You must log in or register to comment.

BeholdMyResponse t1_itin1xj wrote

Quesst has sounded interesting for a long time, I'm just curious to hear firsthand if its "sonic thump" is really that much better than a sonic boom. They'll be flying over major cities in 2024 and then asking residents what they think of the sound, that should be interesting. It could revolutionize air travel in the 2030s if it works.


experiential t1_itjqamt wrote

I’m sure that the good people of Oklahoma will be more than willing test participants again!


absentmindedjwc t1_itk2px9 wrote

IIRC, it'll sound like a basketball bouncing instead of an explosion.


PasswordisP4ssword t1_itkgklf wrote

Now I'm imagining the sound of a kickball to the head


tickettoride98 t1_itkad8l wrote

I find it very short-sighted that stuff like this is only concerned with human's perception and not the rest of the biosphere. How would the noise of regular flights affect animals and insects? Some animals have far more sensitive hearing than we do, and sound is energy, so a sonic shockwave is transferring energy to all those tiny bugs in a way that nature has ever had (on a regular basis) which cannot be good for their delicate structure.

Yet all we ever check is how humans feel about it. Meanwhile wildlife populations are down 69% since 1970 and insect populations are down 75% in 25 years. But hey, faster air travel!


londons_explorer t1_itkmja3 wrote

It's fairly clear that humans and nature can never life in perfect harmony. The only way is to separate the humans and the nature - for example we could all move to Mars and leave earth for the nature.


PlanetLandon t1_itm07si wrote

I started working on a novella years ago (but abandoned it) that had something similar. It was the distant future and humanity had colonized a dozen other worlds, so Earth was essentially turned into a giant nature preserve to allow the planet to heal. It was illegal for any human to land on the surface.


Sunion t1_itmk6mz wrote

I actually fucking love this idea. Too bad that by the time it becomes viable there will be no nature left.


EKmars t1_itn7im7 wrote

Only by moving the population to space can Mother Earth truly recover. Join the AEUG today!


thefriendlycouple t1_itm8r2n wrote

Humanity can do more than one thing at a time. There are also people working on those issues as well.


tickettoride98 t1_itmnrls wrote

My point was we're horrible at predicting the consequences of our own actions yet we're prepared to introduce constant low-grade sonic thumps as long as humans consider them tolerable. Seems like another great recipe for finding out in 20 years that constant low-grade sonic thumps really screw with other animals. See sonar and whales.


strcrssd t1_ito23re wrote

Right, but there are consequences for not taking risks and advancing the state of the art as well. There are consequences for every action and inaction. If you want to be upset about the environment, take a look at that we're still using and aerosolizing lead in aviation engines. Look at the impacts associated with burning, rapidly, every fossil fuel we can find and allowing corporations to capture the government to continue, today, to subsidize fossil fuel resource extraction. After we know what fossil fuels are actually doing.


Imaginary-Location-8 t1_itl9euy wrote

Bugs don’t ‘hear’


tickettoride98 t1_itmoib7 wrote

The Atlantic - Is Noise Pollution Making Desert Bugs Disappear?

> Some bug groups did not show much difference in abundance regardless of the overall noise level or the presence of a compressor. But others had dramatic changes. There were 24-percent fewer grasshoppers in compressor plots, 52-percent fewer froghoppers, and a whopping 95-percent fewer cave, camel, and spider crickets. The louder the plot was, regardless of the presence or absence of a compressor, the fewer velvet ants and wolf spiders there were.


nucflashevent t1_itj76mj wrote

If they can reduce the amount of disturbance reaching the ground to a level that doesn't cause irritation, then supersonic aircraft become a means of pure economics.

In a way, they always were, but the economics were a lot harder when the only flight paths could be other water. Aside from New York-London/New York-Paris, there really weren't any major flight paths where people would conceivably pay the higher required costs.

If suddenly every current airport were opened to supersonic flights, then the economics become quite a bit easier to manager since there are tons of places in general (not just limited to destinations near ocean-crossing flight paths I mean) where the traffic may well see folks willing to pay for supersonic flights if they could.


peter-doubt t1_itiu5ht wrote

Just a nit that needs picking:

>Seventy-five years ago, a sonic boom thundered for the first time over the high desert of California.

Over Peenemunde, Germany, it was broken in 1944. By the V2.

Agreed, not a plane.. but the article said first, and that's wrong


QWERTYroch t1_itiytvb wrote

To be really pedantic, that sentence isn't technically wrong. It was the first time it was broken "over the high desert of California", even if not the first time on Earth.

Obviously the context implies that it was the first ever, but in a vacuum each of their claims could be rationalized.


tom-8-to t1_itk16qs wrote

Actually the OG is the pistol shrimp he’s been exploiting supersonic weapons since forever


happyscrappy t1_itj15b8 wrote

Meteors did it before 1944 and in many places other than Germany.


PorkyMcRib t1_itj51ru wrote

And rifle bullets. The Bell X1 was shaped somewhat like the .50BMG bullet, a shape known to be stable at supersonic speeds.


Ok-Welder-4816 t1_itj60u3 wrote

And every time you crack a whip, or a towel.


happyscrappy t1_itj64zc wrote

And whip tails.

I wonder, is there a complete list of everything that went supersonic within the Earth's atmosphere before the X-1 did?


alucarddrol t1_itjk9lj wrote

some insect have different appendages that strike at supersonic speeds


RoninRobot t1_itjblk1 wrote

It’s been hypothesized that dive bombers surpassed the barrier before 1944 in vertical flight. Not that many or any survived the accomplishment. If we’re picking nits.


peter-doubt t1_itjpz4d wrote

Were they designed for that flight?


RoninRobot t1_itjqmzf wrote

Vertical dive? Yes. Supersonic? No.


Oh_its_that_asshole t1_itkzuzk wrote

super zoomy, but also super "why aren't my control surfaces working much anymore? Oh god that ground is coming up fas..."


[deleted] t1_itiy9on wrote



MpVpRb t1_itlse19 wrote

Fluff piece containing little actual information


[deleted] t1_itkaupz wrote

Guile is having an existential crisis.


MyNameIsDaveToo t1_itl3gr4 wrote

I'm guessing this results in even higher CO2 emissions per passenger...


strcrssd t1_ito3t70 wrote

Yes, though jet fuel has a sustainable, carbon neutral alternative. If/when they can get the cost down, air travel is one of the few places that burning fossil fuels makes sense. The energy density of jet fuel is just too good. Batteries are too heavy, hydrogen is basically impossible to store.

Carbon capture can handle some CO2, but the wanton waste that characterized the 20th century is unsustainable.


alehel t1_itmp8oo wrote

I didn't even know it was physically possible.


nmesunimportnt t1_itk9jrd wrote

Despite the glowing optimism of this story, I’ve been hearing this promise for nearly as long as I’ve been hearing about fully self-driving cars. Not sure which one will arrive first, but “soon” sounds like Elon Musk runs this project…


Oh_its_that_asshole t1_itl00i0 wrote

Nah if it was a Musk project he would be proposing flying rockets down vacuum tunnels underground.


jrhoffa t1_itkhr30 wrote

Elon Musk has just about nothing to do with autonomous vehicles.

Edit: downvotes from fanboys and marketing victims


cadillacbee t1_itjvmb0 wrote

Well that's no fun...unless they apply it to my farts...