Jet stream blast 777 to 745mph over Atlantic.

I did the same thing on a 777 within the US last week. flew from just north of ATL to just over RDU in about 25 minutes. ATL-JFK was in less than 1.5 hours.
 
Seems Delta planes are faster than those of rival airlines. Man, they are just the epitome or airlines...
 
CMH_GSE said:
 
Typically, B777s cruise at .84 Mach which is 560 mph, or 490 knots, through the air.  Depending on model, the max speed is either .87 or .89 Mach (590 mph or 512 knots.)  But groundspeed (and "how long does it take to get there?") depends on what that air is doing, even though the airplane (in this case a B777) is still moving through the air at .84 Mach/560mph/490kt.
 
True airspeed (TAS) is the speed at which an airplane is moving relative to the air that surrounds it.
 
Ground speed is the speed of the aircraft in relation to the ground.
 
560mph TAS plus 200mph winds equals 760mph ground speed.
 
NYer said:
Seems Delta planes are faster than those of rival airlines. Man, they are just the epitome or airlines...
That is correct...The Jetstream favors Delta planes because ti fears a lawsuit if other planes are allowed to travel faster!
 
DL planes fly at the same speed.

DL just manages to get them in the air with more reliability than that of its competitors.
 
Structural limits don't matter.  As far as the plane was concerned, everything was normal.  The airspeed was the same.  It didn't get any closer to the speed of sound in relation to the air in which it was moving. 
 
I recall a flight on a TWA 747 (which normally cruised at .86) where the captain said we might set a non-Concorde record of 4:48 on the same route, but a 13 minute ATC hold got us there in 5:01.  It took 8:35 to get back the next day.  I believe that was late seventies or early eighties.
 
A couple of days ago we went ORD-SEA on a 737 in 5:10 block (with deicing) and 4:40 block the next day SEA-JFK.
 
MK  (commercial, multi, instrument and glider rated flight attendant)
 
Most of the public thinks airliners drop out of the sky without power.  They make excellent gliders, although their thermalling characteristics could be better.
 
Glide ratio is a function of lift over drag.  Weight doesn't affect glide performance.  Competition gliders have water ballast tanks to make them heavier for higher speed.  Weight only affects the speed at which the best glide ratio occurs. 
 
Back in 1983 an Air Canada 767 ran out of fuel due to an error in calculating gallons and liters.  The pilot, who had a glider rating, landed the aircraft at an abandoned air force base that had been turned into a drag strip:
 
http://en.wikikpedia.org/wiki/gimli_glider
 
MK
 
Nice analysis...unless, of course, power is lost over the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.
 
MetalMover said:
Nice analysis...unless, of course, power is lost over the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.
 
Oh, so you're saying that if power is lost over the ocean, the airplane doesn't glide?  How does it know it's over the ocean?
 
And, before you even go there:  There have been a few successful, survivable water landings of airliners.  Sully is ismply the most well known because it happened in New York harbor under intense media scrutiny.
 
Busdriver, Sully landed on a calm river in front of millions of people.  If he had been over the open ocean with 30 ft swells it might have turned out differently.  Not to take away from what he did - but he was lucky it happened where it did.
 
MK
 

Latest posts

Back
Top