This crazy-looking plane might let us travel cross-country in half the time 

Strange fetish.

It's a lie. They are digging passenger grave. The pilot can not see the front

@@trendingviews4086 I guess you have never seen a plane fly in moonless night or in super dense fog or through clouds, even though planes have front windows all pilots get trained to fly only using instruments

They don't want to hear it.

Yes like everything else, we probably had this plane for years but only now finding out about it because we might be close to checking off all the boxes for commercial use. Just like with most of the tech we use today, it was already made for the military or nasa, computer, gps, cell phones, etc., when they hit the shelves, they were expensive, but significantly dropped as more and more companies got in on it.

Business class is quite popular eventhough its 3x more cost than economy. I can see supersonic being sustainable if cost is 4x economy flight ticket.

Obviously. It wasn’t made for normal low/middle class people 😂

The boom is great.

I use to hear theses sonic booms when is was young.

Get ready to break the Sound barrier

The problem is Boom jets will have the same route limitations as the Concorde because they create normal shock waves. So Boom aircraft will only be able to fly Mach 1 or faster over water. The X-59 will hopefully lead to development of future supersonic airframes that don't create sonic booms, opening up overland routes.

Like he didn't even listened ​@@GabeRamirez15

Jugglers can juggle balls without seeing them.

planes fly in 0 visibility all the time

It is a one seater but the hope is it will lead to new passenger aircraft designs if successful.

@GabeRamirez15 I mean, in 50 years, the best they can do is a 1 seater? 50 years of technology and that's where they're starting?

So the problem is so complex that it wasn’t until current computing power was available, that they could conceive a design they think will work.

@GabeRamirez15 So only good for terminator drones. Makes sense.

I think it would have to be a private jet, maybe 12 people? It would be crazy expensive for a commercial jetliner, I don't see a good business case for it.

It won’t be.

Billions of people flying around the world is totally fine. This message brought to you by deadly pathogens.

It hasn’t had its first flight yet

better off wasting millions of a human transporter than the continued OLD tech of flying!!!!

They are digging passengers grave. The pilot can no see anything. They depend on NASA.

i see the point of the video flew right over your head

There's a company building a center in my city right now to basically reinvent the Concorde

Maybe they can learn how to time them perfectly to make a beat

Choppers and current comercial planes make way more annoying sounds that last for a good few seconds

Actually… it depends? If reduces the amount of time a plane is in the air significantly and fuel costs aren’t too high per person, it could actually be affordable just by virtue of the fact that might be able to sell 1.3x - 1.7x the number of tickets per 24 hours. That is to say, if a Boeing 737 can only do NYC-LA 2x per day each way (for a total of 4 flights), if this plane is able to carry the same number of passengers 3x a day (6 flights) the airline would likely sell both the 737 and the new plane tickets at the same price. They wouldn’t let the new plane be cheaper at first because they know that people would want to take it so they wouldn’t have to. Oh yeah, and the fact that it would be able to fly over land means that both purchase and operating costs would be lower because it wouldn’t be a bespoke niche product. TL;DR: If it works as advertised and can carry a comparable number of passengers as our current main aircrafts, it would probably be as affordable as any other type of commercial air travel.

Assuming they aren't built by Boeing.

a lot of our familiar tech originated from military advancements at one point or another just like the jet engine, and M&M's candy.

Wtf are you babbling about???

@@rogerthat4545 He's not babbling at all. You could make a basic inference and see exactly what he's talking about. Lockheed Martin is a defense contractor, so this will undoubtedly be used in combat. When the US has supersonic jets that are bombing targets below without making any noise, it would be much harder for the enemy down below to know that they're coming and to try to shoot them down, that's the whole reason Lockheed Martin put so much time and money and engineers on this project, to bomb without as much risk of being shot down.

@JohnSmith-hr7fl our "sophisticated weapons" never lost a war, especially when you consider we haven't lost a fight. It's our politicians that lose the wars.

@@rogerthat4545you guys lost against Vietnam and Afghanistan

Yea and some day people on planes like this video shows will say they are slow too. I swear no matter what we accomplish nobody will ever be happy and just demand more. Faster must go faster 3000mph is just too slow like a cow 🤦‍♂️. You are lucky to have jet airlines most of the humans who have already lived didn't even get to ride a horse. You are lucky and clearly too stupid to understand that.

More like an hour to hour and a half.

@@ethanweeter2732 Right, I stand corrected. Plus probably only 2x the price but 5x the fuel.

@@Habib_Osman Your are correct that a lot of drag and thus fuel consumption is generally associated with flying supersonic in conventional ways. Trans sonic drag seemed insurmountable at first.Hence we still talk about the sound barrier when we refer to the speed of sound. While the X59's reduction of sound gets the majority of the attention, along with that revolutionary project's noise reduction comes tremendous drag reduction as well, compared to traditional supersonic flight. I know that a similar project by the commercial Boom company aims for a phenomenal drag reduction of 75%, which will directly translate in similar fuel efficiency improvements. Perhaps their on to something revolutionary, which could give commercial supersonic flight a second chance.

We means you and a keyboard??

High speed rail is stupid policy. I know your idols in China love trains, but that doesn't make it the best option for America

The problem with that is infrastructure. We already have the airports to support destinations and departures, but building high speed rail requires construction (and maintenance) for every mile of travel for any given destination and departure. That's going to cost more money, it's probably going to require remapping of routes even if you try to use existing railways because high speed rail won't be able to turn as sharply (meaning negotiating new property usage and working around other existing infrastructure).

railway lines cause mass extinction of animals in north america already

Correct. To be even more altruistic id say we should have both.

Technology improved so much and building materials for windows got better I assume.

I'm sure the tickets will be as inexpensive as Southwest.

The point is just to figure out how to deal with sonic boom. Fuel consumption is a different set of problem.

I fear that silenced a supersonic airplane goes contrary to efficiency and supersonic flight is already a waste of fuel. And i got very skeptical when i heard "moving the engine up to reduce noise", pretty sure that the engine location has nothing to do with the sonic boom.

@vincentvoillot6365 idk. Engine technology has came a long way since the concord. We can produce engine with so high in thrust to weight ratio that it can push a plane into supersonic without afterburner (aka supercruise). We'll see how it goes.

@vincentvoillot6365 since sonic boom is due to air coalescing on airframe, I'm guessing placing the engine above the fueslage would help dampening the shockwaves caused by the engine intake

@@Apollo-tj1vm You are correct, the air displaced by a moving surface coalesce and create a sonic boom. But air don't coalesce on an air intake (or something is very wrong), air is even slow down and compressed before being feed in the combustion chamber. For the casing of the engine, that's why it is generally in the tail (fighter jet) or being an intake. Beside, if they want to go commercial and need more than two engines, they will have to place them on the wings.

The U.S. Navy is working on a submarine that will be able to travel at the speed of sound....the idea is to somehow encase it in a "bubble".... Recent article....available online.

@@alfredgeorge317 >will be able to travel at the speed of sound speed of sound in air or speed of sound in water since it's a submaine? it's kind of 5 time difference 😆 >the idea is the same as in old Russian's 1977 "Shkval" torpedo PS and if for these torpedos their sound is irrelevant since target will be dead before been able to evide for submarine silence is a key for survival.

@@delta_glider4362 speed of sound in water... I read an article in "Marine Insight"... Not sure when they'll have the actual design, but they're working on it now with Penn State.

@@delta_glider4362 My comments keep deleting for some reason... The article is in "Marine Insight"...

That is bad news as you live in Seatle.

maybe they can fly higher so the air resistance is lower

The smaller aircraft may help reduce carbon emissions.

@@owendebest4183Plus faster so might not be that inefficient if the plane has far less drag.

If you Google it Concorde used roughly 4 times the fuel per passenger on the same distance compared to a 747-400 of the era. 7 times compared to a modern 787.

But if you go really fast, time will stand still so you aren't using any fuel at all...

🤣

Way more. It's not more aerodynamic, in fact, slightly less. Only way this is ever viable with net zero policy is with extremely cheap renewables and non existent cheap synthetic fuels.

Does it matter at all?

@@eliasl332 yes it does. Cos there were already supersonic aircrafts in later 1960x and they gone for a reason

@@delta_glider4362 that reason wasn’t environmental but economical.

They didn't forget, the narrator is just British and willingly lied.

Yes, if we can get across the country in an hour and a half, imagine how much more business gets done in a day?

You cannot because you're not socially in a particular class which demands you and your staff time schedule be updated. For many a plane as this is not a luxury but a travelling necessity.🕊️🦜

Or maybe it might have military applications

I'm sure the guys at nasa forgot to think about that...

In the future! 😅

Hopefully football will be banned by then.

High speed rail that travels at over twice the speed of sound? no... Not even hyperloop comes close to those speeds.

They just inflating the value of existing technology for the marketing.

mind your business

What an irrelevant comment. I also would like to stop funding Israel, but it's an inconsquential amount in our economy and has nothing to do with why we can't afford things in the US. Is it possible for any thread on the internet to not be taken over by politics and bots? Even one about a f*ing airplane.

No tech has ever remained solely in the hands of the extremely rich.