PatriceBoivin September 26, 2016 11:09 PM Didn't they stop funding the Concorde for invalid reasons? Why would other supersonic jets be accepted? WilliamSager September 26, 2016 11:24 PM I'm sorry but the idea of battery powered supersonic airplanes is about as logical as high speed moving sidewalks.Never mind that as speed and weight goes up the range of electric vehicles drops exponentially.Never mind that propellers can't power a aircraft this fast no matter what supper power source powers them. Scion September 27, 2016 02:52 AM @WilliamSager: And you know these things as a basic certainty? Besides I'm pretty certain Workman was talking about using the surface area of a supersonic jet and not necessarily talking about using the battery to power a jet to supersonic speeds. The key to this topology is having a large flat surface area. I think it would work well for example with any sufficiently large delta wing aircraft design (like maybe a big flying wing?) Tim Jonson September 27, 2016 03:17 AM Yikes WilliamSager, if a jet turbine can spin fast enough to propel a supersonic airliner, then a motor can too- only better, since thin air doesn't matter, as the article states. So the motors would spin turbines, not propellers. Furthermore, the very point of article was that electric flight becomes EASIER at larger scale. PatriceBoivin: Supersonic jets will be accepted when they don't pollute and when their business model works. Which it probably will, in the future. You two commenters are best off sticking to candle making. Kaido Tiigisoon September 27, 2016 03:57 AM Otherwise nice idea. The only issue is the cooling. Supersonic flight heats the aircraft and Concorde had to fight heavily to not turn the craft into a big flying sauna. This partly invalidates the whole idea because instead of wing acting as a battery cooling surface, we get the wing, that heats the battery. And in subsonic flight the battery gets so cold, that one couldn't get any meaningful power out of it anymore. So your flight speed is not dicatated by the need, but by the fact that you need to keep your batteries at correct temperatures. This may work and may not. Here's the temperature painting of the Concorde: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/Concorde_-_airframe_temperatures.svg/634px-Concorde_-_airframe_temperatures.svg.png Instead I would suggest to use this idea to propel naval vessels. tapasmonkey September 27, 2016 04:29 AM What an inspiring man! - we need more people like this working on the actual important stuff, rather than on how to kill one another ever more efficiently. Boondocks September 27, 2016 04:49 AM @Tim Jonson: At supersonic speeds Concorde was propelled by the reaction force from its engines. Airscrews are not capable of propulsion beyond high sub-sonic speeds. If you read up on Concorde you will find that the jet engine intakes themselves contributed a substantial percentage of the total thrust in supersonic flight. Since Concorde was also largely built from titanium, how well would this material work with the proposed battery technology? Odyssios September 27, 2016 06:22 AM Let's assume you have the power. What gives the thrust? Can't be a jet; no fuel! Ion acceleration won't work in an atmosphere (and in any case, the thrust is tiny). so - propeller? Hmm ... I'd need quite a bit of convincing you can design propellers that would drive a craft supersonically. I'm not saying it can't be done - just that I've never seen a convincing case made. Graham September 27, 2016 06:39 AM Every airliner gets struck by lightning, often more than once a year. The current pulse conducts around the skin of the aircraft, and continues down the lightning plasma. All instruments and avionic kit inside, and the passengers too, are protected from this gross EMP by the "Faraday Cage" effect where charge cannot exist inside a closed conductor I would question the ability of the outer skin of the airplane to double as a battery conductor feeding power management electronics, while taking a current hit of typically 400, 000 Amps ! BroerKonijn September 27, 2016 06:40 AM I guess one needs dreamers despite this being indeed extremely unlogical and actually stupid. Workman clearly has no clue about the industry in general. Besides what has been commented in earlier posts, if one forgets the most simple thing with battery powered vehicles, the charging, one can not be seen serious. His large wing planes will have integrated batteries, a lot of them. To charge them up, even with a huge DC power connection, one would need 14-16 hours charging. Airline companies need their planes airborne for most of the time, not charging on the tarmac. So besides the planes getting more expensive airline companies need to purchase twice as much planes as well. He should spend his time on making car batteries twice as power full. This already will change the complete industry and have a massive influence on the environment.