Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Fast Can The Concorde Fly JFK-LAX?(if Allowed)  
User currently offlineBobcat From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 12063 times:

How fast can the Concorde fly JFK-LAX?
(if allowed to do so... I realize it's unlikely)

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2027 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12041 times:

By, "If allowed" do you mean supersonic mach 2.2? Because that isn't allowed.

Being allowed to fly accross the US would probably depend on it not exceeding mach 1.0 and since it's Stage II only, certain airports lifting some restrictions for it to operate there.

So do you mean allowed operations wise, or operataions wise and supersonic wise?

Oh my, I might have confused more than I helped!

They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineFlyboy36y From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12037 times:

He meant if allowed to fly at maximum speed.

User currently offlineStrickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12033 times:

I think he just means if it was allowed to fly the whole way at its typical supersonic cruising speed (which I'm pretty sure is Mach 2.0, 1330 miles per hour at 57,000 feet).

So let's consult Great Circle Mapper (http://gc.kls2.com/), shall we? (I love this website!)

The Great Circle Mapper says 1:52, which is a very rough estimate since it doesn't take into account the time to takeoff and climb or the prevailing wind (JFK-LAX is against the wind). So it's a bit more complicated than you probably hoped, but I hope this info helps anyway.


User currently offline9V-SVA From Singapore, joined Aug 2001, 1861 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12023 times:

It cannot fly over Mach 1 overland. Ops wise it has the range to do JFK-LAX.


9V-SVA | B772ER
User currently offlineJhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6210 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12001 times:

Using DUAT, I came up with 2:23. This takes the current winds into account, but it made the assumption that the aircraft would climb and descend to/from FL570 at 250 knots before accelerating/decellerating to/from 1330 knots, which probably wouldn't exactly be the case. Of course this doesn't take traffic flow / possible weather delays into consideration.

Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1325 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11891 times:

Years ago Braniff number 1 had a route sharing with British Airways in which a Braniff crew would fly the Concorde from JFK to DFW and return. The maximum speed that they could fly, on this route, was Mach .95.

User currently offlineVc10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1468 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11825 times:

I know it is not Lax but it might give you a feel for the time JFK to Lax

On 3rd August 1996 a Concorde did a round trip New York-Phoenix-New York
cruising at a subsonic speed of Mach 0.95

JFK to Phoenix took 4hrs and 19 minutes chock to chock
Phoenix to JFK took 4hrs and 2minutes chock to chock

JFK -LAX is some 300 miles further so would take approx an extra 30 mins

So my best guess is that Concorde at subsonic speed would take
4.50 chock to chock JFK-LAX

I also have a note that the old VC-10 when it flew JFK- LAX would take about
5hrs 50 mins chock to chock cruising at Mach 0.86, I just wonder how that compares to modern subsonic times

regards little vc10

User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 9027 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11795 times:

I would assume if Mach 2.2 was reached, then it would be able to do the route in 2-2.5 hours. The winds don't make a big difference with Concorde, since JFK-LHR is 3h55 and LHR-JFK is 3h55. Comparitively, BA's 777 on JFK-LHR is 7h05 and LHR-JFK is 7h40. It depends on how fast the plane goes (if you push it to max cruise speed or fly at economy cruise speed), as a BA Concorde has done JFK-LHR (or vice versa) in 2h31.


User currently offlineFlightSimFreak From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 720 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 11731 times:

Quick question about the mach 1 over land rule... If you are flying at a speed that is faster than mach one at altitude, but slower than mach 1 at ground level, then the sonic boom will not be heard or felt. This is true... can the Concorde fly at some sub sonic at ground level but supersonic at altitude speed?

User currently offlineShaun3000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11674 times:

No... because at its altitude it is supersonic so it will make a sonic boom. That will then travel to the ground and be very loud and scare people.

ANd flying at 600 kts at a lower altitude, where it is no super sonic, would do no good as it would be very inefficient fuel-wise. It can't travel as fast at lower altitudes due to the thickness of the air. Its gound speed would be slower and it would use more fuel trying to push it thorugh the thicker air. At 57,000 feet the air is much thinner so it requires LESS thrust to keep it at a HIGHER speed and uses LESS fuel and its ground speed is then much higher.

SO, to answer your question, no, it would not be economical nor as fast as up being supersonic at 57,000.

User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11667 times:


Yes, indeed, that's why it's measured on Mach numbers and not on Indicated Air Speed (IAS). Also, all the nasty aerodynamic behaviour is based on speed relative to Mach 1 (tuck, for example), so at higher altitudes it's the only important airspeed.

"Standard" airliners do the same thing. You can fly a 757 at a far higher speed at altitude than at sea level.

Someone else probably knows the specifics of IAS = M1.0. I think it's somewhere around 340 knots indicated (KIAS) at 41,000'. I do know offhand that 575 KIAS at 70,000' is Mach 3.0 in standard conditions.


User currently offlineMls515 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3081 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 11646 times:


I think what you have in mind is that the groundspeed can be supersonic without a sonic boom if the airspeed is subsonic but the airspeed + the tailwind totals supersonic speed.

User currently offlineBellerophon From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 587 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 11612 times:


An interesting question. I think Vc10 is spot on subsonic, and for what they are worth, my estimates are:

Unrestricted: JFK-LAX 2h 05m airborne / 2h 30m schedule
USA speeds: JFK-LAX 4h 20m airborne / 4h 45m schedule


Not a bad guess, but 250 kts up to FL 570 would be much too slow for Concorde at altitude - as I think you suspected.

The lowest authorised speed (VLA) is 250 kts up to FL410 and 300 kts thereafter, however even these speeds are far below the optimum climb speeds.

If we assume no speed restrictions whatsoever - a big assumption - Concorde’s optimum climb profile would be to achieve 400kts IAS by 5,000 ft, climb at that IAS to around FL320, accelerate to reach 530kts IAS by FL440, climb at that IAS until achieving Mach 2.0, at around FL510, which it would then maintain, in a cruise climb, up to FL600.


Again, I wouldn’t disagree with your estimate, but the maximum cruise Mach number for Concorde is Mach 2.0, and Concorde has never done 2h 31m across the Atlantic.

To date, the fastest Atlantic crossing achieved by Concorde, was on the 07 Feb 1996, Capt Les Scott, JFK-LHR, 2h 52m 59s.

Having talked to the crew about the unusually favourable conditions pertaining on that day, the winds and temperatures, the runways in use, and, perhaps most of all, the invaluable help from ATC on both sides of the pond, this is probably unbeatable.

Probably!  Big grin



User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 11564 times:

Some interesting points of speed comparison.

The SR-71 once flew between NYC and London back in 1974 in 1 hour 54 minutes, an average speed of 1745 miles per hour, or about 2.6 Mach

In 1990, an SR-71 flew from BUR to IAD in 67 minutes. This was a full-blown, get special clearance maximum performance flight. I was still leaving just five miles from BUR almost directly under the departure path and I remember seeing the SR-71 streak off at maximum afterburner. They landed at IAD as hot as possible.

Given then averaged M3.2 for the entire trip, that's about as fast as it will ever be done. The only other aircraft which had that kind of range and performance was the XB-70, which was never 'production' enough for such attempts (a specific B-70 issue was that you couldn't retard below full military power in supersonic flight).


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...
How Much Can DL Expand At JFK? posted Thu Jun 1 2006 16:03:12 by RobertS975
It's Official: Song To Fly JFK-LAX, SFO, SEA posted Thu Jan 27 2005 00:32:01 by Jetbluefan1
How Fast Is The 767 Line Moving posted Tue Jan 4 2005 13:38:28 by Dkny
Song To Fly JFK-LAX/SFO posted Wed Dec 8 2004 01:08:52 by Padcrasher
Will The Concorde Fly Again? posted Thu Mar 18 2004 18:46:21 by A380900
Flight Attendants: How Old Are The A/C You Fly? posted Tue Feb 17 2004 13:32:43 by Andz
How Long Will The Concorde Stay In The Air? posted Thu Dec 5 2002 20:37:40 by LegoLars
Can The A380 Fly Non-stop To LHR From Oz? posted Fri Jun 28 2002 02:48:44 by Ctang
Can The 738 Fly TPE-HNL? posted Wed Mar 27 2002 00:22:37 by 22886
Can The Concorde Make Contrails? posted Mon Feb 4 2002 01:36:10 by ILS