There has been a renewed interest worldwide focusing on identifying technological advances, which can allow production and operation of new commercial supersonic aircraft. There is a lot of advancement since the Concorde was developed however many challenges still exist. A supersonic business jet (SBJ) is seen as a technological stepping-stone in the overall challenge of advancing the speed of commercial aircraft. This paper outlines some of the key technological, economic, and environmental challenges facing such an aircraft. Quality of life and health impact environmental issues include sonic boom, aircraft community noise, and aircraft emissions. The authors maintain that a successful supersonic aircraft will depend on our ability to deal with these issues. We suggest that working within an international arena to address these issues is necessary to ensure that all stakeholders' concerns are considered. Ultimately, successfully addressing concerns regarding sonic boom is a necessary condition for regulatory authorities to reconsider the current ban on supersonic fight over land, the key constrain to the business case for future supersonic transports.
References
1.
RoundhillJ. and RadloffP., “The Future of Commercial Aviation – Building on Our Legacy,” AIAA 2003–2883, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
2.
ColpinJ. and AltmanR., “Dependable Power Reinvented,” AIAA 2003–2882, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
3.
DrewP., Technology Drivers for 21st Century Transportation Systems, “AIAA 2003–2909, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
4.
“Northrop Grumman/Government Team Shapes Aviation History with Sonic Boom Tests – Aircraft-Shaping Theory Proven Sound in First Flight Demonstration”, Northrop Grumman Press Release, August 28, 2003.
5.
HenneP., “The Case for Small Supersonic Civil Aircraft,” AIAA 2003–2907, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
PedersonD., “Lockheed Martin Palmdale Sonic Boom Technologies and Challenges,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Airframe Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
PedersonD., “Lockheed Martin Palmdale Sonic Boom Technologies and Challenges,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Airframe Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
16.
SmithR., “Net Jets International Inc.: Supersonic Aircraft Workshop,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Applications Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
17.
HennePres, “A Gulfstream Perspective on the DARPA QSP Program and Future Civil Supersonic Initiatives”, FAA Civil Supersonic Aircraft Workshop, Arlington, Virginia, 13 November 2003.
18.
GrahamD., “Northrop Grumman Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstrator (SSBD) Program,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Government Programs Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
19.
HennePres, “A Gulfstream Perspective on the DARPA QSP Program and Future Civil Supersonic Initiatives”, FAA Civil Supersonic Aircraft Workshop, Arlington, Virginia, 13 November 2003.
20.
BrinesJ., “Allison Advanced Development Company (AADC) UEET Integrated Inlet Propulsion System Study (IIPSS) Program,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Engine Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
HennePres, “A Gulfstream Perspective on the DARPA QSP Program and Future Civil Supersonic Initiatives”, FAA Civil Supersonic Aircraft Workshop, Arlington, Virginia, 13 November 2003.
23.
SmithR.SmithR., “Net Jets International Inc.: Supersonic Aircraft Workshop,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Applications Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
24.
HenneP., “The Case for Small Supersonic Civil Aircraft,” AIAA 2003–2907, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
25.
CarrerasCarmenDaoukMirnaDownenTroyJamonetLaurentLederleStephaneSharmanDavidWertenbergRuss, The Case for a Small Practical Supersonic Transport, International Council of Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS) Congress, 2002.
26.
HenneP., “The Case for Small Supersonic Civil Aircraft,” AIAA 2003–2907, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
27.
HorwitchM., “The American SST: A Cautionary Analysis,”Harvard University, Westview Press, Boulder Colorado, 1978, pages 158–159.
28.
ShurcliffW. A., “S/S/T and Sonic Boom Handbook,”Ballantine Books, Inc., New York, 1970, page 28.
29.
HorwitchM., “The American SST: A Cautionary Analysis,”Harvard University, Westview Press, Boulder Colorado, 1978, pages 158–159.
PedersonD., “Lockheed Martin Palmdale Sonic Boom Technologies and Challenges,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Airframe Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
33.
WolzR., “Recent Supersonic Vehicle Studies At Gulfstream Aerospace,”FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop (Airframe Panel), 13 November 2003, Arlington, VA.
World Health Organization, “Guidelines for Community Noise,”Geneva, 2000, page 48.
36.
Federal Register, “Civil Aircraft Sonic Boom – Part 91 – General Operating and Flight Rules,”Vol. 38, No. 59, March 28, 1973.
37.
NSTC, “Goals for a National Partnership in Aeronautics Research and Technology.”Washington, D.C., 1995. Whitehouse Office of Science and Technology Policy, http://www.ostp.gov/html/aero/cv-ind.html.
38.
Opportunities, “AIAA 2003–2554, AIAA-ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exhibit: The Next 100 Years,” 14–17 July 2003, Dayton, OH.
39.
“Northrop Grumman/Government Team Shapes Aviation History with Sonic Boom Tests – Aircraft-Shaping Theory Proven Sound in First Flight Demonstration”, Northrop Grumman Press Release, August 28, 2003.
40.
KryerK.D., “Review of Research and Methods for Measuring the Loudness and Noisiness of Complex Sounds,” NASA Contract Report CR-422, April 1966.
41.
JackLeatherwood D., “Summary of recent NASA studies of human response to sonic booms”, J. Acoust. Soc. Am.111(1), Pt.2, Jan 2002, pp 586–598.
42.
McCurdyD.A., “The effects of simulated sonic booms on people in their homes,” AIAA paper 95–0834, Jan 1995.
43.
BorskyPaul N., “Community reactions to sonic booms in the Oklahoma City area”, NORC Report no. 101. AMRL Report AMRL-TR 65–37, 1965. Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
44.
FieldsJ.M., “Reactions of residents to long-term sonic boom noise environments” NASA Contractor Report 201704, June 1997.
45.
ConnorThomasMauriceLourdes, and ClarkeJohn Paul, Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction, International Airport Review, December 2003.
46.
ShepherdK. P., and CoenP., NASA: Human Response to Sonic Booms, Public Perspective Panel Presentation at FAA's Supersonic Aircraft Workshop, Arlington, VA, November 13, 2003.
47.
National Research Council, “For Greener Skies – Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation,”National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 2002.
48.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report, “Aviation and the Global Atmosphere,”1999.
49.
Ibid
50.
/RCED-00-153, Survey of the nation's 50 busiest commercial service airports, August 2000.
51.
AkinGumpStraussHauer, and FeldLLP, “Airport Air Quality Guide – A Guide to Air Quality Issues Under the Clean Air Act,” March 2003.
