The Boeing 2707 stemmed from President Kennedy's June 1963 call for a
supersonic transport (SST) to compete with the Anglo-French
Concorde. Unlike Concorde and the Soviet Tu-144, the US SST was to be
made largely of titanium, making it capable of Mach 3. In 1966 Boeing's
variable-geometry (swing-wing) Model 2707 was chosen over proposals from
Lockheed and North American. Boeing built an impressive full-scale mockup
and estimated future sales of 700 - 1000 SSTs. The technical challenges of
a Mach 3 SST were greater than faced by its slower, smaller rivals.
The variable-geometry idea was abandoned in 1968 and a smaller fixed-wing version was
planned, with test flights planned for 1970 and commercial service in 1974.
Two prototypes were begun, but in 1971 the SST programme was cancelled.
Increasing oil prices and environmental concerns were the excuses.
It was Democratic Senator William Proxmire of Wisconsin who was key in killing the SST. I remember him saying the sonic boom would have an adverse effect on this cow's milk production.
HHHmmmmmm(?) kinda like the CF100? All about the upper crust wanting the best and "keeping up with the Jones's". But it's really funny, all it takes is some politicians on the other side of the fence to "ney" technology that we as humans drive to succeed. Funny that! Politicians are only good for thier term (pending on what country you live in) but engineers /developers /physisists and yes.... even dreamers work all there life for something to (pardon the expression)...fly.Maybe we should have told Albert Einstien to get lost? Wonder how much longer the war in the pacific would have lasted? Anyway..... Back your soldiers... or get in front of them!!!!!!!!! PEACE JLS
Your take on the SST is correct, but why the need to throw angry Limbaugh-esque insults around? Name calling is very immature for a man of your age. Be sure to rip up your monthly Social Security & Medicare checks (both fully socialized programs). You wouldn't want to be a dreaded socialist after all. ;-)
BTW, I still remember the SST logo with Snoopy riding atop it on the side of the Boeing plant.
I was employed as Technical Service Engineer at Titanium Metals Corp. of America (Timet) the Largest Titanium producer. They supplied all the Ti in heavy CIA secrecy for the Blackbird starting in 1960. The British and French knew nothing of it. Nor did anyone else.
Whenever I was around a British ehgineer /metallugist at a Major Air or Metals Show, I would always be kidded in a friendly yet serious way because America "Thought" we could build a titanium SST. Little did they know the Blackbird was flying. The Timet and AF money spent on the Ti metallurgy, especially, alloy developmet and how to roll high strength Ti was incredibly exhausting in time, money and new equipment. All in secret. I will never forget that Satrday in 1964 when Johnson, for political reasons announced the A-11, the Mach 3 interceptor. Goldwater was criticising Johnson because no new manned aircraft was in development. What a joke., can you immagin a mach 3 intercepter /fighter. It takes 50 miles to turn around. Two weeks later he announced a new Mach 3 bomber called the YF-12A, essentially the same aircraft, then two weeks later, he announced a new mach 3 reconisence aircraft, the SR-71. He screwed up the name..RS-71 was correct) We were instantly told to pass all media question to Timet's PR person. "We knew nothing" was the reply. Johnson did not authorize declassification because he did not want anyone to know that all were essentially the same aircraft.(Goldwater and I talked about this in his home three years before his death.) I can't repeat what he said (#@&*#). Remember he was a General in the AF Reserve. Point being however, my metallurgy counterparts in the UK and France avoided me forever after because they were stunned and embarassed. The governments and Concord builders were in SHOCK. We joked about their mach 2 "kiddy cart but could say no more because the Blackbird was still classified. Boy, did we want to.... I was soon hired by GE to be responsible for all the materials and processes for the massive compressor and frame of the GE -4 SST, 60,000 pound thrust engine. Ninty percent was titanium. The Seantor ? from Wisconsin led the huge very devisive battle to kill the SST program after millions upon millions had been spent and America had a titanium mach 3 qircraft flying. I stopped buying Wi cheese. That is when they "turned the lights out" in Seattle. I don't recall any discussion about environmental reasons for the death. Johnson and congress soon would need money for welfare and Vietnam. In my opinion, even though distasteful It was correct to cancel the program. The economics to fly and maintain a titanium fleet of SST's would not have been justifible. The estimated passenger numbers were in the thousands but I did not believe it. BUT, one or two should have been built for a flying scientific test bed and to keep from laying off hundreds of talented engineers. The large tough question , "could an untried material like titanium sheet withstand 600F temperatures at stress and long term stability" had been answered. Also Timet, a relative small company had commited millions for the design, development and actual construction of a first ever ten story continuously 36" sheet vacuum annealing line based on the governments assurance that an SST would be built. The Blackbird had been built with 3'X 8' batch vacuumed annealed sheets, the industry capability at the time. The cost nearly broke Timet. If you desire a picture of Boeing's two full sized mock ups of the swept wing SST, (one in cruise mode and the other in landing mode) let me know. No cost. I have them on my PC photo library. I could go on and on about titanium and secret stuff.. If any of you feel I'm wrong, please correct this 76 year old geezer. One last thing, Barry Goldwater and I were "neighbors" in Paradise valley, AZ for 30 years. I will also send you a photo of a framed famous comment he wrote and autographed to me. Regards, C. W. Field PS, I will sell these two unique models for $250. Reportedly, they are the only models built by Revelle of an aircraft that never flew.
In answer to Matteo's question of 31 January 2010, the aircraft is located in the Hiller Aviation Museum in San Carlos CA, a bit south of San Francisco, just off 101. See: www.hiller.org /sst.shtml
The Concorde project would have suffered a similar fate had it not been for the intervention of cabinet minister Anthony Wedgewood-Benn.The then Primeminister Harold Wilson asked him if the aircraft was "going to be allright".Wedgewood Benn knew that wilson meant would it be on budget and sell.He chose to interpret it as " would it fly".and answered yes. He knew that thousands of jobs would be lost if the aircraft was cancelled. Wedgewood-Benn was a prolific diarist and the incident is well recorded in his memoirs.
I was a member of the SST test team at the Boeing High Speed Wind Tunnel near Philadelphia, Pa.
Joe is correct.
The outcry from the people in the United States crushed the United States SST program. It was okay for the Concord to use our airspace. But we could not use our own air space.
After we moved the SST out of the Wind Tunnel we began testing the STOL and VSTOL jets. There was some uproar over those aircraft.
Hey Dan The XB 70 Valkyrie was a North American project and it did fly! See the NA page. It is too bad we never entered this race, though I understand the Concordsky (TU144) was engineered with american engines and avionics as a cooperative experiment after glastnost. I'd like to know where that led.
I do think, however, if Boeing and Lockheed had partnered, they would have cornered the market on HST. Leaving from coastal cities and flying over open water, such as the Concorde did, they would have had time to further develop sonic noise suppression systems, and we'd all be flying on one today.
The Boeing program doesn't show the B-70 which was the design around which the SST program was based. The B-70 did fly and was originally thought to be something the Air Force could use in its inventory.
I would like to respond to David's inaccurate explanation as to why the SST wasn't built. Here are the facts. The environmental resistance to the project was so intense, the U.S. government pulled supplemental funding of the SST leaving Boeing with all the financial burden. I realize a socialist like David has little or no understanding of the fact that companies must recover developmental expenses. There was the fear that Boeing could not recover these costs. There is no government compensation in the United States like there is in socialist nations like the one time Soviet Union. Instead, Boeing developed the 747 which obviously became one of the most successful jetliners in history. An aircraft that only now has been rivaled. Profit is neccessary David for companies in the free world to survive.
