This fall marks the 20th anniversary since the final flight of Concorde, the world’s first supersonic commercial airliner.
Traveling at twice the speed of sound — around 1,350 mph — Concorde could take passengers from New York to London in under three hours.
But the enormous costs of maintaining the plane — along with a high-profile crash in 2000 — eventually ended Concorde’s run.
Two decades on, ultrafast air travel looks set to enter an entirely new phase.
Smaller and slower than its illustrious predecessor, X-59 will still be capable of speeds of 925 mph, cutting the journey time from New York to London to roughly three and a half hours.
But that’s nothing compared to what some aviation experts are planning.
Recent research published by Britain’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) suggested that by the year 2033, a flight from London to Sydney — which currently takes 22 hours — could be reduced to just two hours.
What will get them there: Suborbital “Earth to Earth” flights.
Put simply, suborbital flights would use rockets, similar to those deployed by Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin and Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic jet programs, to propel passengers up to 125 miles into space at speeds of more than 3,500 mph.
The craft then makes a rapid descent toward its final destination back on Earth, thereby dramatically reducing the journey time.
How quick would it be? A conventional 15-hour flight from New York to Shanghai could take just 39 minutes, while a New York to London jaunt would also run under an hour.
Indeed, it’s estimated that suborbital flights can reach anywhere on earth within two hours.
That’s why entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and his SpaceX project are moving beyond mere space tourism and into the suborbital market.
In 2020, SpaceX revealed plans for its Starship rocket that would be able to transport 100 passengers from one continent to another in less than an hour.
More recently, Chinese company Space Transportation announced testing plans for its reusable “rocket with wings,” with a first flight penciled in for 2024 and a crewed flight in the following year.
Launched in 2018, they estimate that their Tianxing I suborbital spacecraft will be able to complete a 4,300-mile trip in about an hour.
Another company, Rocket Lab, in Long Beach, Calif., is also exploring the feasibility of suborbital point-to-point cargo journeys.
But as Jim Heidmann, acting director of NASA’s Advanced Air Vehicles Program, explains, suborbital flights still have a long way to go before they achieve liftoff.
“Hypersonic flights of this nature are really intriguing, but there remain many technical challenges to overcome to make such a mission truly feasible.”
He’s right, of course.
From contending with environmental issues to managing sonic booms to building entirely new liftoff and landing facilities, the path toward subsonic travel is still in its early stages.
But the fact that the likes of Musk are investing so heavily suggests one thing; There’s plenty of money to be made in ultra high-speed aviation.
According to UBS, there are more than 150 million passengers taking flights lasting 10 hours or more each year.
If just 5% of those trips were made via point-to-point suborbital space travel, the market could be worth in excess of $20 billion per year, UBS says.
The total value of the entire subsonic market, adds UBS, could reach $805 billion by 2030.
Dr. Scott Pace is director of the Space Policy Institute at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University.
He says that while point-to-point suborbital travel might be technically possible in the next 10 years, the deeper question is how to make it economically viable.
“I suspect we’ll see a mixed portfolio of revenues, from unmanned cargo delivery to human passengers, from government shipments for military and public safety reasons,” he tells The Post.
Safety, of course, will be key to taking subsonic travel mainstream, particularly as the fuels used —liquified natural gas for Blue Origin, liquid oxygen and liquid methane for the Starship — are more prone to exploding than typical aviation fuel. (The spacecraft also consumes far more of those fuels to become airborne, adding to the dangers).
In April, for instance, Elon Musk’s Starship exploded just 90 seconds after liftoff from a spaceport in Boca Chica, Texas, when its booster failed to separate from the main rocket.
As the craft tumbled back towards earth, SpaceX blew it up in the air, rather than risk it crash landing and the fuel igniting on the ground.
The record of the now abandoned Space Shuttle program is also worth examining.
Over the course of its 30-year service, the US space shuttles suffered two fatal accidents out of a total of 135 flights.
While that failure rate of just under 1.5% may appear small, it’s far greater than the 0.00041% enjoyed by commercial aviation, according to the UK’s Civil Aviation Safety Review.
Then there’s the environmental impact of using rocket-propelled craft, especially as there is little regulation governing their emissions.
Last year, the Georgetown Environmental Law Review examined the potential hazards associated with sub-orbital travel, suggesting that some of the rockets currently being used emit as much 10,000 times more black carbon particles into the atmosphere than typical airline engines.
But, says Scott Pace, the technology, as it develops, is likely to mitigate these emissions.
The New Shepard rocket on Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin space flights, for example, uses a combination of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen to generate thrust, meaning a significant amount of the emissions are water rather than CO2.
“Total carbon emissions may be less than for a longer jet flight,” Pace says.
As for sonic booms — which hobbled Concorde’s ability to soar over land — rockets, says NASA, only cause sonic booms during landing.
And those booms typically occur at far higher altitudes, lowering their impact.
NASA’s X-59, meanwhile, also features ‘Quiet Supersonic Technology’ which is intended to turn the sonic boom caused by breaking the sound barrier into more of a ‘sonic thump.
Just as worrisome as sonic boom are the effects of subsonic travel on the human body.
Dr Ryan Anderton is the medical lead of the CAA’s space team. He says that the principal concern of suborbital flights is G-forces, or the measure of acceleration we feel due to the force of gravity.
“The main challenge faced will be the exposure to G-forces on launch and reentry,” he tells The Post. “We know this can affect the flow of blood around the body and to the head and it can sometimes generate abnormal heart rhythms.”
For those with medical conditions affecting the heart or the lungs, there is also what’s known as “hypoxia,” or the impact of the spacecraft’s reduced oxygen levels.
When combined with G-forces, the results could include breathing problems and even temporary loss of vision. “But for the majority of passengers,” says Anderton, “these temporary physiological changes are likely to be benign.”
As any subsonic journey will be short, passengers will not need to undergo astronaut-like training.
They can expect, however, a ‘centrifuge familiarization’ briefing making them aware of the effects of sub-orbital travel, such as changes in heart rate and blood pressure and momentary weightlessness.
And if you think superfast suborbital travel will render jet lag a thing of the past, then think again.
As jet-lag occurs because of the mismatch between your body’s natural circadian rhythms and the time at your new destination, it doesn’t matter how quickly you get there — the time difference between the two places remains the same.
Despite the size of the market — and the might of the players at stake — suborbital operators could soon have competition.
Right now, a new generation of supersonic aircraft is currently in development which could soon serve as modern-day Concordes.
American company Boom Supersonic, for example, is already taking orders for its Overture jets from American and United Airlines.
The plane, which could travel between New York and London in three and a half hours, will undergo test flights in 2026 with services looking set to start in 2029 or 2030.
Lockheed Martin and Exosonic, which have already developed supersonic drones — are also eyeing the supersonic aircraft arena.
With supersonic craft mere years from arrival, will suborbital travel actually arrive any time soon?
Most likely not before its supersonic competitors, especially with the heavy costs of going into space. “While Concorde ultimately proved to be unviable there is clearly a market for premium, high-speed passenger travel — especially over long routes,” adds Scott Pace.
For now, then, it’s best to keep your eyes on the skies rather than the stars.
UP, UP & AWAY
Take flight with your own personal flying machine . . .
Flying Cars
If you have $789,000 to spare you can put your order in for an Aska A5 flying car.
At the recent CES tech convention in Las Vegas, Aska co-founder Guy Kaplinsky explained that approval from the Federal Aviation Administration could happen soon and, if approved, an A5 ride-sharing service could launch in 2026.
Jet Packs
Older readers may remember the opening ceremony of the 1984 Olympics Games in Los Angeles when Bill Suitor flew across the Coliseum using only a jet pack for propulsion.
Now, though, you have your own.
There are several companies in the jet pack market, but the Martin Jetpack, made by New Zealand’s Martin Aircraft Company, can reach speeds of nearly 50 mph and heights of around 3,000 feet.
The price? Just $250,000.
Passenger Drones
While Volkswagen is developing a fully autonomous electric drone capable of carrying four people and their luggage, the single-person Jetson One, from Italy, is already available.
Featuring a range of around 20 miles and speeds of 60 mph, it can be yours for $92,000, although you’ll have to weigh under 185 pounds for it to get off the ground.
