Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Supersonic Travel: Would you like to get to Sydney, Australia in 4 hours?
Well, it's being worked by these companies in collaboration: Boeing, Gulfstream and NASA and it's being nicknamed the Son of Concorde". If it comes to pass, all you'll probably need to do to fly it is mortgage your home. But it's sure an exciting idea. (news.yahoo.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
We went to the moon 7 years from the word GO. Now it will take at least 7 years to get back to what we had in 1969? Brilliant!
What I'm saying is that with less computing power than is in your smartphone we went to the moon and built the SST and Concorde in 1969. The X-15 was an atmospheric skipper in 1959. The SR-71 flew shortly after that! Now, with a super computer in every design facility, we can't build squat much less get back to where we were! What has changed? Our desire to lead; Government regulations; or just national laziness and the desire to be victims? The Xbox 10 will be great except China will be telling us what we can and can't do with it.
Not if it costs me $15K lol. The market for this service will be tiny and well-heeled.
My kinda folk - hehehe.
Dear friend Jonathan Fischbach, I beg to differ with you about the size of market plea.
Please recall the two specific stages of travel periods.
When sea travel changed to air travel (through slow and hopping flights).
Second when hopping and slow flights were 'replaced' by faster non stop flights.
The change in time is changing the pace of trade commerce and hence the life in general.
Travel style is and will have to change accordingly.
I repeat Concorde failed , NOT because of lack of need or popularity , BUT because of many technical shortcomings. Mainly due the sonic boom which in turn restricted the routes substantially and hence it became commercially unviable. Amongst many other reasons.
MHCO(my half cent opinion)
Please recall the two specific stages of travel periods.
When sea travel changed to air travel (through slow and hopping flights).
Second when hopping and slow flights were 'replaced' by faster non stop flights.
The change in time is changing the pace of trade commerce and hence the life in general.
Travel style is and will have to change accordingly.
I repeat Concorde failed , NOT because of lack of need or popularity , BUT because of many technical shortcomings. Mainly due the sonic boom which in turn restricted the routes substantially and hence it became commercially unviable. Amongst many other reasons.
MHCO(my half cent opinion)
I don't believe it's Jonathan's opinion it isn't something to move towards. All he's saying, and I agree, is that it wouldn't be something the mainstream population can use to commute around the globe to various meetings and / or family vacations. It's something a very very small demographic would enjoy. I think that's probably the case. It's a dream for some which may become a reality at some point. Evolution's an exciting phenomenon.
ThanX dear friend Donna Peterson, I will NOT say that you did not understand my view.
I know what I write , and I still hold it.
This is what ALWAYS happens to innovations.
sea travel to air travel. Why it was accepted ?
Communication became faster and gradually work time was at a premium around the same time.
And sea travel had to take a back seat.
And so on .
I know what I write , and I still hold it.
This is what ALWAYS happens to innovations.
sea travel to air travel. Why it was accepted ?
Communication became faster and gradually work time was at a premium around the same time.
And sea travel had to take a back seat.
And so on .
I think we're saying the same thing - simply using different words.