Technology

34989 readers

35 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

395

NASA moves a step closer to supersonic passenger flights (www.cnn.com)

submitted 1 year ago by deconstruct@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.ml

155 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In July, Lockheed Martin completed the build of NASA’s X-59 test aircraft, which is designed to turn sonic booms into mere thumps, in the hope of making overland supersonic flight a possibility. Ground tests and a first test flight are planned for later in the year. NASA aims to have enough data to hand over to US regulators in 2027.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MattMillz@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

But we already had the Concorde.... It stopped flying due to fuel costs and limited flight paths only allowed over oceans, no super sonic flying over land. Hopefully NASA has fixed these issues...

[–] RandomStickman@kbin.social 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's what they're trying to solve, the sonic boom. The spike in the front is supposed to reduce the boom, which hopefully leads to legal supersonic overland travel.

However, time and time again, the market showed that people value the price tag over anything else. The Concorde didn't make it, the A380 isn't looking good. Anything with a high operational cost doesn't seem like it would last, especially with push for greener tech.

[+] kadu@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] keeb420@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

yeah i experienced a sonic boom once, obama came to seattle and a small private plane accidentally entered the restricted airspace, that was one too many. even if its lessend its not gonna be pleasant to be under.

[–] Ryumast3r@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They're promising a perceived 75 dB level, equivalent to the volume of a dishwasher. Sonic booms are normally about 110 dB or about a jackhammer or a rock concert

And it's not like you'd hear it all the time, just once in a while and only if you're in the flight path.

[–] keeb420@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

will it reduce the air pressure difference on the ground? i was in a building and it moved. i felt it. sound is only one problem.

Overpressure
Sonic booms are measured in pounds per square foot
of overpressure. This is the amount of the increase
over the normal atmospheric pressure which surrounds
us (2,116 psf/14.7 psi).
At one pound overpressure, no damage to structures
would be expected.
Overpressures of 1 to 2 pounds are produced by
supersonic aircraft flying at normal operating altitudes. Some public reaction could be expected between 1.5 and 2 pounds.
Rare minor damage may occur with 2 to 5 pounds
overpressure.
As overpressure increases, the likelihood of structural
damage and stronger public reaction also increases.
Tests, however, have shown that structures in good
condition have been undamaged by overpressures of
up to 11 pounds.
Sonic booms produced by aircraft flying supersonic at
altitudes of less than 100 feet, creating between 20 and
144 pounds overpressure, have been experienced by
humans without injury.
Damage to eardrums can be expected when overpressures reach 720 pounds. Overpressures of 2160
pounds would have to be generated to produce lung
damage.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/120274main_FS-016-DFRC.pdf

[–] Ryumast3r@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, they would reduce the overpressure. By how much I'm not sure, but that's part of the research.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're promising

I guarantee it will be louder than that. Unless the flight path is directly over a senator's house or an historic golf club (where donors play), it will be too loud.

Literally make the flight path over the richest part of town or I won't believe it.

[–] Ryumast3r@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

NASA has no control of flight paths. The FAA also doesn't specify sonic-boom allowed flight paths. They just outright ban it (with a few exceptions) for any boom that could reach anywhere in the US.

FAA also doesn't want to deal with people complaining about sonic booms like they did back in the 50s when this all started (they received tens of thousands of complaints) so they have an interest in making sure NASA lives up to their promises.

[–] deconstruct@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

That's the idea behind the prototype. The sonic booms are lessened so overland flights will be permitted.