Started By
Message

re: Would you fly on a supersonic plane? Supersonic travel making a comeback...

Posted on 6/24/14 at 7:56 pm to
Posted by 777Tiger
Member since Mar 2011
73856 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 7:56 pm to
quote:

What Mach do you cruise the 777 and at MTOW standard day what will she climb to.




.84-.85 is pretty standard, the -200 can leave the gate at 750K, the -300, at 777K, both need to burn 2k before takeoff

ETA: 430 is the max for certification, but the computer figures out the most efficient altitude
This post was edited on 6/24/14 at 7:59 pm
Posted by just1dawg
Virginia
Member since Dec 2011
1483 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 8:56 pm to
Supercruise is old hat for commercial airliners--Concorde did it at M2.02 without reheat (the Tu-144 needed afterburners all the time because its engines were much less efficient).

It was only with the F-22 that "supercruise" really seemed like a new thing. It wasn't, it was just new for American fighter jets.
Posted by 777Tiger
Member since Mar 2011
73856 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 9:51 pm to
quote:

Supercruise is old hat for commercial airliner

supercruise, i.e. sustained supersonic flight, is not old hat for commercial airliners, the technology is there, there demand for it, as yet, is not, the Concorde was a cool machine, but a tremendous money loser
Posted by LaFlyer
Member since Oct 2012
1043 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 9:52 pm to
quote:

777Tiger
Would you fly on a supersonic plane? Supersonic travel making a comeback... quote: What Mach do you cruise the 777 and at MTOW standard day what will she climb to. .84-.85 is pretty standard, the -200 can leave the gate at 750K, the -300, at 777K, both need to burn 2k before takeoff ETA: 430 is the max for certification, but the computer figures out the most efficient altitude

Nice! We run about the same Mach .82-.85 usually the latter number and at ISA can usually go to 430 or burn off 5000 lbs then go to 450 on international run constant .82 and usually never higher than 430 over the tracks.
Posted by Topwater Trout
Red Stick
Member since Oct 2010
67589 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 9:54 pm to
Around the world in a hour and a half would be awesome...3-4 hour trips suck
Posted by 777Tiger
Member since Mar 2011
73856 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 9:58 pm to
quote:

usually never higher than 430 over the tracks.

aren't the tracks 290-410?
anyhow, sounds like a sweet whip, what are you flying?

ETA: another cool thing about the 777, is that, it's EOW is about what the MGTOW for a 767-300 is, and for about another 2k per side, you're basically carrying its weight, awesome airplane
This post was edited on 6/24/14 at 10:11 pm
Posted by LaFlyer
Member since Oct 2012
1043 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 10:10 pm to
quote:

777Tiger Would you fly on a supersonic plane? Supersonic travel making a comeback... quote: usually never higher than 430 over the tracks. aren't the tracks 290-410? anyhow, sounds like a sweet whip, what are you flying?


Yes they are 290-410 summertime we can't go over the top winter we can. Gulfstream 450 for the numbers previous and in the G5 we run .86 or so and always mid to high 40s
Posted by 777Tiger
Member since Mar 2011
73856 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 10:21 pm to
quote:

Gulfstream 450 for the numbers previous and in the G5 we run .86 or so and always mid to high 40s

sweet, I've got a friend that took an early retirement a few years ago, thought he was going to get familiar with his bass boat, got tracked down by another guy that left early, and got recruited to fly a G-650, from what he's told me about it, it's a pretty fine machine, corp. a/c historically have always been way ahead of the airlines(when I was a new Captain on the 727, we had 2 VOR's and and ADF,) it's only been the last couple of decades to where the cheapskates that run the airlines didn't have any choice but to buy the technology
Posted by LaFlyer
Member since Oct 2012
1043 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 10:44 pm to
777Tiger

quote:

sweet, I've got a friend that took an early retirement a few years ago, thought he was going to get familiar with his bass boat, got tracked down by another guy that left early, and got recruited to fly a G-650, from what he's told me about it, i


The G650 is incredible, I actually did a walk through inspection on one last week for a buddy who got stuck in Russia. It weighs in a shade under 100k so unlike the BBJ it can go into Teterboro and other airports with weight limits. It's significantly wider than the other Gulfstreams and very efficient. The type rating is 92k which is also significantly more than other Gulfstreams as well. The machine I am so glad to have been able to fly is the GIII, literally climbs 4000 ft a minute or more into the high thirties, then 3000 ft to 450 and you start pulling the throttles back because .87 is coming fast. I flew both the stage. II and III versions, on most trips you had two altitudes 430 and 450. They're going away quickly. I handled purchase for one in 2007 for 8.5 mill and sold it last year for 400k painful. And it was a stage III go anywhere in the world airplane. Others most just scrap out.
Posted by 777Tiger
Member since Mar 2011
73856 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 10:53 pm to
quote:

Others most just scrap out.

that's sad, I flew a 727 to the desert a few years back, it was in immaculate condition, hush kits, everything, the motors weren't even spun down when they literally, started chopping things off of it, I had to tell them to at least wait until I was gone, sucked
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108189 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 11:01 pm to
Not only yes, but frick yes. That would be awesome, and if I went down, I'd be doing something I'd love doing, so so what?
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108189 posts
Posted on 6/24/14 at 11:03 pm to
quote:

Anyone think Virgin or SpaceX or one of these companies are crazy enough to strap a scamjet to one of their jets and get people going hypersonic (mach 2+)?



They're planning on going even faster than that. They're planning on a plane going from London to Sydney in 2 hours by going into orbit and being thrust around the planet. That's my dream flight right there.
This post was edited on 6/24/14 at 11:04 pm
Posted by FredsGotSlacks
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2008
815 posts
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:10 am to
I didnt know we had any pilots on the board, Who do you fly the triple for? Im with expressjet on the ERJ and I love when we deadhead on the 777, I used to get one between IAH-EWR every now and then but it seems like most of the hub to hub stuff is bus and 73/75 nowadays.
Posted by LaFlyer
Member since Oct 2012
1043 posts
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:33 am to
OMLandshark


quote:

They're planning on going even faster than that. They're planning on a plane going from London to Sydney in 2 hours by going into orbit and being thrust around the planet. That's my dream flight right there.


The concept is intriguing of course, but the physiological factors to me seem to be the hurdle that will keep it from coming to fruition. If you consider the pressurization system necessary to comfortably and safely maintain cabin altitude, heat generated through the crafts movement, the amount of radiation passengers and crews will be exposed to and that in the event of cabin pressure loss blood will literally boil at the altitudes being flown it just doesn't appear doable. Also at these speeds, angle of ascent and descent along with acceleration and deceleration forces will be extreme and make for a vomit comet ride.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram