From the article (behind a registration wall):

The U.S. ban on overland supersonic flight, in place since 1973, is the culprit for the recent decades of aviation stagnation. It not only has crippled investment in the technologies needed to revive progress, it has bred a complacent mindset among today’s airframers, content to compete for market share in a static Mach 0.85 world. It is urgent that the ban be repealed.

Some say there is not enough data to support lifting the speed limit. Fortunately, that is not so. Sonic booms have been extensively studied over the last 60 years—there have been more than three dozen supersonic flight-test programs in the U.S. alone. Some of the literature is hard to find—yours truly physically had to go to the Library of Congress to read one report—so lack of awareness is understandable. Taken as a whole, the data show there are levels of sonic boom that simultaneously are economically viable in an airliner today and would be acceptable to the public.

Some say there is not enough data to support lifting the speed limit. Fortunately, that is not so. Sonic booms have been extensively studied over the last 60 years—there have been more than three dozen supersonic flight-test programs in the U.S. alone. Some of the literature is hard to find—yours truly physically had to go to the Library of Congress to read one report—so lack of awareness is understandable. Taken as a whole, the data show there are levels of sonic boom that simultaneously are economically viable in an airliner today and would be acceptable to the public.

Aviation enthusiasts know about the 1964 Oklahoma City tests, in which the U.S. Air Force, NASA and FAA were run out of town after exposing the public to eight Concorde-level booms per day. Less familiar is the 1968 report of experiments conducted at Edwards AFB, California, in which 98% of respondents rated sonic booms only 10-dB quieter than the Concorde’s as “acceptable” or “very acceptable.” The 1968 study also found that small changes in sonic-boom levels have a large effect on acceptability, meaning incrementally tiny further reductions would go a long way.

It therefore will be an enormous missed opportunity if the U.S. does not remove the overland speed limit in this year’s FAA reauthorization. For Boom’s Mach 2.2 airliner to serve the overland market by the mid-2020s—flying routes such as New York-Los Angeles in only 2 hr. and 30 min.—we need to know what law applies in time to influence the design.

Except the F 35 meme has historic precedent. This was an actual postcard

This will also throw some cold water on your meme

The grand strategy of the two civilization-states of Iran and Russia contradicts one another on certain fronts such as the one related to Tehran’s hoped-for post-war role in Syria vis-à-vis its hated Israeli rival, which as anyone who has even cursory knowledge about this knows is designed to strengthen Iran’s overall position against Israel through its own forces and those of its allied militia Hezbollah. Russia, however, doesn’t seem to agree with this policy because it believes that it will only “trigger” more Israeli raids into Syria which could eventually contribute to more destabilization in the country and inadvertently endanger the safety of Russia’s forces there, whether through direct action or the indirect facilitation of terrorism.

Although it may pain many in the Alt-Media to read, Russia’s actions in passively allowing Israel to bomb what it claims (whether accurately or not) are Iranian-related infrastructure and troops (whether its own or allied) in Syria indicate that Moscow believes that Tehran “deserved it”, or put more gently, that Iran is “provoking” Israel through its presence in western and southern Syria and that Tel Aviv is therefore “justified” in militarily responding to it with “surgical strikes”.

@Swereve

All the arguments that it was killed by regulation, or airlines were subsidised anyway, deny the facts

Nobody is denying that it was subsidized. But ALL air travel was subsidized at that time. All of the major carriers were state owned. Most of the manufactures rely on state funds to this day/ To this day Boeing has its own US government backed bank. Its called the Ex Im bank.

the few Concordes that entered service had to be given away,

Standard practice for new jets. The Concorde was always going to be a niche product. It was never going to sell like a white elephant. Canada is giving away C series right now.

but given the chance of much more comfort & much more space at the same or even a lower price, how many would choose it?

Read the vanity fair article. Tons of rich people loved it and flew it all the time. It was part of being rich.

The Concorde is where Paul McCartney led his fellow passengers in an impromptu sing-along of Beatles tunes; where Phil Collins collected himself between performances on the London and Philadelphia stages of Live Aid; where Malcolm Forbes treated his friends to a supersonic cocktail party in the late 1970s; where Miramax boss Harvey Weinstein sheepishly fessed up to sneaking a cigarette in the lavatory; where Rupert Murdoch, Robert Maxwell, Henry Kravis, John Gutfreund, and George Soros met up and talked shop in the pre—Gulfstream V days of the 1980s; where the Queen Mum celebrated her 85th birthday by strapping herself into the cockpit’s jump seat and watching the pilots throttle that baby past Mach One.

o even if it was allowed to make sonic booms over populated areas

Studies showed that it wasn’t actually much louder than anything else. Cant believe we have aviation fans buying into this scam. It was a green scam.

Old Russo Gulf stream concept

In 1999 the aircraft was shown at the air show in Le Bourget. There MP Simonov said that for the beginning of serial release liner (as well as completion of all work on the aircraft) will take about 1 billion. With full and timely financing of aircraft can take off in 2002 year, and the price of the same model would be about 50 million. Then consider the possibility of continuing work on the project with the company Dassault Aviation, but the deal broke.

Sukhoi in 2000 year trying to find investors for the project in China.
Подробнее на: http://en.avia.pro/blog/ssbj

I’m not even sure what’s so complicated about this. This is a political problem more than anything else. Some laws have to be changed in order to make super sonic travel viable again.

It’s all been done before. Russia could just make scaled down and civilainized versions of the tu 122 or tu 160

Why is this so hard ?

A trick ?

There are plenty of supersonic projects in the works today and we will see prototypes in the sky by 2020 and maybe service in 2025. The history books will look at 2003 to 2020 as the dark ages of aviation. The age where the fastest military and civilian jets sat in museums. The age where aviation regressed instead of progressed.

@Tomcat

At the time, air travel was not yet deregulated. So in effect,all aircraft were state subsidized. After deregulation and privatization, Im not sure how it worked.

British Airways was privatized in 1987. Air France was even later.