Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc.
Reload this Page >

The QSST - A Private Concorde

Wikiposts
Search
Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

The QSST - A Private Concorde

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12th Dec 2007, 16:29
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The QSST - A Private Concorde

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f26_1197392102

Apologies if posted before.

(Mods - place elsewhere if required)
rab-k is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 16:54
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: エリア88
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it looks right, it flies right.

http://www.saiqsst.com/index.html
Mercenary Pilot is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 19:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 2,325
Received 26 Likes on 18 Posts
QSST

...Amen.
Kelly Johnson's most important rule of aerodynamics.
tartare is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 19:32
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it looks right, it flies right.
...Amen.
Kelly Johnson's most important rule of aerodynamics.
And silly me thought that it was either Mr de Haviland, or Mr Mitchell who said that....whoe ever said it, they were right.
watp,iktch
chiglet is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 19:46
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually, I've heard it was Marcel Dassault (Bloch), who certainly has produced some beautiful aircraft. Whoever, it is a true statement.
H.Finn is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 20:58
  #6 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,732
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Yes it was Marcel Dassault who said that.And he was right.

On the QSST video, I doubt very much the size of the windows.
Looks like the artist copied those of a a Fokker27 .
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2007, 21:39
  #7 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,212
Received 70 Likes on 56 Posts
A nice dream and I am sure there would be a market for it but the uphill push is BIG.
  1. Development and certification costs for a small production run.
  2. Engineering support down route for a specialised machine.
  3. Fuel burn.
  4. Treehuggers.
  5. ???
On top of which, the recession that is now imminent will curb demand. Overall, I would doubt it will make it into production and regular service.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 07:23
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 54
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Someone will produce one, the demand is there and the feasability studies are positive. The type of people who spend $80m on an aircraft are not going to care about the predicted minor downturn, especially if they are not American and are buying in $$$.

Paxboy, I suspect that during the millions spent on the feasability stage someone did a rough calculation on fuel burn
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 07:33
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A nice dream and I am sure there would be a market for it but the uphill push is BIG.

1. Development and certification costs for a small production run.
2. Engineering support down route for a specialised machine.
3. Fuel burn.
4. Treehuggers.
All of the above apply to any specialized business jets. Gulfstream and Dassault exist solely for the few rich people and businesses that can spend tens of millions to buy planes and then a lot on fuel and maintenance. While Boeing Business Jet and Airbus Corporate Jetliner can share the development, certification and maintenance costs with the mass of 737, 767, 777, 747, 787, A319, A340, A380 and A350 planes flown as airliners, and Bombardier Challenger shares something with CRJ, Gulfstream and Dassault cannot do so.

As for windows, there is a reason most jetliners have ceilings of FL430...FL450. They want to get back to FL400 before the air flows out. There is a reason Concorde has so small windows. Larger windows are feasible, Concorde prototypes have them, but if one of them broke at FL600, the air would flow out before the plane gets down to FL400.

Whereas private jets sport huge panorama windows and fly at FL500. And they do not have a huge volume of cabin air. If a window did break, the passengers would be... unlucky. So, no reason why a private jet with huge windows should not fly at FL600 or FL800 or FL8000...
chornedsnorkack is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 08:06
  #10 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,732
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
chornedsnorkack :

They want to get back to FL400 before the air flows out.
I think you meant FL140 No ?

If a window did break, the passengers would be... unlucky.
Indeed . Hence my remark .We're talking VVIPs, not SLF here. But I am not up to date with newest semi Plexiglas materials. What was difficult/ risky in 1960 might be different today.

As to the "tree-huggers" , what is the ecological impact difference between a QSST and, say, a B1 ?
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 09:21
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They want to get back to FL400 before the air flows out.
I think you meant FL140 No ?
No. FL400.

FL140 is where oxygen masks deploy. If a plane gets back to FL140 before the oxygen runs out, oxygen masks do not deploy. But private jets actually have oxygen masks - it is acceptable to fly above FL140 and allow for the mask deployment should the cabin decompress.

However, there are certain problems with flying above FL400 with just oxygen masks. Which is a problem. Concorde has oxygen masks, but the small windows are supposed to make sure that if one broke, the plane would be below FL400 by the time the air flows out.

What happened with the recent A330 test flight which decompressed?
chornedsnorkack is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 09:51
  #12 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,732
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Thanks for the explanation
.
For the A330 in TLS the answer is ( always) the same as the A346 from Etihad :: No aircraft malfunction could be established .

For the details : only the press release :

Seven occupants of an Air Mauritius Airbus A330-200 aircraft were taken to hospital after a depressurisation incident on 21 November2007.

Ten people were on board the aircraft: three Airbus personnel, six from Air Mauritius and one representative of a supplier. Two pilots and an observer were in the cockpit at the time, while the others were moving around the cabin.

"While in the cruise there was a sudden decompression," says a spokeswoman for Airbus. "When it happened it was so sudden that there was no time for [those in the cabin] to grab oxygen masks. Some became dizzy and unconscious."

There is no firm information on the altitude of the A330 at the time. Standard procedures following decompression include performing a swift descent to an altitude of around 10,000ft where atmospheric oxygen density is sufficiently high.

Seven people were taken to hospital as a precaution although all but one have since been released. The Airbus spokeswoman describes the occurrence as a "minor incident" and says none of the occupants suffered serious injuries.

Air Mauritius selected the A330 last year after revising an earlier order for Airbus A340-300s, opting to fit them with General Electric CF6 engines.

French investigation agency Bureau d’Enquetes et d’Analyses (BEA) is conducting an inquiry into the event.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 11:22
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: europe
Age: 54
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Dassault SST exist for almost 10 years now he is dormant in the design office at St Cloud because there is no civilian certified engines to make it fly , and that is a common problem for everybody...even for the Americans. they try to certified an engine based on the M88 and the F104 both military supersonic engines but the authorities came back with a 500 h overall at the start of the program which make it not viable. For the info Netjets was Dassault launch customer with 100 airplane price at 75M$ each (1999 $) and lost of middle east customers ask Dassault where to wire the deposit ...so the engines development remain the problem as no manufacturer want to invest due to the small quantity of engines to sell in regard to the money that have to be invested for the program !
falconbis is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2007, 18:35
  #14 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 77
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whereas private jets sport huge panorama windows and fly at FL500. And they do not have a huge volume of cabin air. If a window did break, the passengers would be... unlucky.
Well not quite true. Actually in pressurization certification test all aircraft that are certified to FL-510 must be able to hold enough cabin pressurization to allow the aircraft to reach lower altitudes without causing harm to the passengers and crew with a window blown out. This is partly achieved by emergency bleed air from the engines being directed directly into the passenger vessel bypassing the air conditioning system. Basically it is raw bleed air dumping into the cabin.

Now, if you want to trust that system I guess it up to the individual. I have and do.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2007, 19:04
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hello,

The Supersonic Business Jet is being sold today already.

Aerion Corporation has apointed ExecuJet as their exclusive sales agent outside of the Americas. The deal was made public during the Dubai airshow.

According to what you can read here and there, they have more than 20 LOI signed with deposits paid. The finished bird is a t $ 80'000'000.-

The Aerion is using existing technology, including the P & W JT8-219 which flies on a number of airliners today.

Predicted max speed is 1.6 Mach, with a cruise at up to 1.15 Mach overland due to reduced sonic boom. Range is above 4'000 NM. Runway requirement is not above what is already needed for a long range business jet.

Have fun
pascualito is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 06:46
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Never Citation

I just hope they don't let Cessna build it. If Lockheed or Boeing builds it, it will be AWESOME!
Whale Rider is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 21:31
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: europe
Age: 54
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I sincerely doubt, an unknow manufacturer will have huge problems to buy the technology required from military manufacturers...and finance such a program from scratch !! the concorde program development cost was equal to the Apollo program...
Dassault Gulfstream and Sukkoi are on this kind of program since 10 years already, Dassault and Sukkoi have the know how, the design office, the ingeneering expertise, the test pilots, the supersonic wing design and tooling and the flight by wire knowmedge and the money, so if the JT 8 bought on shelves was able to achieve supersonic cruise without after burner on 4000 nm range they will have done it long time ago ...
wait and see
falconbis is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 21:41
  #18 (permalink)  
Flintstone
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
On no other basis than my own cynicism I'm saying it won't happen.

I'd like to see it, I just think it will never come to fruition because none of the good stuff ever does.
 
Old 20th Dec 2007, 12:50
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whalerider - why would it be so awesome if Boeing or Lockheed build rather than another manufacturer please?
WorkingHard is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2007, 14:22
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: europe
Age: 54
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Because Whale rider live in Honolulu not in Europe !!!
falconbis is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.