Boom Supersonic CEO Blake Scholl tells JP Hampstead the story of the XB-1's historic supersonic flight. Blake explains how the XB-1 broke the sound barrier without creating an audible sonic boom, and why that matters for the future of supersonic aviation.
So, if I understand this correctly, exceeding MACH1 without creating an audible sonic boom on the ground could be done with any supersonic aircraft assuming the right weather conditions and speed control. What am I missing?
Everything, Mark Sonic boom overpressures can be minimized by careful SHAPING of the airplane. Weather conditions and speed are mitigating items but the primary reduction comes from shaping of the airplane. That’s why the X-59 has such a long nose.
More than 20 years ago, we proved this theory with the 'Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstrator; (SSBD) airplane … google “Quieting the Boom + NASA.”
Everything.
Larry is close, but on the wrong path. The plane’s shape minimizes the overpressure but is doesn’t stop it. BOOM’s secret sauce is engines and nacelles designed to exceed Mach 1 without an afterburner. The result is more like a dull thump than shock wave.
The benefit is the Concord was limited to transatlantic flights going supersonic only over water. BOOM’s airliner will open up something like 480 overland routes.
What does the afterburner have to do with sonic booms? The SST routinely supercruised (held sustained supersonic speeds without afterburner), as did the Tu-144D - and I don’t think they were thumpers.
Afterburner has nothing to do with shock wave which is caused by shape of airplane, but with noise on takeoff and fuel consumption - and weight of them.
Boom went to three then four engines for field performance without afterburner.
Nothing.
But apparently the Concorde created the shock waves called booms, or was assumed to so operation overland was prohibited. (The question is whether or not the shock wave reaches the ground where it would bother humans and maybe cows.)