Palmdale Intercontinental Airport
A big bet on a supersonic flight that did not pay off.
The Palmdale Intercontinental Airport was planned as the second major[1] airport for Los Angeles in 1968. It was to take the overflow from Los Angeles Airport and provide the infrastructure for supersonic flights, the transportation of the future. The story of the Palmdale airport illustrates the failure of supersonic flight in the United States and the world and its impact on infrastructure.
Supersonic Planes and the need for infrastructure
The race for supersonic commercial planes was another facet of the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union demonstrated the first supersonic commercial plane, the TU-144 in 1968. Soon after, in 1969, the Anglo-French consortium did the first test flight of their SST, the Concorde. The United States was on track to build a larger version of the Concorde SST, the Boeing 2707, which was to carry at least two and a half times the number of passengers.
SSTs need extremely long runways, and neighborhoods that constrain the Los Angeles Airport could not support them. Given this limitation on growth and the heavy passenger demands on LAX, the airport board decided to develop a new facility adjacent to a US Air Force / Skunk Works facility in Palmdale—the Palmdale Intercontinental Airport. Palmdale is 64.7 miles from downtown Los Angeles, but the travel time would vary from about 1.25 to 4 hours, depending on traffic. Most of the elected officials and the public derided the idea of an airport in the “middle of nowhere.”
To address this distance problem, there were plans for a high-speed rail line to run directly from the new Airport to downtown Los Angeles. This immediately ran into public objections, which delayed the development of the rail line and ultimately killed it. Meanwhile, the supersonic airliners displayed problems that made travel problematic.
SSTs created massive sonic booms, effectively cutting the possibility of supersonics on US internal routes, where the economics might have made sense.
The cost per passenger mile for supersonic planes was extremely high. The Concorde addressed these by focusing on business and high-net-worth travelers between London / Paris and New York.
Supersonic planes fly higher than regular planes and release their output into this higher level. The output includes pollutants that destroy the ozone layer. The Montreal Protocols of 1987, designed to protect the ozone layer, outlawed many pollutants. The Protocols did not address SSTs directly because they were a small part of the problem. However, further SST deployment would upend the success in addressing ozone depletion.
Finally, the US government killed their participation in supersonic commercial travel. Most of the development funds had been provided by the government, as it was started as a competition against the Soviets.
Unique Geographic and Economic Problems for Palmdale
These are generic issues with SST development. However, two additional developments effectively killed the development of the Palmdale Airport. The first development was connected to the proof-of-concept flights into the Los Angeles area. The Concorde flew a few demonstration flights around the United States. When landing in the Los Angeles region, the Concorde SST landed and took off from Ontario Airport – about 40 miles from downtown LA with infrastructure in place. This removed the immediate need for an SST airport to be built. The Ontario Airport could handle SST traffic in the short term.
The second development was the cancellation of the Boeing 2707 SST in 1971. Boeing had dozens of orders for the new plane but decided to kill the project. The cost per passenger of the 2707 was too high to be profitable. This economic factor was compounded when engineers had to reduce the capacity for travelers. Engineering problems meant that the wings, designed to be swept back in flight, had to be fixed, increasing costs.
Without a demand for internal flights due to noise pollution and the spiraling costs of the plane, Boeing ended the project. This ended the demand for SSTs in the United States and, therefore, any new airports justified by the need to support them. Palmdale was one of the first causalities.
Instead of the SST, Boeing concentrated on manufacturing a commercially viable large capacity plane. In January of 1970, the first 747 flew. Early planes transported about 365 people at a much lower cost than the Boeing 2707 was projected to cost per passenger mile. Later versions of the 747 flew about 460 people, and a different adaptation could fly fewer people much further. The capacity for people and cargo made the 747 the SST beater.
Why was the US market so critical to SST travel?
The United States internal market dominated the aviation market in the 1970s. About 3 quarters of passengers traveled internally around the United States. Even though the numbers were low, approximately 500,000 passengers, the US market was critical.
The market is still critical; in 1980, there were 800 Million passengers, 600 Million were US domestic travelers, 75%. By 2000, there were 1.8 Billion passengers, 1.6 of them flying in the US Domestic Market, 88%. Comparable numbers in 2019, immediately before COVID-19, were 4.6 Billion passengers, and 2.7 million flew in the US Domestic market - more travelers but a lower percentage of United States internal flights, 59%.
The US domestic market could not support the SST with the limitations it had and so it was deprioritized and then canceled.
Is there a future for supersonic transportation?
The future of supersonic flights depends on which of two competing forces proves more compelling.
On the one hand, there is interest in new SSTs. Many established companies like Boeing, Gulfstream, and Dassault are working on SSTs. Additionally, private startups like SAI, Aerion, Spike, Boom, and Exosonic have pursued supersonic flight, generally geared towards lower occupancy and greater speed. These smaller planes would be designed for the very rich.
Per environmentalists, “Environmentalists and advocates for economic equality are probably very happy to see the set back to a “toy for the rich”. These “toys” will likely burn more fuel and, if not designed correctly, will create more emissions than sub-sonic aircraft, burn more fuel and create more noise (sonic boom and engine noise around airport communities) than subsonic jets.” (https://www.spikeaerospace.com/state-of-supersonic-flight-2022/)
Is there a future for the Palmdale Airport?
I don’t believe there is any real future in building Palmdale Airport into a major airport. The logistics of getting customers are too difficult, and other local and regional airports have enhanced their capabilities.
This might change in the future if the LA – San Francisco high-speed rail project ever comes to fruition, now planned for 2030. But I don’t see that as happening.
In the near future, the Palmdale Airport will continue to be used to park old airplanes and serve as a set for filming.
[1] At least 4 other airports serve the Los Angeles region, but they are considered lesser regional airports in the Los Angeles Basin. These include Burbank/Hollywood, Long Beach, Ontario, Orange County, and Van Nuys (a private airport).