BOOM!

Boom Supersonic unveils new Symphony engine for faster-than-sound Overture airliner

This potent new turbo-fan engine is designed for net zero carbon efficiency and quiet operation.


FTT is well equipped to confidently head up this new supersonic engine design. Many of its veteran engineers were instrumental in creating the powerful F-119 and F-135 supersonic engines that are installed on the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Panther.

"The team at FTT has a decades-long history of developing innovative, high-performance propulsion solutions," said Stacey Rock, President of Florida Turbine Technologies, in the same announcement. "We are proud to team with Boom and its Symphony partners and look forward to developing the first bespoke engine for sustainable, economical supersonic flight."

...

 

Boom Supersonic Timeline: .... 1) Pigs Fly .... 2) Hell freezes over .... 3) Overture supersonic airliner flies

>>> Couple of good articles that discuss the many challenges that they face. Not just the engine, but the viability of the concept itself.

Boom Supersonic's engine reveal not enough to get skeptics all on board
https://journalnow.com/business/technology/boom-supersonics-engine-reveal-not-enough-to-get-skeptics-all-on-board/article_9713a330-7b17-11ed-b21b-8fecad93d5a7.html

Boom still has an uphill battle
https://onemileatatime.com/news/boom-supersonic-engine/

.

 

Newest teaser:

 

Call me when they are flying. I'll wait right here next to the phone.

 

.
2 years old? ....c'mon man
.

 

Well, he did say "teaser".......

 

Looks too small to actually make any money, just like Concorde. Also cruising in an inefficient mach regime.

 

Sorry I missed this thread, I've been following Boom Supersonic since the early days, even tried to get in as a designer as I live around 45 minutes from the HQ in Centennial, CO.

Early on I was hopeful that this would work because of advancements in aircraft design, development, and manufacturing. Blake Schull, Boom's founder, had put together a compelling argument that an efficient supersonic aircraft could operate financially, offering tickets around the price of Business class. The original design seem to pencil out, using three engines with an approx. 50 seat capacity.

To test their design they built a full scale, single seater, three engine jet that incorporated several of the aerodynamic feature designed in the Overture airliner proposal. Boom was able to assemble a highly technical jet, presumably capable of speeds over Mach 1. Yet, years after its assembly it has never flown and possibly never will.

Weight has been a problem, in both the built scale jet and in the design of Overture and achieving the desired speed of well above Mach 1 became questionable. The designs were just too heavy. The solution for Overture was to add an engine, going from three to four, along with some aerodynamic changes. This was a logical evolution of design. But these changes made the three engine scale model obsolete, with all the time, effort, and money required to design and build it, sunk into a hole from which it will likely never crawl out of.

Concurrently during this time Boom's engine partner RR said no mas, the juice isn't worth the squeeze. And since no one else stepped up to fill the void, Boom is left with their only option, try to design and build one themselves. Given the type of talent at Boom (aircraft engineers not engine engineers) and given the limited resources (Boom is funded by a few well healed individuals who have already sunk a lot of cash), the task of designing a new, supersonic engine that doesn't require afterburners, may be too high a mountain to climb.

And yet, Boom continues to plow forward, building a manufacturing facility in NC, talking about sustainable fuels, releasing renderings of their engine. But the work of engineering, prototyping, testing, re-engineering, prototyping, testing and so on, will take several years. And on top of that the flight testing and certification required for this new engine will extend out to several more years. It took Boom several years to design and build their scale jet and it still hasn't flown. I could take a decade before their proposed supersonic engine will see flight. Can Boom survive a decade of design and engineering until first flight? Doubtful.

 

I don't see how anyone funding this sees a light (ROI) at the end of the looong tunnel.
Designing their own/partner engine, with a very limited market, is a road straight to bankruptcy.

How about starting with a 'detuned' military engine?

 

Sounds to me more like a really good salesman has found selling an idea to wealthy investors is a better life than getting a real job.
Ever hear of the Vector Automobile? I was offered a job by them at one time and got a good long look behind the curtain.

 

What was the vlj they were going to make thousands of for point to point airlines, the eclipse and it was afar less ambitious project which went boom.
Designing a new airframe and engine, and supersonic flight, thats 100 billion or more even if the concept is sound.

 

The XB-1 three jet prototype uses GE J85, "detuned", aka no afterburners. However this aircraft has yet to fly. But hey, the latest update it's in Mohave, so there's that.

I think the problem is this application needs engines that can achieve supersonic flight without afterburners and those don't really exist.

 

Supercruise >>> F-22 with 2 Pratt & Whitney F119's
.

 

Not sure why Boom hasn't gone down that road. Perhaps those engines are not available outside of military use. I'm pretty sure Boom has looked around. They're only going down the DIY path because no one else will partner with them.

 

I suspect they want to be paid. Even

I suspect they want to be paid. Even unicorn herders have bills to pay. Its not like RR,PW, et al have any need to do it for the glory.

 

Any of the F-15/F-16 engines (P&W F100, GE F110) would work fine. Supercruise easily possible.

 

Negatives: fuel consumption and noise?
.

 

Those are afterburning turbofans and much more fuel efficient than anything a bunch of engine amateurs will be able to produce. Both are available in non-afterburning versions, too.

 

I believe there’s a legit reason why Boom hasn’t selected an existing jet engine. Noise, fuel consumption, performance characteristics, something. Selecting an existing engine would save them time, money, and heartbreak. But they haven’t done that and I believe there’s a reason why.

 

Because it sounds like he needs motors that don't exist. Designing an engine that will haul that thing supersonic with 45 dB and do it on 2 Lbs of fairy dust per hour is not an easy task. Gerald Wiegert at Vector had similar troubles.

 

Yeah Brian, you're basically correct.

I reached out to a former engineer at Boom. I asked him if there is a reason why they didn't choose an existing military jet engine. His response:

Yes, there are a couple reasons: 1) the existing military engines do not have large enough cores (high pressure spool) for Overture and 2) military engines for supersonic aircraft tend to be either pure turbojets or low bypass ratio turbofans, neither of which will allow Overture to meet current community (takeoff and landing) noise requirements. Aerion’s AS2 supersonic business jet was using an existing core (from the CFM56-7 at one point) until they found it did not have enough thrust for the tri-jet. Boom needs (according to them) a 35k lbf engine at takeoff. But that is without afterburners! The core of the engine is typically sized by transonic thrust margin at Mach 1.1 or top of climb rate of climb at cruise Mach.

 

British Electric Lightning could supercruise just over Mach at mil power but only in the right temps in tropopause. 1960s

 

I know, I know. It was embedded in a blog and didn't have the date.

 

F-111F could also supercruise at the right altitude and fuel load. At least 70-2400 could. Lost a case of beer on that one. Settled down at Mach 1.08 at FL 260. Got some noise complaints.

 

YF-120, variable cycle