Pretty cool looking:
http://www.topgear.com/car-news/future-tech/london-la-three-hours-meet-1350mph-private-jet
Guess this was old news from the summer. Maybe I was in World's as I missed it.
Youtube video:
Pretty cool looking:
http://www.topgear.com/car-news/future-tech/london-la-three-hours-meet-1350mph-private-jet
Guess this was old news from the summer. Maybe I was in World's as I missed it.
Youtube video:
Does that mean, hypothetically of course, Obama could play a round of golf in London and NYC the same day (on the day of the summer solstice to maximize daylight)?
Did you read the article?
1350mph
LA to London quoted at 5592 miles.
How is that 3 hours?
They also close the story saying the trip is less than 1 hour.
This is total bullshit! Do we as a society think that being able to go from LA to London in 3 hours is a right or a privilege? These people should be shut down! Can't the Justice Department hit them with an antitrust suit for exploiting aircraft engines or being too much faster than their slower competitors? What ever happened to SOCIAL JUSTICE?!
Political Views: Very Liberal wrote:
This is total bullshit! Do we as a society think that being able to go from LA to London in 3 hours is a right or a privilege? These people should be shut down! Can't the Justice Department hit them with an antitrust suit for exploiting aircraft engines or being too much faster than their slower competitors? What ever happened to SOCIAL JUSTICE?!
...that's not what a Liberal thinks at all... Are you off your meds or something?
You should be banned for your aggressive behavior. It makes me uncomfortable.
Rockets? No thanks. How many space shuttles have blown up after take-off?
Carbon credits included in the tickets so that rich Democrats, especially Hollywood and Silicon Valley millionaires, will now be able to increase their carbon footprints without responsibility.
Buy a ticket. Save the world.
questionabled wrote:
Did you read the article?
1350mph
LA to London quoted at 5592 miles.
How is that 3 hours?
They also close the story saying the trip is less than 1 hour.
they also claim mach 4 to 4.5. (3000+mph). Can't get their facts strait.
Looks like an incredibly unstable plane. and yeah, i'll pass on the rockets too.
libnation wrote:
You should be banned for your aggressive behavior. It makes me uncomfortable.
I need my Safe Space!!!
questionabled wrote:
Did you read the article?
1350mph
LA to London quoted at 5592 miles.
How is that 3 hours?
They also close the story saying the trip is less than 1 hour.
Timezone difference dude.
Not impressed. The technology for an airplane with 1000+ mph speed has been around for about 50 years. Does the SR-71 ring any bells? The trick is making such an endeavor economically feasible. Would 20 rich guys be able to pay the bills for such a limited use, highly-specialized aircraft? I doubt it.
What companies like Airbus do is patent everything, no matter how outlandish, on the off chance they may be able to cash in on said patent in the future. For example, they recently patented a system where the passenger cabin of an airliner detaches from the airframe:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/27/europe/airbus-detachable-cabin/
Any bets on when we'll see this system in place at an airport?
Honda just entered the private jet market
How long from LA to Tokyo?
You know nothing about aircraft. Filing for a patent on a design is a far cry from "to make jet for super rich."
(Interesting fact about Concorde. It couldn't cross the Atlantic at subsonic speeds. Meaning that if it lost the ability to fly supersonic it might run out of fuel 7/8ths of the way across the ocean. There is no way Concorde would be certified for commercial service now, given what was learned about the aircraft from the operation of the small British and French fleets, and the crash at Charles de Gaulle Airport. This said, Concorde was an engineering miracle of the first order given the limitations of technology at the time of its introduction. Many of those limitations still exist, and they will prevent the development of a successor aircraft for a very long time.)
The Concorde could travel close to 1350 mph, so that would not be twice its speed.
questionabled wrote:
Did you read the article?
1350mph
LA to London quoted at 5592 miles.
How is that 3 hours?
They also close the story saying the trip is less than 1 hour.
Yes, the arithmetic is off as 1350 mph is 4.14 hours for 5592 miles. And even with that, it is illegal to fly supersonic over the continental US.
As for the one hour, that is from London to New York. However, even that makes no sense as I am seeing that distance being about 3500 miles. So that would be about 2.5 hours.
luv2run wrote:
questionabled wrote:Did you read the article?
1350mph
LA to London quoted at 5592 miles.
How is that 3 hours?
They also close the story saying the trip is less than 1 hour.
Yes, the arithmetic is off as 1350 mph is 4.14 hours for 5592 miles. And even with that, it is illegal to fly supersonic over the continental US.
As for the one hour, that is from London to New York. However, even that makes no sense as I am seeing that distance being about 3500 miles. So that would be about 2.5 hours.
Ok people.
If the jet took off from London at 3pm and it took 2.5 hours, what time would they arrive in NYC in EST time zone?
rojo wrote:
Pretty cool looking:
http://www.topgear.com/car-news/future-tech/london-la-three-hours-meet-1350mph-private-jetGuess this was old news from the summer. Maybe I was in World's as I missed it.
Youtube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dyrbRGkVKI
Rojo.... why is this news? Do you and your fellow Gen Xers believe all the click-bait articles that the boomers devour? Do you flip through Popular Mechanics/Science and believe those products will come out next week????
That plane is a concept and you're terrible at math.
1350mph? That's the same speed as Concorde.