Supersonic Executive Jet

[nev]

Have there even been any proposals?  Y'know, like a G-VI?  Usual stuff, 12-15 passengers, inter-continental range, only instead of cruising at 0.85 Mach, it cruises at Mach 1.4 or somesuch.

Is it just a question of thrust?  Would powerful enough engines on a Bombardier Global Express make it supercruise?  Is it just me that thinks there might be a market for this?

The only supersonic airliner was of course Concorde, but that was 1950s technology in many ways.  What 21st century billionaire wouldn't want his own private jet that could fly twice as fast?

[Hobbes]

Sukhoi had a proposal at one point. Mostly it's a matter of thrust, but fuel consumption at those speeds is high, so to get enough range you'd need a rather large aircraft. If you're going to be supersonic, IIRC you're better off at Mach 2 than at Mach 1.1 because drag doesn't increase linearly with speed.

[Martin H]

there are pics of a factory model from MIG of a biz jet version of the Mig 25 . that wouldnt hang around speed wise.

[ysi_maniac]

Dassault had a proposal too: http://www.vectorsite.net/avsst.html#m4

[AeroplaneDriver]

There have been several proposals, with two currently under development and in the news at last month's NBAA (National Business Aviation Association) convention in Atlanta.

Gulfstream have had an on-again-off-again project both with and without Sukhoi's participation for quite a while now.

The other player is Aerion , which is supposedly looking for a partner such as Dassault for their aircraft.

It may eventually happen, but I'm betting it will be a hard sell and a long time before we see any SSBJs on the ramp.

[Thorvic]

Theres a rather nice BAE one in "Stuck on the Drawing Board"

G

[Jennings]

I believe there was a proposal for a B-58 based biz jet also.  Now *that* would have been cool (and VERY fast).

j

[Mossie]

IIRC there are two reasons companies buy biz jets, prestige & to save money.  

The first one's pretty much out these days, in the past it did your share price some good to show off how well you were doing, now not so much.

The second one is the main thing nowadays.  If your top fat cats, ahem, execs are getting paid ridiculous amounts of money, it's wasting a lot of cash in time by sending them to wait for the jumbo, only to be delayed 10 hours.  You send them in a chauffer driven Cadillac/Bentley/Maybach or even by helicopter to the city airport & pop em onto a Lear/Gulfstream whatever.  It then whisks them on a jolly to a conferrence/all expenses payed piss-up, bypassing the queueing plebs.  What I'm getting at is it actually saves money to have your own jet than wait around & pay for a first class ticket on BA.  If your going supersonic, it has to save enough time to be economical, i.e. time verses cost.  If you can't get the economy down, then no-ones going to want a supersonic cocktail bar.

Do I sound cynical???  Maybe that's because I had to fight hard to go on a budget airline to a conferrence in Dublin while the bosses got to go Florence & New York business class no questions asked.    

[AeroplaneDriver]

If an SSBJ ever does make it to the market I most will end up with fractional ownership companies like NetJets.  A tiny number of companies can justify the cost of a supersonic business aircraft, while many more could justify owning 1/4, 1/8, or 1/16 or one.

[Shasper]

I agree AD, Fracts are the way to go these days. . .

Shas B)

[Jennings]

companies like NetJets

I have a friend (well, an acquaintance) who flies Citation X's for NetJets.  I don't get how they make money.  Fully 70% (seventy, that is) of his trips are repositioning empty airplanes in order to pick up clients.  That's 7 out of every 10 hours he puts on his jet are producing zero revenue, and burning untold amounts of fuel, simply to allow rich fat cat executives to avoid the waiting lounge at O'Hare and Hartsfield.

He once flew from DC to Oakland (commercial) to pick up an airplane, then flew the airplane from Oakland to Gainesville, Florida (clear across the country) to pick up two college students and fly them home - TO TAMPA (about 2 hours drive) - for the weekend with mommy & daddy.

And we wonder why we have global warming?  It disgusts me to think about NetJets.  And we won't even get into the way those two college students are growing up and what *their* expectations for what life owes them are going to be.  Sorry, I'm getting nauseous.

J

[AeroplaneDriver]

companies like NetJets

I have a friend (well, an acquaintance) who flies Citation X's for NetJets.  I don't get how they make money.  Fully 70% (seventy, that is) of his trips are repositioning empty airplanes in order to pick up clients.  That's 7 out of every 10 hours he puts on his jet are producing zero revenue, and burning untold amounts of fuel, simply to allow rich fat cat executives to avoid the waiting lounge at O'Hare and Hartsfield.

He once flew from DC to Oakland (commercial) to pick up an airplane, then flew the airplane from Oakland to Gainesville, Florida (clear across the country) to pick up two college students and fly them home - TO TAMPA (about 2 hours drive) - for the weekend with mommy & daddy.

And we wonder why we have global warming?  It disgusts me to think about NetJets.  And we won't even get into the way those two college students are growing up and what *their* expectations for what life owes them are going to be.  Sorry, I'm getting nauseous.

J

I think NJ and most of the other Fracs charge some sort of repositioning fee for empty legs (not neccesarily covering th whole cost, but at least part of it).  I think I recently read though that they are doing away with the fee or modifying it for certain fleets and/or areas.

I understand what you mean about flying the college kids too J.  The charter company I used to fly for regularly flew a couple of kids (like 10-14 year olds) to the beach house for the weekend.  They were the most obnoxious little bastards I think I've ever encountered.  Such a sense of entitlement at such an age was troubling to say the least.  It made me happy to realize that going out for ice cream is a big deal to our kids.

[jcf]

There have posts on the subject over on the Secret Projects board:

GULFSTREAM SSBJ

RAYTHEON (BEECHCRAFT) QSP SSBJ

DASSAULT SSBJ

TSAGI QSP SSBJ

Tu444 SSBJ

AERION SSBJ

SUKHOI QSP SSBJ

LOCKHEED SKUNK WORKS/SAI QSST

VG BIZJETS

Cheers, Jon

[Radish]

well, I like the idea of:

Su-34 with extended rear hump for passengers.

B-58 Hustler, with the passengers "in the pod" underneath.....that'd be spectacular.

B-2 with passengers in the bomb bay, or in the aft-cockpit area.....ideal for "surprise visits!"

For my Rocky Horror "Intergalactic" Leer Jet, I replaced the engines with those from an X-wing fighter. There's photos around somewhere  

[overscan]

I've read in connection with the ATF program that there are two sweet spots for supersonic cruise - Mach 1.4-1.5 and Mach 1.8-2.0. Not sure of the science behind that though.

I'd suggest Mach 1.5 would be a practical target for an SSBJ, it would still drastically cut  times. Obviously the work with reducing sonic boom impact is key to enabling routine overland supersonic flight.