Dreamliner sets a new record.

A Norwegian Dreamliner has set a new record for a trans Atlantic crossing in a subsonic plane on its way from Jfk to London Gatwick . It managed to do the flight in 5 hours 13 minutes thanks to really good tailwinds. link

The concord was able to traverse the Atlantic in 3.5 hours.



not to take away from the post, but we've long since beat it.

a reply to: FoxStriker

SUBSONIC. Of course we have beat it in supersonic aircraft.

a reply to: FoxStriker

Which is utterly irrelevant when talking about almost any other aircraft.

a reply to: Woody510

And the Daily Fail fails again.

Despite the speed achieved being more than the speed of sound, the flight didn't actually go supersonic because the plane was travelling in a body of air that was already fast-moving, which increased the velocity needed to break the sound barrier.

Uhm, no. They weren't supersonic because the 776 mph was in ground speed, not airspeed.

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

true true... yet they reached a speed that would break subsonic spead

a reply to: Zaphod58

Haha come on when you saw what paper it was you knew there'd be factual inaccuracies. Can't believe no one has commented on the captains name though

originally posted by: Zaphod58

Uhm, no. They weren't supersonic because the 776 mph was in ground speed, not airspeed.

LOL sheesh, this is the same with alot of the medical stuff I see all wrong. This is what happens when you journalist by wiki

a reply to: Woody510

Of course I did, I just didn't expect it to be that bad. Honestly I didn't even notice the name until you said something.

FO: Harold! Dam we're going fast!
Capt: Like I haven't heard THAT before.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Not just Dam but van Dam

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Woody510

And the Daily Fail fails again.

Despite the speed achieved being more than the speed of sound, the flight didn't actually go supersonic because the plane was travelling in a body of air that was already fast-moving, which increased the velocity needed to break the sound barrier.

Uhm, no. They weren't supersonic because the 776 mph was in ground speed, not airspeed.

What Mach number would they have been at? Can you explain further? Groundspeed vs airspeed? Educate us.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler

What Mach number would they have been at? Can you explain further? Groundspeed vs airspeed? Educate us.

NASA has a great reference on relative velocities

www.grc.nasa.gov...

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Captain Van Dam told MailOnline Travel: 'When flying we record groundspeed - like a car travelling on the ground - and airspeed due to the varying wind speeds experienced during flight. The highest groundspeed during the flight was 776mph, more than the speed of sound, however, airspeed is actually slower than groundspeed. 

'Therefore, our airspeed was at Mach 0.85, below Mach 1.0 needed to go supersonic and break the sound barrier.' 

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Airspeed is measured by the aircraft by using air going through the pitot tubes on the nose. The pitot tube has sensors and goes to the computer and it's able to measure the speed. You have several different types of airspeed. You have Knots Indicated Airspeed (KIAS), which is what shows up on the instrument, and True Airspeed (TAS), which is corrected airspeed.

Ground speed exactly what it says, and is the speed the aircraft is travelling over the ground. It's affected both positively and negatively by wind. Small aircraft have actually measured a negative ground speed, because the headwinds were so strong. They were still flying just fine, and moving, but their speed over the ground was actually backwards according to their ground speed. Get a tailwind, and you can be breaking Mach 1 in ground speed, as they did here, but your actual airspeed is still well below the aircraft limits. In this case, they were actually flying at Mach 0.85, which is pretty close to standard cruising speed.

Has anyone flown with Norwegian? I've heard really good things about them also the big benefit of them being cheap as well

a reply to: Woody510

Everything I've ever heard about them has raved about how good their service is.

a reply to: Zaphod58


Wow I can't believe those prices either and it includes all the taxes as well. Roll on economical 2 engine planes I say

a reply to: Woody510

Yeah, US airlines are pissed that they got their certificate for US flights. They were offering some insane costs from airports that don't see much traffic. They were planning $69 flights to Europe from Stewart in New York, and from Rhode Island, and $99 flights from a few other airports.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I've seen sign planes over Miami Beach just hover in place because of the winds.

It's bizarre site to see.

a reply to: Zaphod58

After the taxes they're basically paying that return flight I just looked at absolutely crazy