Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » The "Boom" airliner - the most unfortunate product name in history?

   
Author Topic: The "Boom" airliner - the most unfortunate product name in history?
Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 03-22-2016 11:32 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If we weren't still a week out from April Fool's Day, I'd have thought that this site was inspired by it.

An airplane called the Boom? Really?! Firstly, if I were launching a new supersonic airliner, the boom is the absolute last aspect of it I'd want to draw attention to (it was why Concorde was never able to fly any overland routes at supersonic speed, and campaigns to ban it sprung up at virtually every airport it operated service to). Quite apart from that, the word evokes crashing, blowing up, 9/11, and a general "Oh, the humanity!" sort of feeling.

It would be like Ford naming their newest model the Impact, or Chanel calling their latest perfume Sewage. The people behind this aircraft may be brilliant engineers, but their expertise sure as heck isn't in marketing!

 |  IP: Logged

Rex Oliver
Film Handler

Posts: 65
From: Greenville, NC. USA
Registered: Apr 2013


 - posted 03-23-2016 01:42 AM      Profile for Rex Oliver   Email Rex Oliver   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
With a name "Boom" I don't think I would want to ride on this plane-We are in a hurry to get nowhere!If the Concorde failed-believe this will too!

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-23-2016 05:57 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
There actually is a car called the "Impact": see here. It was some sort of early electric car model, although I doubt that any were actually sold (especially with that name). Pretty much every article that I read about it at the time indicated that the name was ridiculous.

As a side note, it will be interesting to see if this can succeed. One of the issues with the Concorde (in addition to the boom thing) was that it used so much jet fuel that its range was limited to, effectively, an NYC to Europe flight, and not the truly long flights where supersonic speed would be most advantageous. Also, video conferencing and such have removed some of the need for business travel (the only type of travel that can usually justify paying extra for speed).

Somewhat annoyingly, the trend in aircraft design seems to be to move toward slower crusing speeds for reasons of economy. The modern 787 crusies at about 30-40 mph slower than the 707 of the late 1950s. Also, since the 787 is a twin-engine aircraft, it is somewhat more restricted in routing than a four-engine plane would be. This regression is kind of sad. Which is not to say that the 787 isn't a much better better aircraft...just that it is unfortunate that the product category has gotten worse in some aspects over the last few decades.

 |  IP: Logged

Mitchell Dvoskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1869
From: West Milford, NJ, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 03-23-2016 08:23 AM      Profile for Mitchell Dvoskin   Email Mitchell Dvoskin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
> There actually is a car called the "Impact"

GM had a knack for this. This is a company that marketed the Chevy Nova. In English, "nova" is a sun exploding, implying power. Unfortunately, they did not change the name for Spanish speaking countries, where I understand "no va" means "No Go".

 |  IP: Logged

Kenneth Wuepper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1026
From: Saginaw, MI, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 03-23-2016 08:34 AM      Profile for Kenneth Wuepper   Email Kenneth Wuepper   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
My Ford Escape was "High Impact Blue" in color.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 03-23-2016 10:36 AM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Kinda like Sikorsky with their S-76 helicopter which they dubbed the "Spirit" in English. Too bad that in French, the name translated as "Ghost." Sikorsky ended up just calling it the S-76. [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Cox
Film God

Posts: 2234
From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada
Registered: Apr 2011


 - posted 03-23-2016 02:44 PM      Profile for Frank Cox   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Cox   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see what's wrong with Ghost. The Rolls Royce Golden Ghost is one of the most famous luxury cars ever.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 03-23-2016 03:51 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
My wife reminded me that there was a Chanel no. 2, but it was invented long before dual flush systems turned #1 and #2 into euphemisms for human waste.

As for Concorde, my $0.02 is that the Internet basically killed it. It was only even close to commercially viable (and even then, only to cover its operating costs - no way ever could it have covered the R & D costs, and it wouldn't have existed if the British and French governments hadn't picked up that tab) because during the '80s and '90s, there were enough senior businesspeople willing to pay whatever it cost to be able to make a return trip in one day across the Atlantic. Once telecommunications and data communications became fast, reliable and cheap enough to remove the need for most of Concorde's customers to do that, its market fell out from under it.

The "Boom" guys claim that they can, in effect, research, develop and bring into production a replacement that will enable supersonic transport at a much lower cost. I guess it's a case of watching this space to see if they can deliver; and if they can, whether there's a viable market even at the prices they're talking about ($5k a ticket).

quote: Scott Norwood
Somewhat annoyingly, the trend in aircraft design seems to be to move toward slower crusing speeds for reasons of economy. The modern 787 crusies at about 30-40 mph slower than the 707 of the late 1950s. Also, since the 787 is a twin-engine aircraft, it is somewhat more restricted in routing than a four-engine plane would be. This regression is kind of sad. Which is not to say that the 787 isn't a much better better aircraft...just that it is unfortunate that the product category has gotten worse in some aspects over the last few decades.
Paul would probably be able to speak more authoritatively on this, but my understanding is that there are now very few routes that can't be flown by an ETOPS-certified twin, most of them being across the South Atlantic (e.g. Buenos Aires to Johannesburg), which is a tiny market anyways. As for speeds reducing, again, I guess this is market driven: the vast majority of long-haul air passengers would prefer lower cost and/or higher frequency on major routes to higher speed.

 |  IP: Logged

Allan Young
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 125
From: EGHAM, Surrey UK
Registered: Jun 2011


 - posted 03-24-2016 08:27 AM      Profile for Allan Young   Email Allan Young   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Leo Enticknap
As for Concorde, my $0.02 is that the Internet basically killed it. It was only even close to commercially viable (and even then, only to cover its operating costs - no way ever could it have covered the R & D costs, and it wouldn't have existed if the British and French governments hadn't picked up that tab) because during the '80s and '90s, there were enough senior businesspeople willing to pay whatever it cost to be able to make a return trip in one day across the Atlantic. Once telecommunications and data communications became fast, reliable and cheap enough to remove the need for most of Concorde's customers to do that, its market fell out from under it.
You could well be correct about the Internet (and you're definitely correct about the R&D costs) but I do know that British Airways was making a tidy profit from Concorde in its latter years, right up until it was decommissioned. They had managed to reduce the profit-point load factor to a remarkably low level.

Dunno about Air France though.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 03-24-2016 10:12 AM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Is there data that says ticket sales were declining?

 |  IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005


 - posted 03-24-2016 06:44 PM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
911 killed many business users of Concorde. Only one flight was primarily leisure: London to Barbados?? The rest were primarily business. After 911, Concorde did not prove profitable.

 |  IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted 03-24-2016 07:23 PM      Profile for Sam D. Chavez   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Maybe Barbados was where people in a hurry park their money.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.