Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday November 16 2016, @09:35AM   Printer-friendly
from the is-that-fast-enough-for-you? dept.

One of the odd aspects of modern air travel is that it's not really getting any faster. Ever since British Airways retired its money-losing supersonic Concorde in 2003, airlines have generally stuck to top speeds of around 615 miles per hour. That'll get you from New York to San Francisco in five or six hours, depending on the winds, but you can't find a plane that will get you there significantly sooner.

We've largely learned to tolerate our slow, boring aircraft. But there's a compelling case that we shouldn't — that air travel should actually be much, much quicker.

Right now there are a host of energetic startups and NASA engineers working on sleek new supersonic jets that could fly twice as fast as today's commercial planes, if not faster. These jets would be major upgrades on the noisy, fuel-squandering Concordes of old, and they could be ready within the decade.

When you talk to people working on these super-fast planes, it's hard not to get swept up in the excitement. Take Blake Scholl, the CEO of Boom, a startup that's working with Virgin Galactic to put a new supersonic business jet into service by the early 2020s. He envisions a day when anyone could cross the Pacific or Atlantic in just a few short hours. "It changes how you think about the world," he tells me.

So what say you, Soylentils? Do the political, environmental, technical and economic challenges standing against these efforts outweigh the benefits of supersonic air travel? Should supersonic flights become common or even ubiquitous?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by isostatic on Wednesday November 16 2016, @11:34AM

    by isostatic (365) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @11:34AM (#427467) Journal

    Air travel is going the way of the dinosaur. Moving a person around is becoming less and less necessary for reasons other than the experience of the traveler.

    Yet actual stats show constant year on year growth of 4-5% over the last decade-plus. Same applies for trains (at least in the UK).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @12:19PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @12:19PM (#427479)

    It does make some logical sense that a company would rather use telepresence which is basically free rather than send a person via a costly airline trip. Also, I wonder if the numbers for population growth can explain the increased air travel.

    • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday November 16 2016, @01:51PM

      by isostatic (365) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @01:51PM (#427503) Journal

      It does make some logical sense that a company would rather use telepresence which is basically free rather than send a person via a costly airline trip. Also, I wonder if the numbers for population growth can explain the increased air travel.

      But that isn't what happens in the real world, people travel across the world to have face to face meetings. This is actually increasing, as local businesses become global.

      US airline passengers increased 4.5% in 2015-2016, US population in comparison grew by under 1%.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @03:06PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @03:06PM (#427528)

        Your numbers are interesting, although 5% increased travel vs 1% population increase for a single country hardly mean anything over a one-year span. You could probably explain that away with increased need to move Big Egos around for the U.S. presidential election.

        Until very recently, there was no satisfactory substitute to face to face meets and those are especially important in a business context. Businesses have tried ersatz technologies as they became available, not least because of the cost factor but also for efficiency. Audio and video conferences as well as shared whiteboards have proven workable crutches in some scenarios but severely lacking in most. VR/AR appears to fix all of their shortcomings and with current-day computational power and telecom capacities, are well within reach for mass deployment at a fractional cost of sending employees on long trips.

        It's no coincidence that of all possible financial backers, it was Facebook that invested in Oculus. As a means for purely social interaction, VR is currently too awkward and prohibitively expensive to use. As a tool for doing business it was never more affordable and would help Facebook enter a vast market they have so far been excluded from. There are a few building blocks still missing of course, like tracking of facial expression to drive an avatar or proper force feedback for close-to-perfect immersion, but that's not so far off.

        Extrapolate and compare the possible improvements in a comparatively young technology like VR/AR and an old one like manned flight and their market potentials and draw your own conclusions.

        • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday November 16 2016, @05:50PM

          by isostatic (365) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @05:50PM (#427642) Journal

          Your numbers are interesting, although 5% increased travel vs 1% population increase for a single country hardly mean anything over a one-year span. You could probably explain that away with increased need to move Big Egos around for the U.S. presidential election.

          It's fairly constant over the last 10+ years. My company has had those cisco meeting camera things for at least 5 years, yet that still doesn't impact on the face-to-face stuff, and that's in a team.

          But yes, I'm sure the latest technology just around the corner will make all the difference.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @09:14PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16 2016, @09:14PM (#427779)

            So just like the ubiquitous supersonic passenger airliner that's been just around the corner for around 50 years now? Excellent :)