"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...
Morgans wrote:

It would make a new SST a viable project, if I'm right.

The only thing that would make an SST a viable project in the U.S. is if Boeing
were to build it. The fact that non-US firms were the only ones building SSTs was
the only thing that got the anti-sonic-boom stuff through Congress in the first
place. That era saw a tremendous amount of protectionist legislation, much of it
in the guise of "safety".


I'm not so sure about that. Back in the 60s when SSTs were being
considered, the AF conducted tests by generating booms over populated
areas in the midwest, to see if the public would accept it. The
general response was negative. It wasn't just the sound. The broken
windows and cracked plaster had a more negative affect.

The severity depends on where you are in relation to the aircraft.
If you're directly below it, the vibration can be pretty severe.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)