DOT Announces 'Return of Supersonic Flight' For Commercial Airlines (forbes.com)
(Wednesday July 01, 2026 @05:00AM (BeauHD)
from the technological-advances dept.)
- Reference: 0184237530
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/07/01/0554258/dot-announces-return-of-supersonic-flight-for-commercial-airlines
- Source link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2026/06/30/faa-supersonic-flight-no-boom/
The FAA plans to replace [1]its 1973 ban on civilian supersonic flight over U.S. land with a noise-based standard, [2]potentially allowing aircraft to exceed Mach 1 as long as they stay below certain sound limits. The agency aims to finalize the rules by mid-2027, opening the door for companies such as Boom Supersonic and Spike Aerospace to operate quieter next-generation passenger jets over land. Longtime Slashdot reader [3]schwit1 shared the [4]notice (PDF) published Tuesday by the FAA. Forbes reports:
> Technological advances "will eliminate the old sonic boom," FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said in a statement. "This means we can ultimately repeal the ban from the 1970s on supersonic flight over U.S. territory while minimizing noise impacts to residents in communities along the route and near airports." The primary reason was public opposition to loud sonic booms. In the 1960s, a plane flying faster than the speed of sound -- about 660 mph at high altitudes -- created shock waves that traveled to the ground and reached human ears as a loud gunshot-like crack or thunder-like boom. Tests during that decade, including the Oklahoma City sonic boom experiments, found repeated booms broke windows, damaged property and generated thousands of public complaints.
>
> In its 1973 ruling, the FAA stated that due to the limits of technology at that time, "a prohibition was needed to protect the public from sonic boom .... by preventing operations of a civil aircraft at a true flight Mach number greater than 1." Several years later, Air France and British Airways introduced Concorde, and were allowed to serve New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport as long as flights remained subsonic over U.S. land. Notably, "the prestigious London-New York service was the only truly profitable [Concorde] route, supported by high-powered business and celebrity travel," [5]wrote a former British Airways network planner for Forbes in 2021.
>
> Several U.S. companies are working on a new generation of luxurious supersonic passenger aircraft with much quieter sonic booms and improved fuel efficiency. In particular, Colorado-headquartered Boom Supersonic says it has pre-orders from United Airlines, American Airlines and Japan Airlines for its Overture jets, which will carry 60-80 passengers. Atlanta-based Spike Aerospace is developing smaller Diplomat jets for up to 18 passengers. Both companies' websites tout future transatlantic flights in under four hours.
[1] https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Transportation_Systems_Casebook/Supersonic_Flight_Integration
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2026/06/30/faa-supersonic-flight-no-boom/
[3] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[4] https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/ARM-260115-001_Supersonic_NPRM_06-10-26.pdf
[5] https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnstrickland/2021/06/27/united-and-boom-supersonic-a-new-supersonic-age-lessons-from-the-concorde-era/
> Technological advances "will eliminate the old sonic boom," FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said in a statement. "This means we can ultimately repeal the ban from the 1970s on supersonic flight over U.S. territory while minimizing noise impacts to residents in communities along the route and near airports." The primary reason was public opposition to loud sonic booms. In the 1960s, a plane flying faster than the speed of sound -- about 660 mph at high altitudes -- created shock waves that traveled to the ground and reached human ears as a loud gunshot-like crack or thunder-like boom. Tests during that decade, including the Oklahoma City sonic boom experiments, found repeated booms broke windows, damaged property and generated thousands of public complaints.
>
> In its 1973 ruling, the FAA stated that due to the limits of technology at that time, "a prohibition was needed to protect the public from sonic boom .... by preventing operations of a civil aircraft at a true flight Mach number greater than 1." Several years later, Air France and British Airways introduced Concorde, and were allowed to serve New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport as long as flights remained subsonic over U.S. land. Notably, "the prestigious London-New York service was the only truly profitable [Concorde] route, supported by high-powered business and celebrity travel," [5]wrote a former British Airways network planner for Forbes in 2021.
>
> Several U.S. companies are working on a new generation of luxurious supersonic passenger aircraft with much quieter sonic booms and improved fuel efficiency. In particular, Colorado-headquartered Boom Supersonic says it has pre-orders from United Airlines, American Airlines and Japan Airlines for its Overture jets, which will carry 60-80 passengers. Atlanta-based Spike Aerospace is developing smaller Diplomat jets for up to 18 passengers. Both companies' websites tout future transatlantic flights in under four hours.
[1] https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Transportation_Systems_Casebook/Supersonic_Flight_Integration
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2026/06/30/faa-supersonic-flight-no-boom/
[3] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[4] https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/ARM-260115-001_Supersonic_NPRM_06-10-26.pdf
[5] https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnstrickland/2021/06/27/united-and-boom-supersonic-a-new-supersonic-age-lessons-from-the-concorde-era/
More pandering to Epstein class billionaires (Score:2)
by cosmicl ( 1034776 )
who gotta have their faster louder planes to go with their faster louder AI data centers. More because we can, and screw you.
US senators ae shiteaters who swallow (Score:2)
The FAA didn't put regulations togethet in 1973 for noise. They put them in place to prevent Concorde from beating the pants of noncompetitive expensive under-providing US airlines.
For half a decade non-military flight over US land of supersonic aircraft has been banned due to protectionism.
If it was TRULY about the noise, military aircraft would have been included. They never were and 52 years later still are not.
It would be nice to be abused by TSA's "hands of blue" and "random rules" of the day in secu