Unless we are talking travel outside of our atmosphere there is little economicallly to be gained by travelling any faster than we can already do so
by Airbus or Boeing. The price of fuel and it’s future availability will very much dictate the performance of commercial airliners not supersonic flight.

Are you kidding? No need to go faster? Have you ever sat on an airliner for 14 hours?

The problem is the Pacific. What is needed is a supersonic transport that can carry enough people, and be reasonably fuel efficient for the Pacific routes. If Concorde had had enough range to fly from LA-Tokyo she would still be going today.

Flying across the Atlantic in 3 hours instead of 7 was nice, but something of a luxury. However, if you could have an SST that could fly from LA to Sydney, or Hong Kong, in 5 hours instead of 14 you would sell all the $10K tickets you could print.

Also, Janie is right about the sonic boom problem. Much has been done with modern aircraft design to limit the sonic boom, as compared to the Concorde.

It’s all about the engines. Concorde needed reheat (afterburner) to go supersonic. You need to be able to “supercruise”, just like the F-22 (ie supersonic flight without using afterburners).

OK Out you go! Bad Snapper! Bad Bad Bad!

Oh, forgot…I’m not a moderator.

…hears the first distant sounds of explosions, as Jerry’s bombs begin landing on the airfield. “This is going to be an interesting takeoff”, Skipper thinks to himself.

Advancing the throttle he feels the Merlin respond, as the kite begins to taxi away. No time for a proper pre-takeoff check…flaps are up, trim set, temps and pressures good. As Skipper looks out at the rest of the flight he is amazed to see…

Gwd lwc. Ai hop ddat yw can vzit uz in Cymru (Wales) and ddat yt meiks sens tw yw. Iff yw can ryd ddys, dden yw ar dwing ffaen and wil haf no problems wit de sheep. Yw dw knuw ddat yw can ffnd zom llovelly zweters in Wales! Ah yyez, sheep kom n vveri handi, nnuw and deen.

See, anyone can speak Welsh.

Think I’ll move to Australia with James. Sometimes I feel like a man without a country on this forum 😉

As for you, Mr. Hiscock, have a wonderful time sitting in your little red airplane (from Kansas, isn’t it?) making radial engine noises. BTW, how is your speech coming?

And Rob, you’re right that Genesseo is a wonderful show, but you haven’t seen Legends yet. Besides, there’s no Red Lion just down from Genesseo! Also, congratulations on scoring 92% on the poll. Unfortunately a passing grade of 100% is required to gain entry to the UK. Sorry, not my rules. You know those Brits.

How ’bout France?

Steve

Hi Steve,

Sounds like you’ve already gotten plenty of good advice concerning formation flying. It is the most fun flying I’ve ever done, but it’s also the most dangerous. Don’t fly formation with people you don’t know, don’t fly formation without a proper brief, and don’t fly formation until you’ve had instruction from a qualified instructor.

And just to let you know, my L-39 team spends a GREAT deal of time on breakups and rejoins, as well as pitch outs to landing. We’ve been doing it for years and we still are not happy with them. The perfect formation flight is a goal that is never achieved, but we try every flight.

Have fun, and fly safe!

Steve

A really modern unlimited aerobatics has all symmectrical everything, and really doesn’t give a hoot whether the G is + or – .

Lift vs. Weight (or G). The inverted wing needs to be able to create enough lift to sustain the weight of the aircraft. This is why you see older aircraft, with less sophisticated airfoils, having to pitch the nose up to maintain level flight in the inverted attitude. Same goes for knife edge flight, where the fuselage is generating a small amount of lift as the thrust of the propeller is used to counteract weight and drag.