Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation United States

Exclusive Look Inside the US Supersonic Presidential Jet (cnn.com) 70

Posted by BeauHD from the first-look dept.
CNN has an exclusive look at the supersonic presidential jet currently being developed by a California startup and U.S Air Force. From the report: It's a 31-passenger derivative of Exosonic's 70-passenger commercial airliner concept and is the ultimate in business jets -- luxury leather, oak and quartz fittings, private suites for work and rest, and all at cruise times twice that of existing aircraft. The functions of presidential craft varies according to need, but this plane might primarily be used as Air Force Two, which is the call sign for jets carrying the US vice president.

The first of two private suites is the three-passenger meeting room, with secure video teleconferencing so distinguished visitors can work, go online, or address the press. The rotatable seats are leather with wooden shells and the video monitor is capable of being stored in a rolled position so there is space on the credenza sideboard for food platters or presentation equipment. The second eight-passenger suite has lie-flat seats and adjustable table heights and it's where senior staffers can work collaboratively and rest. Then there's the main cabin with 20 business-class seats, plus two galleys, two lavatories and plenty of stowage space. Following the trend in modern aircraft design, the seatbacks have spaces for holding personal electronic devices rather than traditional seat-back monitors.

Exosonic's plane boasts a 5,000-nautical-mile range and, thanks to boom-softening techniques, it should be able to fly overland at almost twice the speed of sound without upsetting residents down below. Tie tells CNN that the company expects its supersonic plane to be flying by the mid-2030s.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Exclusive Look Inside the US Supersonic Presidential Jet More

Exclusive Look Inside the US Supersonic Presidential Jet

Comments Filter:

  • Definitely doesn't qualify as an "airliner" (Score:3)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday April 03, 2021 @02:53AM (#61231586)

    How can the President or Vice President get the Full Flying Experience without having seats rows close enough to each other that their knees are pushing into the back of the seat in front of them?

  • all at cruise times twice that of existing aircraft

    I should hope not.

  • You simply can't stand up for the environment and the critically important reduction in our carbon footprint and then get on a supersonic aircraft. This is just spectacularly tone deaf and hypocritical. I suspect that the justification offered will be the President's security... but you don't need to go supersonic for that.

    We need to be transitioning away from such heavy reliance on air travel and investing much more heavily in very high speed rail, or hyperloop, or something similar.

    • I agree. Far better would have been development of an electric Air Force Two -- set an example of how air travel is going to have to become.

      • An electric airplane cannot currently do any of the stuff we expect out of a [vice] presidential airliner.

        They are useful for short hops already, but they may never be useful for long ones without ground or sky support. You could theoretically beam power to an aircraft in flight, but requiring ground support of that type is not strategically acceptable for an aircraft with this mission.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by RevDisk ( 740008 )
        There are no electric commercial aircraft and won't be for an extremely long time. The only General Aviation electric aircraft I know of is the Alpha Electro, but I know there have been tons of prototypes or one-off experiments.

        Energy density isn't there yet. You'll get actual electric aircraft when lithium air batteries or ultracapacitors get worked out. Until then it's just PR exercises. Why? Li-Air has a theoretical energy density close to aviation gasoline, ~40.1 MJ/kg vs ~44.65 MJ/kg. Li-Ion runs ar

    • Coronavirus sorted that out - passenger arilines are on the brink of bankruptcy now, In the future air travel will once again be the reserve of the rich and famous. (and further into the future this will also appy to car ownership)

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cdrnet ( 1582149 )

      Some level of deafness might also explain their claim that it should be able to fly overland without upsetting residents down below...

      • Some level of deafness might also explain their claim that it should be able to fly overland without upsetting residents down below...

        FAA jurisdiction only extends to 60,000 feet. Above that, no limit. The Concorde could not fly that high, so was limited. The SR-71 could and did regularly fly over 60,000 feet. The acknowledged ceiling was 85,000 but there are claims it could reach 100,000

    • We need to be transitioning away from such heavy reliance on air travel and investing much more heavily in very high speed rail, or hyperloop, or something similar.

      Rail, hyperloop and similar are great for land based travel, but I don't think (SF writer) Harry Harrison's "Trans Atlantic Tunnel" is practical.

      (Even at hyperloop speeds, NY to Paris will be a very long ride without an airliner.)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ytene ( 4376651 )
        That's fair.

        On the other hand, if you look here [flightradar24.com] at the number of aircraft flying over the US (or zoom out for global data) you can see in an instant that there are more (commercial) aircraft overflying the US than the whole of the rest of the world combined. This is what we've got to stop.

        So if you're not willing to invest in the expense of a hyperloop-and-tunnel system that runs up the East Coast to Newfoundland before cutting under the Labrador Sea to Greenland, then Iceland, Scotland and the rest o

  • are being to good use. I guess the subsonic flying palace-cum-office that is Air Force One wasn't enough: the prez had to have the same thing going over Mach 1. I can totally see how this will benefit the greater good of the country in the long run.

    But hey, at least it's a perfect projection of the US' image: obsene privileges for the obsenely privileged few at the expense of everyone else.

    • This is kind of fake news anyways:

      Last month, the service's Presidential and Executive Airlift Directorate awarded a $1 million small business innovation research (SBIR) phase II contract to Exosonic, a start-up aerospace company, to begin the design and development of a low-boom executive airlift concept.

      So, they did get a $1M SBIR for this, which is why I say "kind of" fake news. But that is really small potatoes, such that it cannot be anywhere near the main source of funding for an actual aircraft,

    • Well Grandpa Biden has to get there before he forgets why he is going there.

      Honestly, No this is just a waste of tax payers money. With today's technology there is no reason the president of any country needs to be any where at twice the speed of sound. Maybe 30 years ago.

  • Looks more like an Ikea / playmobil plane. The only exclusivity about it, is its ugliness.

  • simply because they can't 'fly with the President' and will have to pay for their own air-fares and have to fly to their destination before the CinC.
    That and the simple fact is that they will lose access to the Commander in Chief while they are flying. They will say that the Pres obviously has something to hide from their ever-present and active cameras and microphones.

    • ...they will lose access to the Commander in Chief while they are flying. They will say that the Pres obviously has something to hide from their ever-present and active cameras and microphones.

      Do they say this same stupid shit about Marine 1? Or The Beast? Not exactly conference rooms full of seats on those vehicles moving the Commander in Chief around.

      There's an entire fucking army of media leeches. And it's probably been over 100 years since the government cared that much about their travel accommodations.

      And the media, isn't going to say anything bad about their beloved puppet. He would have never gotten the job if they actually chose to.

  • Naturally the only reason the USAF would have for funding the development of larger super and hyper-sonic jets is for executive toys. Certainly for such folks time is money and getting important folks to important meetings with less travel time is, well, important. But I can't help thinking that once you've funded the development and production of much larger aircraft with such speed capability that you can use the same tech to make well, faster bombers, faster fighters, faster versions of a C-130 equivalen

    • While you have a point, and military aircraft have been developed from civilian aircraft in the past, it's going to be mostly drones in the future and self-delivering munitions, not bombers. Bombers concentrate too much value in one aircraft, and the future belongs to swarms.

  • A decade from now, when it flies, every bit of electronics that's in the design now will be obsolete.
  • Look what I can do, I'm sure you will not regret! we will fun together. My contacts ==>> https://v.ht/x0gW [v.ht]

  • Air Force 1 is a customised Boeing 747-200B. 747s are very safe. They have had decades to iron out the flaws. Their pilot are extremely experienced. Are they really going to swap the safety record of the 747 for the speed and convenience of a supersonic jet using new technology?

    I wouldn't expect this to be rushed into service.

  • In the permanent presidential pissing contest, the US having something like this will force Putin to have one that's bigger / faster / quieter.

  • This thing will never be a presidential plane. But they couldn't afford to develop it from scratch on their own so they suckered the American taxpayer into doing it for them.

  • Anyone here know how defense industry works? (Score:3)

    by AlanObject ( 3603453 ) on Saturday April 03, 2021 @10:37AM (#61232598)

    All these posts whining about a waste of tax dollars and impracticality and how Harris is so corrupt and undeserving.

    1. This project got started long before Biden/Harris was a thing. Probably before Trump.

    2. Congress does the appropriations. Yes the executive signs off on it and negotiates but this project was clearly set up to make some group of powerful defense interests, both inside and private, happy.

    3. The justification is that the defense contractor needed it, it would maybe advance aerospace tech, and improve our tech base overall.

    4. I doubt Harris will be VP 15 years from now. She will be either at the end of her 2nd term or out of government altogether.

  • Tech info? (Score:3)

    by Nkwe ( 604125 ) on Saturday April 03, 2021 @11:19AM (#61232800)
    This is supposed to be slashdot. Why so much in the summary about "spaces in the credenza for food platters" and "luxury leather, oak and quartz fittings". How about something interesting such as fuel efficiency, cost of operation, how this compares to the concorde, what engineering challenges / compromises were made to allow for supersonic and still allow for the president to be a passenger, etc.

  • Biden wants us to ride more on trains and buses, and less in cars. I say if trains were good enough for Abe Lincoln, and good enough for the American people, they are good enough for Biden.

  • So... a startup is going to develop a supersonic passenger jet. The 777-X, a substantial update to the 777 is estimated as a $5B development project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] the 787, a new subsonic design development is estaimed at $32B https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] So, a brand new design, supersonic, aircraft??? Exosonic did get a grant from the govt to explore a low boom design. The grant was.... wait for it.... 1 MILLION DOLLARS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] Yes, about 1/50,

    • It is difficult to imagine the next air force 1 being anything other than a US manufacturer airliner, probably a 777-X.

      Exosonic is a US company. Though likely to be acquired by either Boeing or Lockheed if they get close to making something like they are planning.

    • but in no way suggests a company is anywhere near close to a practical product.

      But they have pretty graphics!

Slashdot Top Deals

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Close