Tony Stark Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Taking the "Boom" Out of Booms Sonic booms usually mean something cool. The space shuttle is coming in for a landing or a jet fighter is flying overhead. We don't hear them very often, so when we do it's an event. But imagine if aircraft manufacturers designed and built a vehicle that carried passengers or cargo at supersonic speeds over land. Sonic booms would be happening all the time; and they're loud and annoying. That's why the Concorde flew over the ocean. Noise regulations in most countries wouldn't allow it to fly over land because of the sonic booms it generated. Sonic booms are keeping a new era of supersonic cruise flight from happening. For us to ever be able to enjoy the benefits of flying people or cargo over land at super-fast speeds, we have to figure out how to turn down the volume on sonic booms. NASA has been doing flight tests and simulations and ground experiments -- with cool names like "Quiet Spike," "SonicBOBS," "SonicBREW," "LaNCETS," "House VIBES," "Low Boom/No Boom" – to help find answers. What is a sonic boom? How is it created? Do sonic booms cause damage? To people? Structures? Does changing the noise level of a sonic boom affect aircraft speed? On Tuesday, January 25, at 3:00 p.m. ET, NASA aerospace engineer and "sonic boom guru" Ed Haering answered your questions about what it's like to try to tame a sonic boom. More About Ed Haering Ed is an aerospace engineer at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in Edwards, Ca. He really likes the variety of his work, which can involve starting up a new research program, doing computer simulations and analysis, troubleshooting instrumentation on exotic aircraft, and conducting field measurements in remote locati Quote Link to post Share on other sites
T0M4ever Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) I'm also pretty sure Concorde flew over the ocean because that's the only way to get to New York from London Edited January 26, 2011 by T0M4ever Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wayne S Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 I'm also pretty sure Concorde flew over the ocean because that's the only way to get to New York from London Funny story about the Concord, It had to land at T.F Green Airport here and people wigged on since they thought it was going to boom when it took off, Yet when they did fly it to Newyork, every morning at my house you could hear the boom over the ocean. If it used T.F Green in Rhode Island the actual boom would have been further out to sea. It only landed at TF Green once, I am happy to say I stayed home that day to see it come in and leave Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Litvyak Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I'm also pretty sure Concorde flew over the ocean because that's the only way to get to New York from London :D Well, initially there were many interested airlines, and don't forget there was the Boeing 2707 project, too. Initial ideas foresaw transcontinental services too - New York to L. A., Toronto to Vancouver, etc. (I recall seeing an artist's conception of a Concorde in Canadian Pacific colours, with the script scheme with blue goose on the tail). It was issues with the boom that prevented these flights from happening, and why the Concorde got no further orders, and the 2707 was cancelled... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F106A Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Braniff actually flew it in the US, with US crews (albeit supervised by a French or British Concorde pilot), with US registration markings. For a little while at least. Of course the flights were subsonic. http://www.braniffpages.com/concorde.html Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TomcatFanatic123 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Sonic booms would be happening all the time; and they're loud and annoying. They're loud and annoying? Actually, I think they're pretty cool :). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fishwelding Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 It was only a matter of time. They've successfully developed low-calorie popcorn butter substitutes and sugar substitutes. If you can have junk food without the calories, I think you can have insanely fast airplanes without the earth-shattering, citizen-terrifying noise. (Of course, early on you're going to have mishaps--Tab? Dietrite?) It's amazing to me how they've "hushed" slower airplanes. I think the Goodyear Blimp is noisier than C-17s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
zerosystem Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 It was only a matter of time. They've successfully developed low-calorie popcorn butter substitutes and sugar substitutes. If you can have junk food without the calories, I think you can have insanely fast airplanes without the earth-shattering, citizen-terrifying noise. (Of course, early on you're going to have mishaps--Tab? Dietrite?) It's amazing to me how they've "hushed" slower airplanes. I think the Goodyear Blimp is noisier than C-17s. true but studies of the anti sonic boom system point to cancerous tumors in rats... :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fishwelding Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 true but studies of the anti sonic boom system point to cancerous tumors in rats... :) Not to worry. The PR teams of the companies involved will purchase senators and create sufficient scientific pseudo-debate to obscure the issue. Why, as the industry spokesman said before the congressional hearing on the matter: "It is true that the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease Control, and 27 other national and internationally-recognized public health agencies have supposedly found through separate, independent studies links between elevated cancer rates and the Anti-Sonic Boom System. But we think these are 'junk science,' and conducted our own study, which shows no positive carcinegenic link. So clearly, the issue is undecided, with no consensus." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spejic Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 It was issues with the boom that prevented these flights from happening, and why the Concorde got no further orders, and the 2707 was cancelled... I think it was more the aircraft being ruinously expensive and total fuel hogs. It took about 5 times the fuel to carry a passenger on a Concorde as on a regular passenger jet. I don't see those being fixed any time soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 They're loud and annoying? Actually, I think they're pretty cool :D. :D G'day TomcatFanantic, When the RAAF got its first supersonic fighters (Mirage) in 1963 everbody thought the occasional sonic boom was cool and even somewhat exciting. However when the Mirages started going supersonic chasing Sabres over the city of Newcastle the novelty soon wore off as windows were broken and people started to complain to the RAAF that the booms were 'loud and annoying'. Shift workers complained, young mothers with infants and toddlers complained and people who had never had a window broken before suddenly started to claim the damage against the RAAF and the RAAF was obliged to fix the damage. Some today think sonic booms at air shows are ok (I'm one of them) but as an everyday occurrence they are now thankfully banned closer than 60 NM to sea in everyday flying training and tactics training. , Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dan Diego Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I grew up on a naval base, China Lake to be exact. Sonic booms were a daily occurance for years. As an 8 year old, fascinated with jets, I thought it was cool. Broken windows oh yeah. I remember sitting in class once and having some of the windows crack. We were also not far away from Edwards and they would also add to the chaos. I once remember looking up and seeing the XB-70 fly over. Best sonic boom for me was years later, about 1990. I was out on the USS Ranger for a dependants cruise. One of the demonstrations was a supersonic fly-by of an F-14. There was an overcast layer of about 1000 ft. The F-14 began his run-in above the overcast and dropped down as he got close to the ship (boat?). Anyway the captain got on the PA and told everyone to look toward the southwest. Well we're out at sea and most of the dependants had no idea where the southwest was. Anyway I got lucky and saw him drop down out of the overcast about 2 miles away. There were maybe 3000 people on deck and I pointed to the jet and said "there he is" so that those standing next to me could see him. Obviously his approach was completely silent, and then whammo. He pulled back into the low clouds and was gone. My guess was that 80% of the people on deck never even saw him. As for me I will never forget it. Dan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I love Sonic Booms ... Where we live in Salem, Missouri, the Missouri Air National Guard use to fly over our region to practice ACM, in fact, it's labelled as the Salem Area of Operations ... Through the 90s until they lost their F-15s to Montana, we'd have about 100 Booms per year on average ... I miss them overhead ... We never had a cracked window from them either ... We still occasionally get a boom now and then, I believe it's mostly Boeing shaking down a newly built F-15 or F/A-18 ... Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kei Lau Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I think it was more the aircraft being ruinously expensive and total fuel hogs. It took about 5 times the fuel to carry a passenger on a Concorde as on a regular passenger jet. I don't see those being fixed any time soon. The Aerion Corp is trying. They have received 50 deposites and expected to enter service in 2015. But with a 1.5 Billion development cost, I will believe it when I see the first flight. In the 2007 news: Saudi Arabian royal family member Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud picked up the A 380, so it comes as no surprise that another king from the oil-rich Arab region picks up a swanky new jet for himself. This time around we are talking about Sheikh Rashid, the ruler of Dubai, who has purchased the Aerion Supersonic Business Jet that will fly at 1.6 Mach. To illustrate its speed, you can touchdown at Paris from New York in just over 4 hours as the plane cross the Atlantic in two hours (it has a 4,600 miles range over 45,400 pounds of fuel) thanks to its Pratt & Whitney JT8D-219 engines. Owing to its design the aircraft can cruise at 1.15 Mach over land without producing any boom on the ground. The plane can also keep a 0.98 Mach speed offering a similar cost-per-mile than competing subsonic private jets and complying with US regulations. Over water, however, you will be free to speed it up and sustain 1.5 Mach with ease. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
robtmelvin Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 When I was a kid, long, long ago in the early '60s, we used to hear sonic booms on a regular basis. This was in the days before the regulations about going supersonic over the continental U.S. were in place. To be honest, I thought it was pretty neat. Since the Afghan and Iraq wars have been going on, every now and then we'll hear a sonic boom in the little town in southeastern Kentucky were I live. I've been told that the U.S.A.F. uses this area to practice bombing runs. I have to admit, I still think its pretty neat. Bob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
zerosystem Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 now i know its only a tv show and comparing it to different locations and weather conditions, but how does what was done on mythbuster's about sonic booms and window breakage compare with real world damage? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CorsairMan Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Not to worry. The PR teams of the companies involved will purchase senators and create sufficient scientific pseudo-debate to obscure the issue. Why, as the industry spokesman said before the congressional hearing on the matter: "It is true that the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease Control, and 27 other national and internationally-recognized public health agencies have supposedly found through separate, independent studies links between elevated cancer rates and the Anti-Sonic Boom System. But we think these are 'junk science,' and conducted our own study, which shows no positive carcinegenic link. So clearly, the issue is undecided, with no consensus." Completely unrelated to that, Hollywood has announced two films in production. One called "The Day After All The Rats Get The Cancer Caused By The Booms Caused By The Corporations" and "Ratatar" (both are working titles). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 It's got a great and proven aerodynamic inspiration. Build it! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.