What "fleet of supersonic bombers" would that be,
The article was wrong on that point, and I let it slip by me. "Senior Moment," I guess. However, your original point was that the environmentalists did not oppose supersonic transport, and they did and do. The Concorde did not make economic sense, and we would not have built a supersonic transport in the '70s, because the engine technology was not there. Boeing would have built one in the '90s, or now, if they could have got by the environmental crowd.
But the "Eco=-Nuts" are still screaming about the "Hole in the Ozone," which just got 30% smaller this year, and their "Secular Religion," "Global Warming," which ain't happening either. |
