5 ms·
Is a NYC-SF route a possibility, or are sonic booms only politically feasible over water?
by gregorymichael 8y ago
Is a NYC-SF route a possibility, or are sonic booms only politically feasible over water?
- BinaryIdiot 8y agoIt's my understanding that, initially, it'll have to be over water but once it's proven safe they can get approval to fly over land. I don't know what that entails but that was my understanding of it last time I looked into it. A NYC-SF or DC-SF route would be freaking amazing.
- sailfast 8y agoWhen Boom was first posted here I recall the narrative also including a lot of drag dynamics that would reduce the "boom" which would allow for more feasible overland routes / less noise pollution. Not sure where that sits now - I don't see it as much in their PR copy.
- gsnedders 8y agoIt's still their plan, AFAIK, but the regulatory hurdles to let them do it probably means it's a lot further off than overwater flights.
- jessriedel 8y ago> but once it's proven safe they can get approval to fly over land The prohibition on supersonic airliners over land is about noise, not safety.
- dsjoerg 8y agoThere's lots of water near NYC and SF so maybe you do your sonic boom over the water and then turn towards land?
- itp 8y agoThat's not how a sonic boom works. A sonic boom doesn't occur just at the moment that an object exceeds the speed of sound; it's a continuous phenomenon that is experienced by a stationary observer as a momentary event. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom
- hamandcheese 8y agoThe sonic boom is continuous at speeds above Mach 1
- elidourado 8y agoNYC-SF is a 2h30m block time (gate-to-gate) if it were allowed. Our sonic boom will be quieter than Concorde's, but because of the policy challenge, we are baselining overwater operations only.