Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Non Concorde Supersonic?  
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 950 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

has an airliner other than the concorde ever broken the sound barrier, perhaps in a test or in a dive? what would happen?

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3057 times:

A 747SP once broke the sound barrier in a dive, and lived to tell about it. I'm not sure about structural damage, but I'm sure there was some.

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3009 times:

any more information on that? time and date? location? airline?

User currently offlineCumulonimbus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2977 times:

I thought I heard of a 707 and a 727 going supersonic before in a dive. Also did'nt the Convair 990 manage to do the same? Also the Tupolev TU-144 broke the sound barrier!! JK

Mike


User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2965 times:

Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 2):
any more information on that? time and date? location? airline?

Here's a picture of the plane, with more info in the remarks:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages



Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineAA61Hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2954 times:

Musta been one helluva flight


Go big or go home
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17015 posts, RR: 67
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2917 times:

A DC-8 has broken the sound barrier during a test, and IIRC so has a Citation X.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2916 times:

Ok, finally found the info on the incident. Looks as though the plane pulled almost 5 G's!  crazy 

http://www.aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19850219-0

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2885 times:

Plenty have, including the 767.

Poor SU-GAP  Sad


User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2861 times:

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 8):
Plenty have, including the 767.

Poor SU-GAP

That one did not end as nicely as the 747 unfortunately.  Sad

While on the subject of SU-GAP, here's an eerie picture I found in the db. Read the remarks.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael F. McLaughlin



Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5566 posts, RR: 36
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2842 times:

Actually real supersonic airliners were only the Concorde and the Tu-144 but the latter never went into service, after two crashes (I think one was at the Paris Airshow in Le Bourget).

User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Quoting ZRH (Reply 10):
Tu-144... never went into service

Despite crash in Paris in 1973, Tu144 was in regular passenger service from Nov, 1977 till June, 1978. 55 flights, 3200+ passengers carried. Another crash during test flight in May 1978 caused withdrawal from service.


User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2488 times:

Quoting RIX (Reply 11):
Despite crash in Paris in 1973, Tu144 was in regular passenger service from Nov, 1977 till June, 1978. 55 flights, 3200+ passengers carried. Another crash during test flight in May 1978 caused withdrawal from service.

I've heard this before, and have wondered how you qualify regular passenger service inside the old Soviet Bloc. It's not like they could have paying customers really. Wouldn't this have been more of a regularly scheduled shuttle for Politboro and high ranking party members?

Not disputing it was in service, just wondering at what point it goes from "passenger service" to "private government shuttle"...after all, most people wouldn't call AF1 flights "regular passenger service" even though it spends a lot of time in the air...



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2431 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

The Citation X Mmo = 0.92, and Md = 0.99. During envelope expansion and flutter testing, the Citation X slightly exceeded Mach 1. A T-38 was used as a chase plane and collaborated the airspeed. Cessna renamed one of their executive conference rooms the Mach One conference room as a result of this event.


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineChazzerguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 277 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2254 times:

The SP that went supersonic is N4522V, which is still flying today... However, it still carries the scars of its dive...

I don't recall the precise numbers, but both wings are slightly bent upward... I think one is bent about half a degree, and the other slightly more than one degree. Don't quote me on those numbers... But after the incident it was determined the bend could not be corrected, but was not bad enough to significantly impact its safety or performance.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17015 posts, RR: 67
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2213 times:

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 12):
Quoting RIX (Reply 11):
Despite crash in Paris in 1973, Tu144 was in regular passenger service from Nov, 1977 till June, 1978. 55 flights, 3200+ passengers carried. Another crash during test flight in May 1978 caused withdrawal from service.

I've heard this before, and have wondered how you qualify regular passenger service inside the old Soviet Bloc. It's not like they could have paying customers really. Wouldn't this have been more of a regularly scheduled shuttle for Politboro and high ranking party members?

Why could they not have been paying? The Tu-144 carried mail and pax.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineCornish From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 8187 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2202 times:

Wasn't the CV990 Coronado the quickest of the regular jet airliners (non-Concorde and Tu144)? No idea if it ever went supersonic during any tests, but certainly not in regular use.


Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4368 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2181 times:

How about 744s flying Eastbound TATL or TPAC on a day with strong tailwinds - those suckers zoom across the ocean like none other...


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2154 times:

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 9):
That one did not end as nicely as the 747 unfortunately. Sad

While on the subject of SU-GAP, here's an eerie picture I found in the db. Read the remarks.

wow!! amazing shot. that's got to be a one of a kind event. anyone else have a photo of two unrelated jets in the same frame that both crashed?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17015 posts, RR: 67
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2133 times:

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 17):
How about 744s flying Eastbound TATL or TPAC on a day with strong tailwinds - those suckers zoom across the ocean like none other...

Having a high ground speed due to strong tailwinds does not change the Mach number.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineSpike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1170 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2127 times:

Probably not. Its kind of a rare ocurence. Mind you, someone must have a pic of the KLM/TWA 747 double Tenerife cash for your eddification.

User currently offlineChazzerguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 277 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

The CV-990 was "transonic" as I recall... Although I am unclear as to what that means exactly. I think that means there are areas of airflow over the wing that do exceed the speed of sound, while the plane itself remains subsonic...

But I could be wrong about that. Anyone know?


User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1854 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

THe only civil airliner that was taken supersonic deliberately AFAIK was a Conway powered DC-8-43 (destined for Canadian Pacific) by its test crew, led by Douglas test pilot Bill Magruder (who came up with the idea) on AUgust 21, 1961. It reached Mach 1.012 in a dive from 52K feet and recovered nicely, albeit with some buffeting during recovery.

The airplane was retired in 1980 with 70k hours on the clock.

It was, incidently, escorted by Chuck Yeager in an F-104 on this flight out at Edwards AFB.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5566 posts, RR: 36
Reply 23, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1790 times:

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 17):
How about 744s flying Eastbound TATL or TPAC on a day with strong tailwinds - those suckers zoom across the ocean like none other...

Supersonic is more than mach 1. This means airspeed and has nothing to do with groundspeed and tail winds. I remember, in the 1980ties a Swissair's 747-300 had less than 6 hours between JFK and ZRH because of strong jet-stream. It is even possible that the airspeed is lower with tailwinds than with headwinds, but the groundspeed is higher.


User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1664 times:

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 12):
I've... wondered how you qualify regular passenger service inside the old Soviet Bloc.

- same as everywhere else. People buy tickets and fly.

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 12):
Wouldn't this have been more of a regularly scheduled shuttle for Politboro and high ranking party members?

- no. I've no idea why would Politburo (22 people) or high ranking party members fly from Moscow to Alma-Ata and back once a week (with cancellations)...

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 12):
most people wouldn't call AF1 flights "regular passenger service"

- nobody would call Tu144 "Soviet AF1". It never replaced governmental Il62.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Concorde Supersonic Over Canada posted Thu Jan 8 2004 18:59:46 by Olympus69
BA Film-Concorde:Thank You For 27 Supersonic Years posted Sat Feb 11 2006 01:30:27 by Concorde001
"Supersonic Bust: The Story Of The Concorde" posted Thu Oct 30 2003 02:41:32 by N844AA
If Supersonic=no No, Why Concorde Ok? posted Tue Aug 5 2003 19:04:40 by GotAirbus
Concorde Non-reving? posted Sat May 3 2003 01:32:06 by FLY777UAL
Non-Revving On Concorde posted Wed Jan 16 2002 01:17:02 by TurbineBeaver
Why No Concorde Over-land Supersonic Flights? posted Wed Apr 5 2000 21:21:01 by Mason
Which Is The Fastest, NON-supersonic Airliner ? posted Mon Jan 3 2000 06:53:55 by HP-873
Supersonic Flight, the Concorde posted Thu Feb 25 1999 22:43:44 by Daala
Concorde VS The 747? posted Tue Dec 19 2006 19:33:49 by Chachu201