4 ms·
> With the advent of lie-flat beds, in-flight wifi and power, and higher cabin pressurization, being on an airplane an extra 3.5 hours isn't even so bad anymore
by RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago
> With the advent of lie-flat beds, in-flight wifi and power, and higher cabin pressurization, being on an airplane an extra 3.5 hours isn't even so bad anymore, so the practical advantage isn't nearly as great.
I think this is huge. From what I read, the cabin of the Concorde was very cramped. I would prefer business class on a 787 or A380 vs being cramped and arriving faster.
- cameldrv 7y agoThe size of the seats was a little bit worse than what airlines sell today as premium economy. It's interesting to see what Boom is doing here relative to Concorde. They have a similar sized cabin, but they propose to configure it with fewer but larger seats. They will have more efficient engines and a lighter airframe, but the lower efficiency at higher speeds means they can't match subsonic range, so they'll have to make a fuel stop on transpacific flights, which hurts comfort and will cost at least an hour per flight. Economically, transpacific routes may make more sense even with the fuel stop. Concorde probably could have done this too, but Air France and British Airways didn't serve these routes. All of the very long routes they might have used it on crossed Europe and Asia where they couldn't go supersonic.