Back to Squawk list
  • 28

Concorde Mark 2: Airbus files plans for new supersonic jet

Supersonic passenger planes could once again be racing through the skies with Airbus having filed a patent for what could become the 'son of Concorde'. The new jet could fly from London to New York in an hour - opening up the possibility of a transatlantic return journey in a day. Concorde 2 would be capable of flying more than four times the speed of sound – or more than 2,500mph, according to documents lodged with the US Patent Office by the aerospace and defence group. ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Mark Thomas 8
Never going to happen! Patents are filed all the time and 90% of them never come to fruition. Engines that retract into the fuselage??? How would that work? Its bad enough when hot brakes go into a wheel well, can you imagine stowing an ENGINE? Bring back the Concorde, they should have let Branson buy them!
preacher1 5
It would be a heck of a note to fly across the pond and have to patter/hold longer than it took to fly it.
Torsten Hoff 3
>> The new jet could fly from London to New York in an hour
>> Concorde 2 would be capable of flying more than four times the speed of sound – or more than 2,500mph

Someone's math isn't adding up. The great circle distance is just under 3500 miles, and the plane wouldn't adhere to that route completely or always fly at its maximum speed. The flight time between those two cities would certainly be over two hours.

The SR-71 holds the record for that trip, having flown from New York to London in 1 hour, 54 minutes 56.4 seconds.
30west 1
I don't foresee this record being in jeopardy.
Chris B 2
They've been drinking the Virgin koolaid. But just 20 people? No economic case for it.
WtfWtf 1
You are massively underestimating the salaries we pay to golfing CEOs and 19 year olds who throw a ball around a field. They will pay if they want to travel fast.
Jim Nasby 2
I have to wonder if it would be cheaper to forgo all the extra complexity and just go straight sub-orbital...
Jim Nasby 2
I have to wonder if it would be cheaper to forgo all the extra complexity and just go straight sub-orbital...
Tim Marks 2
Let's see, the SR-71 'official' speed record is about 2200mph, carrying less than 2 hours fuel and 2 'passengers'. Airbus believes they can build an aircraft capable of carrying 100 or more passengers at world record flight speeds? Kelly Johnson does not work for Airbus (God rest his soul) and without someone like him designing this aircraft and the having the advances in technology to back it up, this is only heated rhetoric coming from someone's imagination. It will not happen, even if Sir Branson throws his money at it.
Read the article it says TWENTY people !
Then comment on a hundred
Jim Nasby 1
This is a duplicate of
Torsten Hoff 1
A passenger capacity of 20?!?
BOAC747 1
Bring it om please. Would it be for BAW?
Davon Grant 1
The way how i see it... it is smart to only have capacity of 20 people. Firstly if you can pickup drop off and return in at least two hours you can have alot more sales than just carrying 120 people one time. Also suppose if it had capacity of 200 people... what will happen when those 200 people get dropped off and it returns to london? Guess what... it has to loose money sitting on ground waiting for other people. I say go for it airbus cuz in us all, a little hope wants sonic commercial jets to return ;)
oowmmr 1
Sounds far fetched but they helped get the Concorde flying and must have a lot of data they can update and use. The Concorde was so far ahead of its time, with a new panel, it would still be ahead of its time.
Jakob Xanther 1
This useless article is not about an airplane, it is about a passenger spacecraft. The idea is at least 50 years old. Very old stuff about plans which were discarded multiple times.
David Loh 1
You mean they have not learned their lesson yet with the first SST? that there are not enough multi millionaire passengers to make SST operation viable? And how about the sonic boom?
Ed Mentz 1
UK/FRANCE could not make it pay using a free aircraft, why is this better?
Jakob Xanther 1
... and this concept would be a hundert times more expensive to operate than the Concord was.
s2v8377 0
A dumb design!!! To much to break and go wrong!!! Plus big $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!! to fly and maintain.

Keep it simple always works better!!!

They'd be better off building aircraft with the original Concorde design with updated engines and avionics!!!
MH370 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

London to New York in 1 hour? Airbus might be working on a plane faster than the Concorde

Travelers who regularly fly from the U.S. to Europe and back should be thrilled to hear that Airbus might be developing a brand new superfast jet that would make the journey from London to New York in just one hour.

That’s much faster than the Concorde jet that needed three and a half hours to travel the same distance. Meanwhile, regular commercial flights need seven to eight hours for the trip.
Here we go again. Pride overrules loss of money. Still waiting for the A380 to break even "white elephant"


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.