| The data-point for the elephant in the room: Aérospatiale/BAC Concorde - $169M
150 passengers. Cruising speed: Mach 2 The Concorde was a thing of beauty. Massively expensive to produce and run, and fuel inefficient, it was a passenger airliner that could outrun fighter jets. Fighter jets of that era could get to mach 2 using afterburner, but that's especially fuel inefficient so they could only keep up for 15 minutes or so. The money that went into the program (which is estimated in the neighborhood of $10.3 billion) was later recouped in the form of expertise that went into building Airbus. A lot of time has passed since 1965 when the Concorde was first produced, and the improvements in technology (especially for materials) since, will hopefully allow the economics to work out better this time around. But with the rise of lie-flat seats and personal entertainment systems, flying business class is "good enough" compared to the surcharge that flights on the Concorde cost, so I'm cautiously optimistic. Taking 3 hours instead of 6 is better, but still not low enough. Add getting to/from the airport, and checking into the hotel and all that, you're still out the better part of the day. The really pie-in-the-sky way to travel is if a certain reusable rocket company ran (exorbitantly expensive) passenger service. Moscow to New York in 30 mins, or Moscow to London in 15. |
One of my great travel-related discoveries has been that if I can find a train that takes even about the same amount of time, it will always be much more pleasant and less energy-draining than air travel.