Private jets and business class are shifting to supersonic over the next 20 years

According to JetNet (reported in Knight Frank’s 2017 Wealth report), within the largest 10 markets for private aviation there are around 17,000 (16,854) privately owned aircraft registered. The US has 75% of private jet ownership amongst the top 10 markets. US private jets has grown 34% from 2006 to 2016 to reach 12,717.

Boom Supersonic believes there is a potential global market for 2000 supersonic jets.

Boom Supersonic plans to make one-way supersonic air travel from London to New York cost about $2,600.

They have developed prototypes of a 55-seater jet that will have a cruising speed of 1,451mph, 100mph faster than the Concorde. They hope to begin passenger flights by 2025.

Traveling at half the time will really require a separate system for aircraft boarding and clearing of customs. The pre-clearance systems for getting quickly through security checks will be more common and even separate airports, terminals and gates for supersonic and other high-end travel.

SpaceX has talked about going in under an hour anywhere on earth for a few thousand dollars by 2028

At the recent TED2018 conference, SpaceX COO Shotwell said she has become extremely bullish on BFR and BFS in the last several months.

In her opinion
* BFR (and point-to-point Earth transport) will be deployed “within a decade, for sure.”
* Point to point travel on EArth will be a few thousand dollars per person (less than business fare on a regular plane).

39 thoughts on “Private jets and business class are shifting to supersonic over the next 20 years”

  1. Corporate travel: Company policy says you can book business for work flights over 10 hours. Hapless Employee: Business on a standard plane is $6k. Hypersonic business is $3k. Corporate travel: You can book the hypersonic in economy. The flight is 6 hours. Hapless Employee: But they only have business class seats… I’ll believe in rockets for on-planet transit when they have a protocol to de-ice rockets and launch in near-blizzard conditions. Undersea vacuum tubes might be easier. Falcon 9 launch commit criteria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_commit_criteria#Falcon_9

    Reply
  2. Corporate travel: Company policy says you can book business for work flights over 10 hours.Hapless Employee: Business on a standard plane is $6k. Hypersonic business is $3k.Corporate travel: You can book the hypersonic in economy. The flight is 6 hours.Hapless Employee: But they only have business class seats…I’ll believe in rockets for on-planet transit when they have a protocol to de-ice rockets and launch in near-blizzard conditions. Undersea vacuum tubes might be easier. Falcon 9 launch commit criteria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_commit_criteria#Falcon_9

    Reply
  3. I think the real innovation would be space Cool X use the Big Falcon Rocket to move humans from one end of the globe to the other. Point is that the main problem would be acceleration an deceleration on entry. Luca Mazza ———————————- As a side note, we wrote quite many comments in the past with Disqus. Where have they gone. Is there a repositoriy or so?

    Reply
  4. Most of the richest people are in effect never still. They can’t stop. Then complain they are to busy. I find this funny actually.

    Reply
  5. I think the real innovation would be space Cool X use the Big Falcon Rocket to move humans from one end of the globe to the other. Point is that the main problem would be acceleration an deceleration on entry. Luca Mazza ———————————-As a side note we wrote quite many comments in the past with Disqus. Where have they gone. Is there a repositoriy or so?

    Reply
  6. Most of the richest people are in effect never still. They can’t stop. Then complain they are to busy. I find this funny actually.

    Reply
  7. Good point. Really the BFR would only be useful for intercontinental travel and would only be able to launch in more southerly latitudes it would be largely limited to operating below 35 degrees N. I do not see a plausible way to launch it poor weather making it unrealistic to serve areas where it snows regularly for a third of the year. Weather delays will be a big issue.

    Reply
  8. BFR has some problems, rockets are so noisy you have to have launchpad far away. They tend to have lots of scrubs also its two stages, two stages for planes has only been used twice, once commercial and it was to use an flying boat to lift an seaplane to heavy to take of on it own up to cruising speed. Soviet used oversize cargo planes to lift and cruise with fighter planes, not sure if this was still done during ww2.

    Reply
  9. I often disagree with you, but think it is better to see ideas that I disagree with as long as they aren’t accompanied by gratuitous insults like libtard (from other parts of the political landscape ‘fascist’ often becomes a snarl word rather than a serious comment), which just make the insultees less likely to consider those ideas.

    Reply
  10. Hi Luca: I was starting to wonder if you had been banned or something. I’m glad to see you weren’t. I haven’t seen the name ‘LibtardsHateMe’ recently. Maybe he actually decided to address the ideas rather than throw around childish insults like ‘libtards’.

    Reply
  11. Good point. Really the BFR would only be useful for intercontinental travel and would only be able to launch in more southerly latitudes it would be largely limited to operating below 35 degrees N. I do not see a plausible way to launch it poor weather making it unrealistic to serve areas where it snows regularly for a third of the year. Weather delays will be a big issue.

    Reply
  12. BFR has some problems rockets are so noisy you have to have launchpad far away. They tend to have lots of scrubs also its two stages two stages for planes has only been used twice once commercial and it was to use an flying boat to lift an seaplane to heavy to take of on it own up to cruising speed. Soviet used oversize cargo planes to lift and cruise with fighter planes not sure if this was still done during ww2.

    Reply
  13. I often disagree with you but think it is better to see ideas that I disagree with as long as they aren’t accompanied by gratuitous insults like libtard (from other parts of the political landscape ‘fascist’ often becomes a snarl word rather than a serious comment) which just make the insultees less likely to consider those ideas.

    Reply
  14. Hi Luca:I was starting to wonder if you had been banned or something. I’m glad to see you weren’t.I haven’t seen the name ‘LibtardsHateMe’ recently. Maybe he actually decided to address the ideas rather than throw around childish insults like ‘libtards’.

    Reply
  15. Even in tropical climate, I have my doubts that any rocket will be safe enough for regular human travel. Making it 99.9 percent of the time won’t come close to being good enough.

    Reply
  16. Even in tropical climate I have my doubts that any rocket will be safe enough for regular human travel. Making it 99.9 percent of the time won’t come close to being good enough.

    Reply
  17. Even in tropical climate, I have my doubts that any rocket will be safe enough for regular human travel. Making it 99.9 percent of the time won’t come close to being good enough.

    Reply
  18. Good point. Really the BFR would only be useful for intercontinental travel and would only be able to launch in more southerly latitudes it would be largely limited to operating below 35 degrees N. I do not see a plausible way to launch it poor weather making it unrealistic to serve areas where it snows regularly for a third of the year. Weather delays will be a big issue.

    Reply
  19. BFR has some problems, rockets are so noisy you have to have launchpad far away. They tend to have lots of scrubs also its two stages, two stages for planes has only been used twice, once commercial and it was to use an flying boat to lift an seaplane to heavy to take of on it own up to cruising speed.
    Soviet used oversize cargo planes to lift and cruise with fighter planes, not sure if this was still done during ww2.

    Reply
  20. I often disagree with you, but think it is better to see ideas that I disagree with as long as they aren’t accompanied by gratuitous insults like libtard (from other parts of the political landscape ‘fascist’ often becomes a snarl word rather than a serious comment), which just make the insultees less likely to consider those ideas.

    Reply
  21. Hi Luca:
    I was starting to wonder if you had been banned or something. I’m glad to see you weren’t.

    I haven’t seen the name ‘LibtardsHateMe’ recently. Maybe he actually decided to address the ideas rather than throw around childish insults like ‘libtards’.

    Reply
  22. I think the real innovation would be space Cool X use the Big Falcon Rocket to move humans from one end of the globe to the other. Point is that the main problem would be acceleration an deceleration on entry.

    Luca Mazza

    ———————————-

    As a side note, we wrote quite many comments in the past with Disqus. Where have they gone. Is there a repositoriy or so?

    Reply
  23. Corporate travel: Company policy says you can book business for work flights over 10 hours.
    Hapless Employee: Business on a standard plane is $6k. Hypersonic business is $3k.
    Corporate travel: You can book the hypersonic in economy. The flight is 6 hours.
    Hapless Employee: But they only have business class seats…

    I’ll believe in rockets for on-planet transit when they have a protocol to de-ice rockets and launch in near-blizzard conditions. Undersea vacuum tubes might be easier. Falcon 9 launch commit criteria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_commit_criteria#Falcon_9

    Reply

Leave a Comment