America's skies may soon open up to supersonic travel. But there's still a big problem
Editor's note: Sign up for Unlocking the World, CNN Travel's weekly newsletter. Get news about destinations, plus the latest in aviation, food and drink, and where to stay.
The skies over the United States could be wide open for much faster air travel in the near future. Not just because passenger planes capable of breaking the sound barrier are in development — for the first time ever, they could be allowed to do it over American soil.
Even during the days of Concorde, the supersonic plane that retired in 2003, commercial flying at speeds above Mach 1 over mainland US was strictly forbidden, largely due to concerns over noise pollution from sonic booms.
Now moves are afoot to lift that restriction with a bill recently introduced in the Senate, and a similar measure in the House of Representatives. That means if the long-awaited 'Son of Concorde' ever gets here, it will have more potential supersonic routes than its predecessor.
Currently, there are several supersonic passenger jets in development that aim to reach speeds beyond Mach 1 without crashing loudly through the sound barrier. NASA's experimental X-59, expected to begin flight testing in 2025, aims to reduce noise to a 'sonic thump.'
And then there's Colorado-based Boom Supersonic, which is developing the Overture, the first actual supersonic passenger plane since Concorde flew into the sunset. Opening up US skies could be a step toward removing some of the hurdles it faces in becoming a reality.
'It's a super exciting year for us,' Blake Scholl, founder and CEO of Boom told CNN.
Much of that excitement comes from the company's XB-1 demonstrator aircraft breaking the sound barrier in January and again in February. It did so without creating a detectable sonic boom by flying at what it calls 'boomless cruise' — also known as 'Mach cutoff' — where sound refracts away from the ground at speeds close to the sound barrier in certain atmospheric conditions.
Boom aims to build the first prototype Overture engine by the end of the year and, if all goes according to the company's very ambitious timeline, American Airlines, Japan Airlines (JAL) and United Airlines could all take delivery of their very first Overtures by the end of the decade.
Scholl's sales pitch is very appealing. Who doesn't want to be able to work a full day on the West Coast, jump on a supersonic flight east that evening, and either be home or in a hotel in New York or D.C. before midnight?
The Overture would make those trips possible with a cruise speed of Mach 1.7 that could slash the duration of a transcontinental flight by up to half.
Overture's 80 passengers could make those speedy flights in relative comfort. Renderings show luxurious seats comparable to the contemporary business class offering on any subsonic plane.
Whether airlines are keen is another matter.
The range of the Overture is one challenge. At about 4,888 miles, it's enough for a transcontinental flight over the US or a transatlantic hop to Europe but not enough to traverse the Pacific without a stop.
And the much-touted commitments from American, JAL and United are all non-binding and, at least in the eyes of the industry, viewed as more fluff than substance. Critically, none of the airlines list the deals among their firm capital commitments in stock exchange filings.
'Boom is working in opposition to the most durable single trend in all of flying since the jet age began,' Jon Ostrower, editor-in-chief of trade publication The Air Current, said on The Air Show podcast in February. 'Airlines, fundamentally, since (the dawn of the jet age) have wanted more efficient aircraft.'
By Boom's own estimates, the Overture would burn two to three times more fuel per premium seat — first or business class — than a subsonic plane, such as the Airbus A350 or Boeing 787, on an intercontinental flight.
Another estimate from the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation puts the Overture's fuel burn at five- to- seven-times that of a subsonic long-haul jet.
Airlines would recoup those added fuel costs through higher airfares. Researchers at Worms University of Applied Sciences in Germany described those fares as a 'supersonic premium' in a paper published in the Journal of Air Transport Management last year.
They estimated that airfares on the Overture would need to be roughly 38% higher than the current business class fares on a New York-London flight to turn a profit. Put another way, supersonic flyers would pay roughly $4,830 one-way from New York to London in June based on current average one-way airfares of around $3,500 on Google Flights.
The researchers at Worms were confident that when flying westward travelers would pay a premium for supersonic flights because they 'fly back in time,' as one of the report's authors Jan Belke told CNN. That time gain could translate into real monetary benefits. Eastbound, however, the financial case was weaker due to hours lost across time zones.
While Boom's Scholl acknowledged that Overture seats will likely be priced out of budget for most passengers, he said there's still a solid business case.
'If you hit a mainstream price point — and business class is a mainstream price point — I think of it as the [Tesla] Model S of supersonic flight, it's not yet for everybody but it is a pretty big market segment,' he said.
The question is how many will pay that supersonic premium?
Digital communications have vastly improved from the days of the Concorde. Video calls have reduced the need for in-person meetings, and with flyers now able to answer emails or even join a virtual meeting in mid-air, in-air downtime is rapidly shrinking on subsonic flight.
Richard Aboulafia, a managing director at AeroDynamic Advisory and a long-time skeptic of Boom's business case for the Overture, estimated that Boom needs $12-15 billion to bring the Overture to market, but has only raised around $800 million to date.
Boom had about $700 million, according to its last public funding disclosure in 2023.
Asked how much Boom needs to develop Overture, Scholl put the number at 'under $2 billion.' He cited numerous cost savings the company has found eliminating 'inefficiencies' in the existing aerospace supply chain by, for the most part, integrating production under its own roof.
This integration, Scholl added, also speeds up the development and production process. That gives him confidence in achieving its aggressive timeline of flying the Overture by 2028 and handing the first planes over to airlines a year later. Ostrower called the timeline unrealistic.
Of the many challenges ahead of Boom, one is regulatory approval. The Federal Aviation Administration's certification process has slowed dramatically since the Boeing 737 MAX grounding in 2019 and 2020.
Boom's timeline allows for just a year of flight tests; Airbus took about 18 months to certify the A350 from first flight in June 2013 to the first delivery in December 2014.
Scholl seems unfazed by this, expressing confidence in Boom's ability to meet its targets and produce planes that, in his words, 'delete the friction of travel' by going a whole lot faster than today's jets.
'There's no guarantee of success here — statistically failure is the most likely outcome — but it's definitely possible,' Scholl said. 'The technology is there, the market is there, the passengers and airlines are there, the regulations for overland, I believe, will be there in relative short order. We just have to execute.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Republicans revise ban on state AI regulations in bid to preserve controversial provision
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans have made changes to their party's sweeping tax bill in hopes of preserving a new policy that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade. In legislative text unveiled Thursday night, Senate Republicans proposed denying states federal funding for broadband projects if they regulate AI. That's a change from a provision in the House-passed version of the tax overhaul that simply banned any current or future AI regulations by the states for 10 years. 'These provisions fulfill the mandate given to President Trump and Congressional Republicans by the voters: to unleash America's full economic potential and keep her safe from enemies,' Sen. Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said in a statement announcing the changes. The proposed ban has angered state lawmakers in Democratic and Republican-led states and alarmed some digital safety advocates concerned about how AI will develop as the technology rapidly advances. But leading AI executives, including OpenAI's Sam Altman, have made the case to senators that a 'patchwork' of state AI regulations would cripple innovation. Some House Republicans are also uneasy with the provision. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., came out against the AI regulatory moratorium in the House bill after voting for it. She said she had not read that section of the bill. 'We should be reducing federal power and preserving state power. Not the other way around,' Greene wrote on social media. Senate Republicans made their change in an attempt to follow the special process being used to pass the tax bill with a simple majority vote. To comply with those rules, any provision needs to deal primarily with the federal budget and not government policy. Republican leaders argue, essentially, that by setting conditions for states to receive certain federal appropriations — in this instance, funding for broadband internet infrastructure — they would meet the Senate's standard for using a majority vote. Cruz told reporters Thursday that he will make his case next week to Senate parliamentarian on why the revised ban satisfies the rules. The parliamentarian is the chamber's advisor on its proper rules and procedures. While the parliamentarian's ruling are not binding, senators of both parties have adhered to their findings in the past. Senators generally argue that Congress should take the lead on regulating AI but so far the two parties have been unable to broker a deal that is acceptable to Republicans' and Democrats' divergent concerns. The GOP legislation also includes significant changes to how the federal government auctions commercial spectrum ranges. Those new provisions expand the range of spectrum available for commercial use, an issue that has divided lawmakers over how to balance questions of national security alongside providing telecommunications firms access to more frequencies for commercial wireless use. Senators are aiming to pass the tax package, which extends the 2017 rate cuts and other breaks from President Donald Trump's first term along with new tax breaks and steep cuts to social programs, later this month. Matt Brown, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lululemon Stretched by Tariffs, Macro
Lululemon beat Wall Street's top- and bottom-line expectations, but it cut guidance over macroeconomic concerns. The company's international business posted solid growth, but the Americas region was weak. Lululemon is taking steps to mitigate the impact of tariffs, but until U.S. consumer confidence grows, there is little the company can do to bounce back. 10 stocks we like better than Lululemon Athletica Inc. › Here's our initial take on Lululemon Athletica's (NASDAQ: LULU) financial report. Metric Q1 2024 Q1 2025 Change vs. Expectations Revenue $2.2 billion $2.4 billion 7.3% Beat Earnings per share $2.54 $2.60 2% Beat Comparable sales 6% 1% -500 bps n/a Gross margin 57.7% 58.3% 60 bps n/a Athletic apparel specialist Lululemon beat Wall Street top- and bottom-line expectations for the quarter, delivering 7.3% revenue growth and a slight uptick in earnings per share. But CEO Calvin McDonald warned of a "dynamic macroenvironment" that the company expects to weigh on results in the quarters to come. First, the good news. Revenue growth came in toward the top of Lululemon's guidance, fueled by strong 6% international comparable sales. Overall international net revenue increased by 19%, or 20% when adjusted for currency fluctuations. But Americas comp sales were down 2% and overall revenue was up by just 3%, pressured by an uncertain American consumer. Lululemon does not expect those pressures to ease in the months to come. The company cut its full-year guidance, saying it now expects to earn between $14.58 and $14.78 per share. That's down from its previous $14.95 to $15.15 per share guidance, and below Wall Street's $14.89 consensus estimate. The somber tone and cut guidance appeared to have caught investors off guard. Lululemon shares, already down 11% for the year heading into earnings, were down 20% in after-hours trading ahead of the New York open Friday. McDonald pledged to "leverage our strong financial position and competitive advantages to play offense, while we continue to invest in the growth opportunities in front of us." Lululemon has the wherewithal to weather this storm, but there is only so much the company can do in this environment. Chief financial officer Meghan Frank, on the post-earnings call, said the company is looking to take "strategic price increases" to mitigate the impact of tariffs, as well as evaluating sourcing options. But any efficiency gains made will take time to play out. The good news for investors is Lululemon market share held up well in a rough environment, which implies there is nothing wrong with the brand. But until there is more certainty on the macro front, Lululemon stock could be stuck in neutral. Full earnings report Investor relations page Additional coverage Before you buy stock in Lululemon Athletica Inc., consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Lululemon Athletica Inc. wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Lou Whiteman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Lululemon Athletica Inc. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Lululemon Stretched by Tariffs, Macro was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get?
We've seen the headlines that reveal how rich the world's top billionaires are — but it's hard to comprehend just how rich they are. Consider this: Let's say you had $1 billion in your bank account and had to spend $100,000 every day, for an entire year. After 365 days, you would still have $963,500,000 (nine hundred sixty-three million five hundred thousand). Discover More: Find Out: Over the last two decades, billionaires have ballooned their wealth to unparalleled levels. In 2005, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates ranked as the world's richest person, with a net worth of $46.5 billion, as reported by CNN. Today, that title belongs to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose net worth stands at $368 billion as of June 5, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Even when adjusted for inflation, Gates' former net worth would be equivalent to roughly $76 billion in today's dollars. It is worth noting that other billionaires have also increased their wealth during the same time. For instance, tech billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are worth $229 billion and $227 billion, ranking second and third globally. For many Americans, this trend is not sitting well. The sky-high cost of living has catalyzed support for redistributive tax policies, especially among younger voters and the progressive base of the Democratic Party. While higher taxation may or may not happen in the years to come, here's hypothetically how much you'd get if the world's richest man gives a check to every American. The United States Census Bureau estimates the current population to be around 341 million people, ranking only behind India and China. If Musk's enormous $368 billion were equally divided in the U.S., each person would receive $1,079 (rounded to the nearest dollar). A couple would receive $2,158, while a family of four would get $4,316. Despite the enormous wealth of billionaires, much of their fortune is tied up in stocks, real estate, and other holdings. Only a small percentage of their assets is held in cash. Based on data from Forbes, Musk has a 12% ownership stake in Tesla and to date, he remains the largest shareholder in the $1.15 trillion electric vehicle company. This is in addition to a 42% slice in SpaceX and a 54% interest in xAI, among many other businesses. Interestingly, Bloomberg reported that Musk's financial holdings appreciated by 77% after joining the campaign trail with President Donald Trump late last year, as reported by Bloomberg. Investors became bullish on Tesla and Musk became the first person to ever reach a net worth exceeding $400 billion. Since then, Tesla's market value has fluctuated as a result of volatile market conditions, macroeconomic factors and the threat of a global trade war. Editor's note: Data is accurate as of June 5 and is subject to change. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Says Trump's Executive Order To Lower Medication Costs Has a 'Real Shot' -- Here's Why This article originally appeared on If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get?