News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes. Parent comment

Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by robotresearcher on Monday March 21, 2016 @01:47PM (#11330041)
Speed only matters for the cruise part of the flight. The first and last 45 mins, plus airport time are not different. The slowdown portion of a Mach 2.2 flight will be even longer.

(edit: maybe not much on the slow-down: see Concorde data via link below)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by Retric on Monday March 21, 2016 @02:01PM (#11330186)
They likely accelerate much faster, and slowing down from mach 2.2 is also fast.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by robotresearcher on Monday March 21, 2016 @02:25PM (#11330437)
Data from an actual Concorde flight shows slowdown-to-land of around 45 mins, so around the same as a regular flight.

http://www.blodtandsmidigt.com/concordeprofiles.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by Retric on Monday March 21, 2016 @03:54PM (#11331313)
Yes, but if the Concorde slows from Mach 2 to 0 over 45 mins then it's average may be ~mach 1. Which is faster than the average velocity of a normal 747.

Granted, if the Concorde shows up and needs to circle the airport for 20 minutes then that's the same delay.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by robotresearcher on Monday March 21, 2016 @05:32PM (#11332290)
Those data show slowdown to subsonic over the first 10-15 mins of that period.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes by Retric on Tuesday March 22, 2016 @09:59AM (#11336607)
It also shows fairly linear acceleration to Mach 2 over the first 30 minutes of flight and very rapid deceleration from Mach 2 to Mach 1. Which IMO suggests they could use a different decent profile.
[ Parent | on HN ]