NASA aims to launch system of 'micro jets' to supplant big jetliners

South Florida Sun-Sentinel ^ | December 26 2002 | Ken Kaye

[gubamyster]

By Ken Kaye Staff Writer Posted December 26 2002

Within the next few years, you may be able to avoid big airport hassles by taking tiny jets from one small airfield to another.

The cost would be close to that of a coach seat.

If NASA has its way, thousands of jet-propelled taxicabs will be used to ease the overburdened airline hub system and take advantage of about 5,000 smaller, slower airports.

The agency best known for sending space shuttles into orbit has embarked on a $69 million, five-year program to launch what is officially called the Small Aircraft Transportation System, or SATS.

At the heart of the program: dainty jets designed to hold about as many occupants as a sport-utility vehicle. A typical cabin would have two pilot seats, four club seats and a lavatory in the back.

Their tiny jet engines would be technological marvels, fuel efficient yet powerful enough to propel a plane to speeds up to 400 mph and altitudes of 41,000 feet.

"We want to demonstrate that it makes sense to think of small aircraft as an alternative to scheduled commercial airlines for trips between 200 and 1,000 miles," said Keith Henry, spokesman for NASA Langley Research Center in Virginia.

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[coloradan]

Hopefully this will spill out into the general aviation sector, which won't also have the Stalinesque airport security hassles.

[null and void]

Now, make it robot controlled...

[Gary Boldwater]

This will be as economically feasible as the space shuttle.

[DanielLongo]

This would be a welcomed advancement in a world different from what we know now. That's all we need is jet propelled, jihad kamikazis launched from 5,000 low security airfields. Instead of one big airliner, all 19 hijakers could have had their own death missle. NO THANKS! These guys at NASA haven't been observing the planet Earth for a while.

[Incorrigible]

Citizen Plane

[dirtboy]

If NASA has its way, thousands of jet-propelled taxicabs will be used to ease the overburdened airline hub system and take advantage of about 5,000 smaller, slower airports.

If this were practical, the government would already be doing it. They can make the planes as cheap as they want, but you still have to pay the pilots.

[dirtboy]

Arrgh! Should read:

If this were practical, the private sector would already be doing it. They can make the planes as cheap as they want, but you still have to pay the pilots.

Not only that, but the government is in the business of creating expensive transportation solutions that require massive subsidies and fail to address the core congestion problems. Light rail is a classic example.

[norton]

Last time I saw something like this is was in Popular Science back in the fifties - everybody was going to have their own aerocar, or aquacar, electocar, or combination of the three.

[hopespringseternal]

If I suddenly stumbled into a job requiring a lot of domestic air travel, my next call would probably be to the local flight school.

No way do I want to run the gauntlet of federalized butt-feeling gestapo on a regular basis.

[cynicom]

Eclipse 500 is already under production and is a winner.

[Triple]

Hmmm - Do you think corporate jets were not avaialable to the hijackers?

What do you think of having these new corporate jets widely available, but with armed pilots?

[dirtboy]

Eclipse 500 is already under production and is a winner.

You still have to pay someone to fly the plane. Spread that cost among four passengers, and you ain't gonna get a competive fare. Look at the cost just to ride in a taxi...

[dalereed]

"If this were practical, the private sector would already be doing it."

They don't need their study, all they have to do is buy the Eclipse when it's on the market in the near future. It is exactly what NASA proposes only it's being marketed and sold to general avaition.

I'd love to be able to afford one, a real bargain for under $1 million!

[anobjectivist]

You know what...I used to like what NASA was doing but the more I read about it the more I don't like it.

There is already a private effort going towards "microjets" or whatever catch phrase you want to call them, and NASA has no business competing against the private sector.

[irv]

NASA is only doing this as a way to avoid meaningful space exploration.

Honey! NASA's on the phone. They say they're from the government and they want to help us (with our air travel needs).

[dirtboy]

I'd love to be able to afford one, a real bargain for under $1 million!

Yeah, a $1 million dollar jet, include pilot and ground crew, and amortize that cost for trips carry a whopping four passengers, and it will somehow be equivalent to the price of a coach fare.

Looks like NASA hired the cost estimators for the Canada gun registration database...

[Saturnalia]

But letting NASA spend $$ to produce fuel efficient engines should be a good thing.
Besides, anything distracting them from producing laser death ray satellites can only be a good thing.

[dirtboy]

But letting NASA spend $$ to produce fuel efficient engines should be a good thing.

"Efficient" and "NASA" are not commonly used in the same sentence...