JFK to LHR in under 5 hours

[jbhtexas]

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/09/8042...record-crossing-the-atlantic-in-under-5-hours

An Atlantic storm provided favorable jetstream conditions, and the 747 topped 800 MPH (ground speed) at times.

 

[dirtyninety]

That is very fast.

 

[Macloney]

That is very fast.

For a non-supersonic flight it is, but the Concorde was making that flight in 3 hours over 30 years ago. I know there were operational cost issues, but shouldn't flight times be much faster than they are today?

 

[jbhtexas]

For a non-supersonic flight it is, but the Concorde was making that flight in 3 hours over 30 years ago. I know there were operational cost issues, but shouldn't flight times be much faster than they are today?

It costs a lot of money to fly fast. Enough people aren't willing to play those costs.

 

[wxman1]

It costs a lot of money to fly fast. Enough people aren't willing to play those costs.

I did some quick research and if math and data are correct in todays dollars it would be $7,500-16k. I am willing to bet they could sell them (just look at Qatar's A380 suites and what not) but you are right it is a small amount. I can't imagine how much more they would screw up ground flow at JFK now days either.

There is a company by the name of Boom Supersonic that is working on developing a supersonic business jet.

 

[somecyguy]

Even if the flights were more economical, companies still have a major NAMBY (not above my backyard) problem in the sonic booms.

 

[motorcy90]

I did some quick research and if math and data are correct in todays dollars it would be $7,500-16k. I am willing to bet they could sell them (just look at Qatar's A380 suites and what not) but you are right it is a small amount. I can't imagine how much more they would screw up ground flow at JFK now days either.

There is a company by the name of Boom Supersonic that is working on developing a supersonic business jet.

thats the thing though is your flying in basically a small hotel room, compared to economy plus seats on the Concord basically.

 

[deadeyededric]

 

[Cyclones_R_GR8]

My Dad flew the Concorde once. He had just flown overseas and when he checked in at the office they said they had an issue that only he could address and they wanted him to get on the Concorde so he could be back as soon as possible.
Cost about $3,000 and this was probably early 80's.

 

[mctallerton]

I’m more shocked that British Airways is flying 747s.

 

[wxman1]

I’m more shocked that British Airways is flying 747s.

Unfortunately not for much longer.

 

[VeloClone]

I heard this story on NPR this morning. The reporter didn't ask, and the linked story didn't go into fuel consumption. So many times when on a flight and you are ahead of schedule they will cut back a little bit to conserve fuel and reduce their costs. I would be curious to learn if the pilots on this flight were authorized to max out their fuel consumption to try to break the record and how much of a departure from SOP the fuel use was on this flight. It is great to brag about breaking this record, but it would be nice to point out how much of a departure this was to the normal "do as little as possible to just make it on time" approach most of our commercial flights have.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Unfortunately not for much longer.

The 777's victory march continues.

 

[CascadeClone]

Not enough market segment demand to justify $5B in development costs for a new jet. Like the A380, there's a very limited number of routes that would support the flight profile, and in this case you'd have very few passengers willing to pay a 10x premium to save a few hours.

For those of you mentioning the Concorde from 30 years ago- just remember that 50 years ago we could put humans on the moon. Can't do that anymore either...

 

[jcisuclones]

Not enough market segment demand to justify $5B in development costs for a new jet. Like the A380, there's a very limited number of routes that would support the flight profile, and in this case you'd have very few passengers willing to pay a 10x premium to save a few hours.

kind of unrelated, but it’s kind of crazy how airlines are already preparing to phase out the A380. Feels like it just took its first flight yesterday.

 

[somecyguy]

I heard this story on NPR this morning. The reporter didn't ask, and the linked story didn't go into fuel consumption. So many times when on a flight and you are ahead of schedule they will cut back a little bit to conserve fuel and reduce their costs. I would be curious to learn if the pilots on this flight were authorized to max out their fuel consumption to try to break the record and how much of a departure from SOP the fuel use was on this flight. It is great to brag about breaking this record, but it would be nice to point out how much of a departure this was to the normal "do as little as possible to just make it on time" approach most of our commercial flights have.

The article I read said that the engines weren't pushed any harder, the ambient air around the plane accounted for much of the increase. They claim no change in SOP and then downplayed this a bit, by saying that safety is always the priority.

 

[VeloClone]

The article I read said that the engines weren't pushed any harder, the ambient air around the plane accounted for much of the increase. They claim no change in SOP and then downplayed this a bit, by saying that safety is always the priority.

There is a lot of wiggle room in "engines weren't pushed any harder". That can be said even if they are only pushed up to the standard maximum of the range of operation. They can push them to their cruising max to make up time on a flight that is behind schedule or they can have them run slower and more economically when they are near, on or ahead of schedule. In this case I would wager they had the engines maxed out to set the record instead of backing off like they do every other time when they are ahead of schedule.

 

[wxman1]

kind of unrelated, but it’s kind of crazy how airlines are already preparing to phase out the A380. Feels like it just took its first flight yesterday.

Some have already been retired. Airbus developed the super large four engined A380 at the exact same time that Boeing developed the large but efficient and technologically advanced 787.

Now you have the 777X that some proposed variants will be able to carry as many passengers as the A380 and 747 (400+) but only two engines.

The article I read said that the engines weren't pushed any harder, the ambient air around the plane accounted for much of the increase. They claim no change in SOP and then downplayed this a bit, by saying that safety is always the priority.

Correct everything was normal. The plane was moving through the air at the same speed but due to an EXTREMELY strong jet stream at their tail their ground speed reached over 800MPH.

 

[LincolnWay187]

I'm not the most informed on the subject, but i feel like I've read theres a lot of development going on with getting back into Concorde level speed and traveling on the edge of space. Will be cool seeing that stuff materialize.

 

[CascadeClone]

kind of unrelated, but it’s kind of crazy how airlines are already preparing to phase out the A380. Feels like it just took its first flight yesterday.

Used to be the big aircraft went for 25-30 years before being parked or parted out. Now you see a few that get parted out at the 10 year mark, when the first big scheduled maintenance costs hit. They can be worth more as spare parts than the cost of overhauling the engines and landing gear.