Boom Overture

Unfortunately, i’m out of votes, but i prefer the Space Shuttle to be add and second time this one

1 Like

Space shuttle needed with the rocket launch site at Kennedy and the ISS

3 Likes

Yeah, imagine , mission to ISS in IF

2 Likes

And imagine the vertical launch we need the space shuttle and the falcon 9 at with the crew dragon in IF

3 Likes

Ahh stop, i’m gonna dream it all night, Falcon 9 in IF…

2 Likes

Boom have just conducted a taxi test on the XB-1!

3 Likes

I’m concerned I haven’t seen this yet 🤯🤯
Absolutely 1000% getting my vote 😆

2 Likes

This is what would be the final design of the plane

3 Likes

While this is a cool achievement and good work by the team there is so much that still needs to happen. The XB-1 is much smaller, uses off the shelf engines, and still has a long way to go in it’s own testing. I really want to believe that Boom will succeed but honestly I will believe it when it takes off with passengers for the first time.

2 Likes

Another big breakthrough: boom has announced that the first flight was successful of the XB-1 testbed!

2 Likes

Adjusted for inflation, tickets on the Concorde were around USD 5,000 one way so I can only imagine.

2 Likes

That’s huge! WOW!

1 Like

That would be cool to see in IF, but they might not be able to add it yet because it is not released yet.

1 Like

I like the older design, cause the new one is just so ugly.

4 Likes

While the shape and speed may be cool (or ugly as some now comment:), I can’t find an angle to understand the economics of a real such aircraft.

Save a few hours in exchange for a premium price relative to conventional speeds?

Haven’t we been there before in terms of sustainable economics?

They are re-inventing the wheel in terms of processes and technology that will give them leverage over costs compared to Concorde the company says?

This also implies continued leverage over costs compared to subsonic aircraft.

Why won’t any such breakthrough methods immediately transfer to subsonic aircraft development and production, maintaining pressure on the seat mile premium comparison, keeping pressure on the gap in pricing and customer volume?

There seems to be a bit of an economic perpetual motion machine promise here.

I can’t see where their presumed economic advantage comes from other than their own rosy projections.

At least SpaceX has technology targeted at re-usable rockets we can point to. Where is the re-usable rocket-like economic benefit analogy for Boom (that includes comparisons to conventional subsonic travel)?

4 Likes

Agreed. The curved fuselage and engines with no afterburners just make it look like a deformed Concorde 💀.

2 Likes

I just got called out.

1 Like

🙂I think I agree though.
So your image on the left with the 4 engine pods is the old concept? Doesn’t that look a bit like Boeing’s SST concept plane before Concorde?

2 Likes

The conceptual render with the 4 engines is the newer design. And I will say, it looks a lot like the Boeing SST. Like shockingly.


1 Like

Maybe they can get Nestle as a sponsor if they print Kit Kat on the center engine intakes:)

I forgot about the swing wing on the Boeing SST, which I think maybe they dropped toward the end because of complexity (I don’t know if my memory of what I read is correct). But then of course came the f14 and B1.

1 Like