|
Supersonics Primer
One thing can be said for certain about the idea of a quiet supersonic business jet (SBJ): it’s certainly gone very quiet.
Last October, the National Business Aircraft Association (NBAA) convention in Las Vegas saw a flurry of SBJ activity. Two new-start companies — Aerion and Supersonic Aerospace International — announced plans to launch SBJ projects with a service-entry date as early as 2012. Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce and GE all indicated that they were studying powerplants for one or both of the new-starts, and Boeing confirmed a long-bubbling rumor that it was in a formal relationship with Sukhoi to study an SBJ.
Meanwhile, an industry-wide group called the Super 10 Alliance was formed under the auspices of NASA to build on the successful Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstration (SSBD) tests that Northrop Grumman conducted between August 2003 and January 2004. The group’s goals included the definition of an X-plane demonstrator, which many people — including technology leaders at Gulfstream and Northrop Grumman — said was a prerequisite for overland supersonic flight.
Since then, on the surface, nothing much has happened – which is why a lot of attention will be focused on Aerion’s scheduled update briefing here on Tuesday.
Out of the two new projects announced at NBAA, Aerion was better funded and technologically more modest. It is bankrolled by Texas billionaire Robert Bass and staffed by seasoned industry veterans, including former Learjet CEO Brian Barents and one-time Boeing supersonic transport manager Mike Henderson. It also uses a nearly off-the-shelf engine, a P&W JTD8D-217.
The key difference between Aerion and SAI is that Aerion does not intend to fly supersonic overland, avoiding a thicket of regulatory and political problems. The Aerion SBJ, using supersonic laminar-flow technology, is designed to fly efficiently at two cruise points — Mach 1.6 overwater and Mach 0.98 overland. Some experienced people in the supersonic business maintain that there is not enough demand for such an aircraft — even long-range jets today spend most of their time on transcontinental trips —so this week’s briefing, which focuses on the company’s new market survey, is bound to be interesting.
SAI had not confirmed any presence at the show at press time, nor has industry partner Lockheed Martin indicated that it will brief on the SBJ. Headed by Michael Paulson, son of Gulfstream founder — and SBJ enthusiast — the late Allen Paulson, SAI secretly contracted with Lockheed Martin in 2001 to create a low-boom SBJ design. At last year’s NBAA meeting, Paulson said that his goal was to build an international team to produce the aircraft, using proprietary technology, and said that test results indicated that no interim demonstrator would be necessary.
Both new-starts have said that they do not intend to go ahead alone with an SBJ — they want to work with established airframers in partnerships that exploit their unique designs. So far, though, no partnership deals have been signed or even hinted at.
Meanwhile, the Super 10 Alliance continues to meet. NASA has four aeronautics goals — a solar-powered UAV, an ultra-quiet airliner, a zero-emissions fuel-cell aircraft and low-sonic-boom — and no money to do any of them, because its aeronautics budget has once again been gutted in favor of the space program.
The U.S. Air Force continues to make plans for a new long-range strike aircraft — a requirement which Northrop Grumman has consistently suggested would be best met by a Mach 2.4 supercruiser — but, once again, there is no clear notion of where the budget is coming from. Current, on-the-record plans talk about an ‘interim’ long-range strike platform to enter service in 2018, starting with an analysis of alternatives next year. The question is whether this is a new aircraft, or simply a way for the USAF to promote Lockheed Martin’s FB-22 and, consequently, bolster the case for keeping the F/A-22 in production.
Cynics suspect the latter, and so far there is no pot of Pentagon money for supersonic research. The frustration is palpable: “Are we done with aeronautics?” one senior engineer asked earlier this year.
In Europe, Dassault heads the HiSAC supersonic study program under the European Union’s ‘sixth framework’ research and development structure. However, the company is likely to be more careful about its public statements now than it was in 1997, when it prematurely unveiled a supersonic Falcon design that turned out to be technically infeasible.
For the moment, therefore, it may be up to Aerion and SAI to raise private funding and convince industry partners to join the development program. People feel better about the future of aerospace here than they did two years ago — but are they that optimistic? —Bill Sweetman
back
to ShowNews home
|
