Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!dmocsny
From: dmocsny@uceng.UC.EDU (daniel mocsny)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SST landing rights in US
Summary: Cart my carcass?
Message-ID: <593@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 21 Jan 89 16:02:12 GMT
References: <601326396.amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU>
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg.
Lines: 54

In article <601326396.amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU>, Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes:
> Actually what stopped the SST in the US were the enviro-nuts who
> probably thought the sonic booms would vibrate the tail feathers off
> the ducks.

I seem to recall that one serious objection to the SST (aside from the
obvious economic ones) was its potential deleterious impact on the 
ozone layer. Turns out to have been misplaced, I suppose, now that
the ozone layer seems to be doomed in any case...

> But then, my feeling is that if it required government funding to
> create a COMMERCIAL product, then it probably means that the technology
> of 1970 was just not up to the job. When an SST is economically viable,
> they will be built. The Concorde is nice, but I wonder if it ever paid
> off it's full development cost?

Every major existing transportation system I can think of required
some sort of start-up subsidy for building necessary infrastructure.
Not a few of these systems require ongoing public expenditures or some
sort of indirect cost-spreading.

> I would guess we'll see the return of the SST sometime in the early
> part of the next century. It will then be the standard aircraft for
> fairly long haul flights.

When speculating on the likely state of transportation technology in
the next century, be sure to remember that telecommunications
technologies won't exactly be sitting still in the meantime. In a
couple more decades, we will probably have telecommunications of such
speed, power, and transparency that most of our present-day shuttling
back and forth will become superfluous.

Transportation and communications technologies have historically
competed with each other. Fossil-fuel-based transportation
technologies have more or less "topped out" against theoretical and
practical limits. Communications technologies, on the other hand,
are improving exponentially and have many orders of magnitude of
theoretical headroom left. In a couple of decades, we can safely
predict that the terrestrial communications network will provide
the average individual with bandwidth and fidelity equal to the
limits of his or her sensory apparatus. People interested in
transacting serious business will simply not be able to waste
time sitting on aircraft if they want to stay competitive.

However, I think transportation, and perhaps space exploration,
will remain popular as leisure-time activities. Perhaps when information
technologies increase our disposable income by large factors, groups
of enthusiasts will be able to develop their own private ventures,
irrespective of possible economic return.

Cheers,

Dan Mocsny
dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu