard Woollams 1
“This aircraft is more efficient than the intercontinental aircraft that are currently in the sky. It will actually do less damage to the environment.” Citation required.
jprogers
John Rogers 1
From the article "Boom says its supersonic planes will carry 65 to 80 passenger while flying on sustainable aviation fuel offering lower emissions."

Most likely intending to use bio fuel.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -3
The sooner you RETARDS accept science and GET an education the sooner you'll truly understand the issues, in the mean time go brush your tooth.
baingm
Gary Bain 4
.....as soon as someone reverts to name calling and insults I immediately stop considering anything he/she has to say as valid. Adios Marco
md69
Martin Dennett 1
Ad hominem attacks always lose you the battle.
usrepeaters
Rob Palmer -1
I feel that climate change is politics gone bad. The sun is a variable star, and we just don't have a long history of observing it. Someone is out to "get" the oil industry, which has done a lot to develop this country, for economic reasons, and we should figure out who it is. Nobody ever mentions "overpopulation (caused by many churches)" as a cause for natural problems; perhaps they should.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
I don't think the problem is in the Church's.... Blame it on the people going and getting pregnant and thinking the world should take care of them or they can do what they want. It is more of selfish people making bad choices.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -1
Your "feelings" don't change the facts or the science that man HAS caused the planet to warm.

Get an education fool.
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -1
You are correct about "climate" change but overpopulation is a red herring.

If you took the entire world's population and put it into one spot with the density of Manhattan, it would occupy only an area the size of the former Yugoslavia.

Fremont California is more densely populated than Dhaka in Bangladesh.
It is modernity, the handmaiden of laissez Faire capitalism that makes the difference.
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -2
What other ginned up catastrophes have the marxists got you believing?
ko25701
ko25701 1
I have zero confidence that this airplane will become a reality. Billions in R&D just to build a prototype. FAA certification won't be a given either.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
I agree... but someone is going to make Millions off of it and I don't think it is going to be the Airlines.
srobak
srobak 1
airlines making commitments on unproven technologies and without a prototype. not the best move they made. I wonder how much money they shoveled towards this vaporware that now passengers and tax dollars will need to pay for?
patpylot
patrick baker -6
this aircraft will not be the least bit helpful to the upper atmosphere where it will operate. This is another irresponsible intrusion into planetary global warming, with the astounding comment from the president of the company saying that people want this, etc. etc. Perhaps the grandchildren of these passengers will feel less kindly to the company and their selfish ancestors.
ko25701
ko25701 5
Volcanic eruptions should be your concern for the stratosphere, not a few super sonic jets.
rmchambers
rmchambers 2
Those are OK though because they are "natural" :)
srobak
srobak 1
This aircraft is more efficient than the intercontinental aircraft that are currently in the sky. It will actually do less damage to the environment.

Climate change/global warming is real - but not for the reason you think. In short: it is not man's fault.

No matter where you are currently standing - not terribly long ago (at least in the span of a planet's life) it was covered by 150 feet or more of ice. As the planet has aged and evolved - long before man, or airplanes - it has also changed and warmed. That ice has melted and receded as a result. It did so regardless of man, and it will continue to do so - regardless of man.

The sooner you and all the other alarmists come to grips with that and stop the thinking that you can stop, slow, alter or reverse a planet's natural evolution and lifecycle - the sooner we can all focus on figuring out how to get off this rock and over to a cooler one, that is somewhat younger in it's evolution.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -3
The sooner you RETARDS accept science and GET an education the sooner you'll truly understand the issues, in the mean time go brush your tooth.

You repeating your ignorant statements do not make them truthful.
jprogers
John Rogers 4
You punctuating your statements with insults doesn't make them truthful either. It makes you sound like a petty, little, angry person stamping your feet because someone on the internet said something you don't like.

You want to change minds, offer information. You just want to be pissy, carry on.

Getting angry about something your read on the internet, is like choosing to step in dog shit.
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -3
AlanGlover
Alan Glover -1
Spoken like a true science denier.
Fossil fuels saved mankind from its past of drudgery and slavery and has lowered the lives lost to weather-related natural disasters by over 95% due to that miracle of human endeavor, adaptability.

Any call for the curtailing of fossil fuel development is a call for more human suffering, governmental control and the depression of the natural urge to liberty.

To infinity and beyond, said the REAL Buzz Lightyear. :)
azaerosvc
Jack Norris 0
Government Control = Human Suffering
Alas I won't pilot something burning JP4 at Mach+
I won't reach the stars while I'm burning O2
I'm happy behind a petrol powered prop
A P-51 was nivana for me
and while I'm on the ground...I'll go plant a tree.
Damn that bee just stung me...another box for the colony.
jeffinsydney
jeff slack -7
sandylns
Brian Lager 1
Ignoring history inevitably leads to failure. Concorde development costs alone came to 2.8 billion USD. This after estimating it would cost 130 million. Not a penny of that money was recovered. It never made any money for BA or AF. The restrictions on that craft are still in place and will apply, if it gets off the ground, to this. I remember it landing at my Base in Halifax NS, with mechanical problems and had the dubious distinction of helping BA crews with an engine change. This was almost an annual occurrence and only 40-70 passengers were ever onboard. An impressive aircraft.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Turned into a Tax Deduction... Just like this one will be.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
Sounds like it is going to be a real BOOM... To United's Pocketbook.. so to speak... I do not see this as a good deal.
AlanGlover
Alan Glover 3
Risk is an inherent characteristic of free market capitalism, the sin quo non of liberty.

Freedom isn't free and to the victor go the spoils...and to the advancement of mankind.
augerin
Dave Mathes 0
...never quite figured out why people are in such a hurry...
ssorg
Martin Gross 2
My favorite quote from my late father in law.... "everybody's in a hurry to pet the bears"
usrepeaters
Rob Palmer 1
Agree! Quite often one is disappointed upon arrival, and wishes he had not made the trip. It's like courtship. Hurry, hurry, and then blah.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
They just had to Jump onto the Band Wagon... Finding somewhere else to waste Money.
flybd5juan
Juan Jimenez -2
It would be such a pity if they assigned old hags to be FA's on these. LOL!
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
To quote you: "You must be some kind of stupid."
laserguy0
Bill Cunningham -1
Ya I think They found Alice Kramden
watersw1
Bill Waters -5
Crazy idea.................they didn't notice what a failure the Concord was!
pierrevachon
Pierre Vachon 3
It was a failure because of a design flaw. Otherwise it was a success for decades.
wastiegreen
Alex Green 7
I am intrigued as to what you think the 'design flaw' was. I hope you are not referring to the Air France crash. This was NOT caused by a design flaw, but mismanagement by Air France in overfilling the wing tanks leaving no air space, loading vast amounts of delayed extra last minute and unweighed luggage into the holds and miscalculating how much fuel would be burnt on taxiing. This all led to an aircraft being gravely overweight at take-off and wing tanks so full that there was no expansion room to absorb the shock of some debris from a previous plane bouncing off the tarmac onto the underwing surface. The force of this debris onto full tanks meant that the tanks ruptured outwards causing fuel to come into contact with hot engine gases and igniting. There was also poor maintenance procedures undertaken on the under carriage fixtures.
The work done to Concorde afterwards was as extra mitigation against such poor operational practices in the same way that modern cars have extra protection fitted to absorb impact damage from outside sources even though there was no design flaw in the original design.
Concorde was a political project that failed miserably financially because of the sonic boom and limited demand from passengers at high fares demanded by its low payload. The aircraft was amazing and a credit to the designers and builders but should never have proceeded past the design stage. National pride took over and all common sense left the boardrooms.

लॉगिन

क्या आपका कोई खाता नहीं है? अनुकूलित विशेषताओं, फ्लाइट अलर्टों,और अधिक के लिए अब(नि:शुल्क) रजिस्टर करें!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss