Boom Overture vs Concorde: Which Supersonic Aircraft Is Better?

Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the last Concorde flight, and supersonic business jets are still roughly five years away. A almost 30-year era of jet-setting began with the maiden flight of the British and French joint project from London Heathrow to Dulles International Airport on May 24, 1976. A round-trip ticket on the Concorde would have cost about $10,000 (or $20,000 in today's money), making it the plane of choice for the famous and the rich. The argument for the proposal centred on the possibility of halving the travel time between North America and Europe.
Even now, the record for the quickest passenger airliner crossing the Atlantic Ocean is the British Airways Concorde, which made the journey in 1996 from New York to London in around two hours and fifty-two minutes. Paul McCartney and Elizabeth Taylor were among the jet-setters who sailed on the Concorde during its peak, as reported by NPR.com. Phil Collins performed in London, hopped on the Concorde, and played in Philadelphia all on the same day in 1985 during the renowned Live Aid performance. "I was in England this afternoon," Collins announced to the audience as he settled behind the piano. What a strange world we live in, isn't it?
Only Air France and British Airways, with a combined fleet of seven Concordes, actually flew the plane, despite the fact that numerous other airlines had placed orders for it. It was usual for flights from London to Bahrain, Dulles, and Miami via Washington, although JFK became the most frequent route between the two cities. Washington also provided subsonic service to Dallas. Perhaps the most peculiar path it took was Saturdays from London to Barbados.
The Concorde
British Airways' 1996 transatlantic speed record from New York to London on the Concorde was 2 hours and 52 minutes; this record is still in use today.
BAE Systems
Opponents of the Concorde were there from the start. A Boeing 747, which could transport 500 passengers instead of 100, used four times as much jet fuel as the Concorde. The round-trip cost of the supersonic jet was over $10,000 in the 1990s, which is equivalent to around $200,000 in today's dollars. In response to widespread outrage over the sonic boom, numerous nations, including the United States Congress, banned supersonic travel over land.
The 2000 crash of an Air France Concorde at Charles de Gaulle Airport killed all 109 people on board and grounded all Concordes in service for over a year. Supersonic flying on an ageing fleet is expensive and has environmental implications; most travellers don't see the point after 9/11, which shook up the airline industry.
Commentator Lester Reingold predicted on NPR's Morning Edition in 2001 that commercial supersonic flight will become like space travel: a goal realised, and then long abandoned.
Business Jet Boom Overture Supersonic
The successor to Concorde, Boom's Overture is less harmful to the environment.
BOOM
However, new supersonic business jet manufacturers like Boom are targeting Mach-1+ travel as a potential return to the market. Boom Overture's narrow fuselage and delta wings give it a Concorde-like appearance; yet, the Overture can carry one third fewer passengers and has a wingspan that is 23 feet wider. Another advantage was the Concorde's speed, which could exceed twice the speed of sound. Mach 1.7 is the target speed of the Overture. Boom estimates that the Overture can complete more than 600 global routes in almost half the time it takes subsonic commercial jets.
Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) can cut carbon emissions by as much as 90% compared to regular jet fuel, and the business is now developing engines to run on this fuel, in addition to finding ways to lessen the impact of the sonic boom. A total of 35 Overtures have been ordered by United and American Airlines. The aircraft is expected to be ready for commercial use by 2029, according to Boom.
FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
* Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.
The Buzz does not own the rights to these videos and pictures. They have, in accordance with fair use, been repurposed with the intent of educating and inspiring others. However, if any content owners would like their images removed, please contact us by email [e-mail].

[@chorleycake7942]

The best? Concorde of course because it actually existed, carried passengers and was very successful.

[@Galm1Cipher0]

Well the Concorde was unbelievably expensive and it probably took longer to develop than BOOMs Overture

[@chorleycake7942]

@@Galm1Cipher0 Just let me know when the first one makes the flight from New York to London or Paris, I'll wait.

[@AarushNishikanth1]

@@chorleycake7942I will let Ayou know, haters will be left speechless

[@roberthindle5146]

​@@Galm1Cipher0We don't know yet how long Overture will take to develop. It may be never. For a blank-sheet airliner design, it takes Airbus or Boeing about 16 years to get to market. From first prototype flown to production ready is about 4-5 years alone.

[@mr_young3783]

very successful is a stretch

[@catsupchutney]

If it (the Boom Overture) doesn't exist, then there isn't much point to a comparison.

[@Richard-lp7pp]

Concorde still looks more modern 🤣 nothing will beat her

[@richardtibbitts3841]

Boom doesn't exist.

[@kirbyvanduzer6565]

Obviously boom supersonic doesn’t realize the reason why supersonic travel was done away with it costs too much money to fly and the other reason is the Concorde was loud but boom thinks they will be able to get the overture to supersonic speed without afterburners witch is impossible because 35,000 lbs is nowhere near enough thrust to get it to supersonic speed it’s enough to get it off the ground but not supersonic speeds now all the major engine manufacturers have backed out now they are having off brand lesser known engine companies make the engines so it’s definitely not going to be safe the overture is not going to even make it to the market even if it does it’s going to be to expensive to fly in then it’ll be forced to be taken out of service then all that money they spent on the factory and building the plane would be all for nothing

[@jerryholdcroft4607]

I wish the Boom project every success in their project, however. Less speed and less power means longer flights, in the 70s and 80s 3.5 hours to cross the pond was a ticket seller for those rich folks in a hurry, flying at Mach 2 was a big thing back in the day (like jet fighter speed!) and still carries impressive bragging rights (twice the speed of sound!), less passengers means higher prices (Boom was originally designed for 200 passengers to make sure it was commercially viable) now with just 80 passengers ticket prices are going to be, once again, prohibitive for us normal folk. For me, the reduction of the sonic boom noise is a mute point and should be well down the list of priorities for a new superfast plane such as this, we have always felt that the overland 'boom ban' was just sour grapes from the US airline authorities hating the attention it was getting, Concorde just throttled back until it got over the sea (from an island!) and then spent most of the flight over water with the sonic boom turned up to 11!. 🙂

[@PkMkPresto487]

I'm not interested in boom, IT DOESN'T HAVE A DROOP SNOOT!!!

[@donaldwycoff4154]

The fuel requirement may require a new industry to be developed. Won't be cheap, so I'm guessing the fuel requirement is not a release goal, but something that will happen if the jet is successful with cheaper fuels. My magic crystal ball says the jet will carry rich and politically connected people, and a few plebs who win the lottery. The rest can pound sand.

[@darrenlucas2768]

I,ll believe it.....when I see it. Boom ,you have a long road to walk yet

[@Harryvonturbo]

So, what I’ve taken from this, is that it’s just a shit version of Concorde. 👎🏼

[@MyronZhang]

Assuming the project is a success and all the ideal goals are met, Boom Overture will take the edge in sustainability and max distance, and those will be invaluabe advantages. These are aims though and not guarantees. I take a similar sentiment to you though. In my mind, nothing will usurp Concorde's title as the Queen of the Sky and she will always be the most impressive piece of aviation engineering, relative to its time. Even half a century later, Concorde looks futuristic, belong to an era yet to dawn.

[@corcovado71]

A small detail: Concorde was developed with technology from the 60s and there were no major investments in technical updates, due to its commercial failure.

[@spacedriver24]

Overture is merely a series of computer generated images. Concorde is a real aircraft......no comparison.

[@Homoprimatesapiens]

Lets hope BOOM Overture boom is a lot softer than the Concords BOOM.

[@LordOfSweden]

Did they have to take the dumbest name possible? Boom? Wtf.. so dumb. It looks cool tho. We'll see when it exists I guess.

[@richardsabine5092]

The Concorde exist and is créated in the 60’s with major tecnical advencement and the Boom in 2020 2030 70 years of equart, and the Boom was very inspired to the Concorde tecnical advencement.

[@biplaneacro]

Boom is going to design and certify a new airframe, their own engine and a synthetic vision landing system in three years?

[@GrowingGreenGeography]

i beg you for making this the normal prices

[@elvis6244]

Get it done, no more computer graphics.

[@johnelishalee398]

concorde plus boeing 747;overture

[@JouhouchenHou]

Soviet first actually super flight not Concord plane

[@randomguyinanglider]

jes, by compromiseing pretty much everything, copying the concorde and rushing a not finished prototype to fly and into production they were a few weeks earlyer

[@PkMkPresto487]

It failed though!!!

[@darrenlucas2768]

It was a jet bomber......with seats

[@christasmith6004]

i wonder if this is successful will they in the future build another model which has higher capacity and which is faster.

[@scottdakadescot4127]

It's so nice to hear your beautiful voice, Kim. How's everything going?

[@miguelmouta5372]

Poor marine life.

[@yukiomarco5288]

fishy ears gonna go *BOOM*

[@PedroHenriquePS00000]

Does it not have a windshield? Its all camera feeds? Hopefully pilots can fly with VR HEADSETS TO SEE EVEN MORE They can do that by mapping the cockpit buttons layout and reproducing it in the headset, while also taking the camera 360 camera feed and make a "environment" sort of like apple vision pro has.

[@roberthindle5146]

Not permitted under most aviation safety administrations. In case of electrical system failure, the pilot must be able to control critical actuators (using ram air turbine power) and should be able to see where they are flying.

[@shenmisheshou7002]

This is really an academic question because it is unlikely that the Overture could be successful as a passenger airliner and the reason can be summed up in one word: Slots. To take off from a busy airport, you need a departure slot. To land at a destination, you need an arrival slot. A single modern airliner can seat 350 people while the Overture can only set about 120. By the way, a Triple 7 can also carry 21 kg of cargo. Now when that 350 seat airplane lands, a large percentage of passengers will continue on to their final destination, helping fill seats in their domestic market. If they were to only land 120 passengers, those seats in their domestic flights would be empty. Airports like JFK and Heathrow don't have any slots left at the times that wealthy people would find desirable to travel, and they are not going to give up a slot and a gate for 120 passengers when they can bring in 350 passengers (and freight) in the same slot and gate. Now it is possible that some airline would start service to these cities using less busy airports, but it is unlikely that they would find enough passengers that were willing to pay the premium necessary to make the venture profitable. It was not with Concorde, and the situation with slots at major airports is far worse than it was when Concorde🎉 was flying. The plane is too big for a business jet. The average international capable business jet carries less than 10 passengers. Now maybe Elon Musk would buy one, but it is unlikely that Boom could sell enough of these to make money at it.

[@roberthindle5146]

A 777 can carry 21 kg of cargo? Doesn't seem very much.