Trump and the Sound Barrier: Can Boom Revive Supersonic Flight?

In an era where commercial flight has stagnated at the same speeds for half a century, Boom Supersonic is making a bold appeal to President Donald J. Trump: let America fly fast again. Advances in aerodynamics, engine efficiency, and real-time atmospheric modeling now make it possible to fly supersonically over land without creating disruptive sonic booms. Yet, outdated regulations still prohibit supersonic speeds over the continental United States. The time has come to modernize these rules and allow the next generation of air travel to take flight.

The ban on commercial supersonic travel over the United States dates back to the early 1970s, when concerns about noise pollution and environmental impact led to regulatory intervention. During the late 1960s, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conducted extensive tests on the effects of sonic booms on American communities. The most well-known of these occurred in Oklahoma City, where a six-month experiment subjected residents to regular sonic booms to assess tolerance levels. The results were mixed—while some viewed the booms as minor annoyances, others reported broken windows and structural damage. Public outcry followed, and political opposition grew against allowing commercial supersonic flight over land.

Meanwhile, the U.S. government had invested heavily in developing a domestic Supersonic Transport (SST) program, competing with the Anglo-French Concorde and the Soviet Tu-144. Boeing’s proposed SST, the 2707, aimed to carry over 250 passengers at speeds exceeding Mach 2.7. However, in 1971, Congress, influenced by environmental concerns and budget constraints, canceled the program. The following year, the FAA implemented a nationwide ban on commercial aircraft exceeding Mach 1 over land, effectively grounding the future of American supersonic travel before it could even take off. By 1973, the policy was set in stone, ensuring that Concorde, which entered service in 1976, could only operate at full speed over the ocean.

The core issue behind the ban was the sonic boom. When an aircraft exceeds the speed of sound, it generates shockwaves that travel to the ground as loud, concussive sounds. Concorde, for example, produced continuous booms along its supersonic flight path, which would have been intolerable over populated areas. The FAA’s decision to implement an outright ban rather than a noise-based limit effectively removed any incentive for the aviation industry to develop quieter supersonic technologies. As a result, commercial aviation stagnated at subsonic speeds while military aircraft, exempt from the rule, continued to operate at Mach speeds unhindered.

Fast-forward to today, and the landscape has changed dramatically. Boom Supersonic, along with NASA and other aerospace innovators, has demonstrated that modern supersonic aircraft can mitigate or even eliminate sonic booms. One of the most significant breakthroughs is the concept of "Boomless Cruise," enabled by a well-documented atmospheric phenomenon known as Mach cutoff. When an aircraft reaches supersonic speeds at sufficiently high altitudes, the temperature gradients in the atmosphere cause the shockwaves to bend upward, preventing them from reaching the ground. This principle, known for decades but previously impractical for commercial aviation, is now viable thanks to advances in computational modeling, real-time weather tracking, and precise flight control algorithms.

Boom’s Overture, a next-generation supersonic airliner, is designed to take full advantage of Mach cutoff. By optimizing its speed, altitude, and flight path in real-time, Overture can maintain supersonic speeds of Mach 1.1 to Mach 1.2 over land without generating an audible boom. This is a stark contrast to Concorde, which was unable to adjust for atmospheric conditions and produced loud booms that made it unsuitable for overland routes. Additionally, Boom’s Symphony engines are being designed specifically for efficient supersonic cruise, eliminating the need for afterburners and significantly reducing fuel consumption compared to Concorde’s thirsty turbojets.

Despite these advances, the FAA’s overland supersonic ban remains unchanged. Regulations still treat all supersonic flight as inherently disruptive, failing to account for the capabilities of modern aircraft. However, there are signs of progress. NASA’s X-59 QueSST program is actively researching "low-boom" supersonic flight, with plans to conduct overland tests to gather data on community noise tolerance. The FAA has also been directed to explore new noise-based standards rather than maintaining the blanket ban. These developments indicate a growing recognition that the technology of today is not the technology of 1973.

Beyond the scientific and regulatory challenges, the economic and strategic implications of restoring supersonic flight are substantial. Cutting transcontinental flight times by more than an hour would be a boon for business and international travel, allowing executives and professionals to maximize productivity. Furthermore, reclaiming leadership in supersonic aviation would strengthen America’s aerospace sector, ensuring that the U.S. remains at the forefront of next-generation air travel instead of ceding the market to foreign competitors.

Environmental concerns, once a major obstacle, are also being addressed. Unlike Concorde, which guzzled fuel at inefficient rates, new supersonic designs prioritize sustainability. Overture, for example, is being engineered to operate on 100% sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), significantly reducing carbon emissions. Moreover, improved aerodynamics and modern engine efficiency mean that the environmental footprint of supersonic flight can be competitive with that of conventional air travel. If the right policies are in place to support innovation in SAF and alternative propulsion technologies, supersonic travel could even contribute to aviation’s broader decarbonization goals.

The opportunity is clear: with the right regulatory framework, the United States can reestablish itself as a leader in high-speed commercial aviation. The FAA should replace the outdated speed-based prohibition with a noise-based standard, allowing aircraft that meet acceptable sonic impact thresholds to operate freely. Doing so would not only unlock new economic potential but also revitalize an industry that has been stuck at the same cruising speeds for over half a century.

For decades, America has been grounded by policies that no longer reflect the state of technology. The ban on supersonic flight was a product of its time, but its continued enforcement serves only to stifle innovation. With modern breakthroughs in boom reduction, fuel efficiency, and flight control, the original justification for the ban no longer holds. Now, the question is whether regulators will recognize that the future of aviation should not be shackled by the past. The science is clear. The technology is ready. It is time to let supersonic travel soar once more.

If you don't already please follow @amuse on 𝕏.