Hacker News Reader

> supersonic passenger aircraft would use 7-9 times more fuel per passenger, per kilometre, than subsonic jets burning fossil fuel

Ick.

View on HN

Yeah, that does seem like a massive drawback. Even hypothetically with SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuel) from carbon capture that they’re spruiking, that’s still a huge amount of energy that could be used far more efficiently by not flying supersonic…

If it was more like 3x, that might make it work on a cost benefit in certain cases, but physics makes fools of us all it seems…

The part of Boom's argument that makes absolutely no sense to me -- their argument about how they will be "sustainable" because they will burn SAF -- is that the same argument could be applied to traditional commercial subsonic jet aircraft.

I really hope this fails.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com