4 ms·

Are supersonic aircraft for rich people compatible with a world battling radical climate change? Supersonic passenger jets are likely to burn three to four tim

Are supersonic aircraft for rich people compatible with a world battling radical climate change? Supersonic passenger jets are likely to burn three to four times as much fuel per business-class passenger as standard passenger jets.

redorb 7y ago
Looks like a 2 person tester for super sonic flight, not a private jet for 2 people. The difference is they could produce a commercial level super sonic jet someday and that is cool.
- new_realist 7y ago
  Yes, I'm well aware that it's a demonstrator for an eventual all-business-class supersonic passenger jet, which will pollute carbon into the atmosphere like there's no tomorrow. I don't think that's particularly cool.
  - stickfigure 7y ago
    Do you have some quantitative numbers or some particular expertise in this, or is this just armchair outrage?
    - ericd 7y ago
      You just have to understand how drag scales with speed to know that it’s going to be less fuel efficient per mile, and how capacity typically suffers with high speed designs to know that per passenger will be particularly bad. But if the alternative would’ve been a private jet, I suppose it’s a win. And if we can get cost competitive carbon neutral fuel creation going (a la Prometheus fuels), I’m generally for this.
      - maxnoe 7y ago
        Burning the fuel is only a minor part of the climate pollution by air planes.
        ericd 7y ago
        Oh really? What is the major part?
sempron64 7y ago
Self-flagellation by restricting technological capability is not the solution to climate change. It's not expected that flights on this aircraft will address the mass market. With regards to climate change this will be a drop in the bucket. Solving global climate change requires rethinking energy generation, ground and sea shipping, transportation, heating, and addressing deforestation. It will not be solved by banning plastic straws, sorting your garbage, or even driving an electric car (though switching to electric cars is a very good step towards electric trucks, and will have a noticeable impact, unlike this niche airliner). Don't ban niche things just because they contain something that is immoral at scale. EVERYTHING is immoral at scale, including eating food or breathing. We need to address and manage our problems to allow humanity to live, not die by a thousand self-hating cuts. Optimization is always addressed by looking at the 80%, not the 20%. Maybe once this jet is in the air, if fuel expenditure is at all a concern, we can figure out how to address the efficiency concerns once we have the rest of the problems of aerodynamics and the infrastructure to manufacture this sorted out.
- reitzensteinm 7y ago
  Putting a price on carbon is by no means self flagellation and may well ruin the economics of the venture.

redorb 7y ago

Looks like a 2 person tester for super sonic flight, not a private jet for 2 people. The difference is they could produce a commercial level super sonic jet someday and that is cool.

new_realist 7y ago
Yes, I'm well aware that it's a demonstrator for an eventual all-business-class supersonic passenger jet, which will pollute carbon into the atmosphere like there's no tomorrow. I don't think that's particularly cool.
- stickfigure 7y ago
  Do you have some quantitative numbers or some particular expertise in this, or is this just armchair outrage?
  - ericd 7y ago
    You just have to understand how drag scales with speed to know that it’s going to be less fuel efficient per mile, and how capacity typically suffers with high speed designs to know that per passenger will be particularly bad. But if the alternative would’ve been a private jet, I suppose it’s a win. And if we can get cost competitive carbon neutral fuel creation going (a la Prometheus fuels), I’m generally for this.
    - maxnoe 7y ago
      Burning the fuel is only a minor part of the climate pollution by air planes.
      - ericd 7y ago
        Oh really? What is the major part?

sempron64 7y ago

Self-flagellation by restricting technological capability is not the solution to climate change. It's not expected that flights on this aircraft will address the mass market. With regards to climate change this will be a drop in the bucket. Solving global climate change requires rethinking energy generation, ground and sea shipping, transportation, heating, and addressing deforestation. It will not be solved by banning plastic straws, sorting your garbage, or even driving an electric car (though switching to electric cars is a very good step towards electric trucks, and will have a noticeable impact, unlike this niche airliner). Don't ban niche things just because they contain something that is immoral at scale. EVERYTHING is immoral at scale, including eating food or breathing. We need to address and manage our problems to allow humanity to live, not die by a thousand self-hating cuts. Optimization is always addressed by looking at the 80%, not the 20%. Maybe once this jet is in the air, if fuel expenditure is at all a concern, we can figure out how to address the efficiency concerns once we have the rest of the problems of aerodynamics and the infrastructure to manufacture this sorted out.

reitzensteinm 7y ago
Putting a price on carbon is by no means self flagellation and may well ruin the economics of the venture.