Age of Innovators
The Soviet Tu-144 emerged as a direct counter to the Anglo-French Concorde, reflecting its influence in design and strategic aims. The European project was pursued publicly, with models and concepts showcased at exhibitions and scientific questions debated in open journals. What remained hidden from public view was occasionally conveyed to Soviet designers through intelligence channels.
During the 1960s, supersonic passenger aviation was heralded as the next great leap, and the USSR planned to join the movement. Discussions about Soviet involvement in the European venture occurred for a time, but only a few Soviet-French exchanges materialized. Consequently, the Tu-144 flew for the first time on December 31, 1968, two months ahead of its rival, reportedly driven by a government directive to outpace European efforts.
The real outcome was more modest than Concorde’s. The initial Tu-144 prototype could not reach sustained supersonic speed without afterburners, and even after stronger engines were installed, fuel consumption remained high. New engines extended its maximum range to about 5,000 km, while Concorde could surpass 6,500 km with occasional refueling. The Soviet plane was also characterized by a short service life, significant complexity, and high operating costs, limiting it largely to test pilots.
These factors shaped its trajectory. The Tu-144 conducted its first passenger flight on the Moscow to Alma-Ata route on November 1, 1977. Seven months later, those passenger services were halted due to unprofitability. Concorde targeted business travelers largely outside the USSR, while the Tu-144 carried costs per flight hour far higher than its European counterpart. In total, the aircraft carried 3,284 passengers across 55 flights.
Concorde, by contrast, achieved relatively stable commercial operation until 2003, when services ceased for multiple reasons, including limited profitability for subsonic business-class scenarios, a cramped cabin design due to a narrow fuselage, and the broader impact of the September 11, 2001 attacks on demand. A persistent issue was noise: sonic booms produced by supersonic travel could shatter windows and restrict flight paths, forcing Concorde to operate mainly over oceans to mitigate these effects.
Revival of the Idea
When comparing Concorde and Tu-144, it becomes clear that the success of future aircraft rests on paying attention to the minutest operational details. Simply breaking the sound barrier does not guarantee overall performance.
In the 21st century, the dream of supersonic passenger travel persists, with efforts to overcome its core drawbacks. A major challenge is noise, especially for flights over populated areas. NASA and Lockheed Martin have explored solutions to this issue. A sonic boom arises when flying faster than Mach 1, as sound waves accumulate in a cone behind the aircraft and reach observers as a loud blast.
Calculations and experiments suggest that shaping a long, slender nose can help disperse the sonic boom, reducing perceived intensity. In response, the United States developed the X-59 QueSST research aircraft. Now assembled, it was expected to be completed in early 2024, with full-scale testing to follow. The goal is to fly over populated zones and use acoustic sensors to determine if it can achieve a truly quiet cruise, with in-cabin experience kept comparable to everyday car-door slams in terms of sensory impact.
Yet many engineering firms and investors remain cautious, prioritizing over-water routes for new designs. Boom Technology is moving forward with its updated Overture, projected to enter service by 2029. The plan centers on a business model that targets 40 to 50 passengers in first and business classes at a ticket price around five thousand dollars, a strategy built on shared economic assumptions and market timing.
Does the Market Need a Supersonic Aircraft?
In the mid-20th century, supersonic flight symbolized a leap into the unknown, alongside rapid growth in mass air travel and a more global society. Today, the question remains whether faster travel justifies the costs and environmental factors. To explore this, the analysis consulted Oleg Panteleev, head of the analytical service at AviaPort, about the prospects for supersonic transport.
“For the typical traveler, shaving travel time by half with a proportionate price increase rarely seems worthwhile. Yet there are scenarios where supersonic travel could make sense,” notes the expert.
The first scenario involves transatlantic and transpacific routes. Supersonic speed could cut travel time by three to four hours, a compelling option for some business travelers who view time as money.
Advocates of image-driven travel also enter the mix. Concorde became an icon, frequented by celebrities, politicians, and royalty alike. If a new supersonic aircraft can cultivate a strong brand and social media presence, demand for tickets could rise. Even with branding advantages, the analyst cautions that a measurable impact depends on how the public perceives the experience.
“There are situations where even an economy passenger benefits from a shorter journey, not just a lower price. The overall trip value matters—getting there sooner can save on hotel costs, or reduce the discomfort of long flights for those with anxiety or claustrophobia,” explains Panteleev. “In some cases, the travel time advantage justifies higher costs.”
Not every market segment will embrace supersonic travel, and economy class may remain the primary draw. Still, investors remain intrigued by the potential of supersonic projects.
“The air transport market is vast. Even capturing a modest one-percent share could yield a significant footprint. The early leaders who offer compelling products will likely secure healthy profits, while a crowded field increases the risk of losses for some players,” Panteleev observes.
Government involvement can also influence development, partly to secure new technologies or to bolster national prestige. Such support can reduce initial capital costs and support early profitability as the market scales.