Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 91

Thread: GlobalFlyer: Around the World in 67 hours, 1 minute

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by A Thousand Pardons
    He can glide that far, right?
    If he's still high enough and atmospheric conditions aren't too bad, indeed he can.

    Will he make it?? (that remark makes it sound like a cheap TV quiz, doesn't it? )

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,546
    Curiously, he is actually flying away from Salina now.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by cyswxman
    Curiously, he is actually flying away from Salina now.
    He's pushing his luck Or WAY too much tailwind blew him away?

    Seriously, I guess he's just following the best winds for the final part of the trip.

  4. #64
    MSNBC has some great video (free, no bandwidth trouble)

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    Yes, their weatherman just remarked Fossett rode the 'Pineapple Express' in from Hawaii and that the plane could land within 1,000' of runway...

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,271
    Landing on CNN right now!

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,345
    =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,271
    He's back.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,546
    Landed safely. 19:49 UTC. =D> =D> =D>

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,271
    The announcer on CNN wanted to know what the big red thingy was on top of the fuselage. ops:

  11. #71
    Oh my God, they lost his luggage!

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    He was the luggage! =D> =D> =D>

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Cylinder
    The announcer on CNN wanted to know what the big red thingy was on top of the fuselage. ops:
    Nooooooo

    "that red thing is a special device, which sucks in fuel and burns it away, which reduced the aircraft wieght and hence increases the performance. In fact this unit is so good, it had digested almost all fuel by the end of the trip, hence creating a very low weight plane. Obviously this unit needs a lot of cooling air, as can be seen by the fan it incorporates". :roll:

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,382
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas
    Quote Originally Posted by Cylinder
    The announcer on CNN wanted to know what the big red thingy was on top of the fuselage. ops:
    Nooooooo

    "that red thing is a special device, which sucks in fuel and burns it away, which reduced the aircraft wieght and hence increases the performance. In fact this unit is so good, it had digested almost all fuel by the end of the trip, hence creating a very low weight plane. Obviously this unit needs a lot of cooling air, as can be seen by the fan it incorporates". :roll:
    =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

    Oh man, i need to know who dared to ask that one on camera!

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    687

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,550
    Judging by the signage on the red thing it was an advertising billboard that they reluctantly carried around the world. Extra weight you know...

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    Yeah, but they probably got the Williams International engine for nada. Seems they have some fairly ambitious plans:
    "...Last fall under a competitive procurement program among jet engine companies, NASA selected Williams International to join NASA in a $100 million cooperative effort to revitalize the once-flourishing light aircraft industry..."

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,550
    Not gonna happen. The light aircraft industry has been killed by the insurance industry.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,115
    Quote Originally Posted by Evan
    Not gonna happen. The light aircraft industry has been killed by the insurance industry.
    Maybe only indirect. The true culprit may be liability with absurd sums when something happens.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by kucharek
    Quote Originally Posted by Evan
    Not gonna happen. The light aircraft industry has been killed by the insurance industry.
    Maybe only indirect. The true culprit may be liability with absurd sums when something happens.
    That's the one indeed.

    "You made a plane that doesn't work: It flew into a mountain."

    "Person 1: Your engine makes noise A dB, you should stay under B dB". "OK fixed: under bdB now". "Person 2: your engine makes too much noise, it should stay under C dB" etcetc. Result: a very expensive and less powerful, making the 172 effectively an expensive three seater...

    The examples are numerous.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,382
    Quote Originally Posted by kucharek
    Quote Originally Posted by Evan
    Not gonna happen. The light aircraft industry has been killed by the insurance industry.
    Maybe only indirect. The true culprit may be liability with absurd sums when something happens.
    Agree, insurance is all well and fine for covering what its intended to cover, the torte lottery needs to be shut down.

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,550
    The "lottery" is easily fixed. In Canada you can sue for actual damages plus a maximum of $300,000 for "pain and suffering" and punitive damages. That's it. The maximum is rarely awarded. What sucks is that it doesn't make our rates cheaper as they are based on US claims experience.

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,382
    Quote Originally Posted by Evan
    The "lottery" is easily fixed. In Canada you can sue for actual damages plus a maximum of $300,000 for "pain and suffering" and punitive damages. That's it. The maximum is rarely awarded. What sucks is that it doesn't make our rates cheaper as they are based on US claims experience.
    It would be nice to have that kind of logic applied on this side of the border.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    Hadn't considered the insurance/liability issue before, not owning a plane, but good point in light of my auto insurance rates. Yikes!
    While 'Space' is what most people associate with NASA, the 'Aeronautics' seems to be getting the short end:
    February 27, 2005
    "...Less than 6 percent of NASA's $16.2 billion budget for 2005 will be spent on aeronautics. Although research funding already has been slashed by almost 60 percent since 1994, even deeper cuts are planned..."

  25. #85
    A sidenote concerning that figures is that aeronautics research often is cheaper than space research, which needs to be taken into account.

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,115
    Quote Originally Posted by sarongsong
    Hadn't considered the insurance/liability issue before, not owning a plane, but good point in light of my auto insurance rates. Yikes!
    While 'Space' is what most people associate with NASA, the 'Aeronautics' seems to be getting the short end:
    February 27, 2005
    "...Less than 6 percent of NASA's $16.2 billion budget for 2005 will be spent on aeronautics. Although research funding already has been slashed by almost 60 percent since 1994, even deeper cuts are planned..."
    No Aeronautics or Science Agency

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    Great site, kucharek!---still chuckling:
    "...WARNING! This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something..."

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    323
    I wonder how far that thing could have covered while gliding in ground effects. I didn't see the landing, but I heard they used a small chute to slow it down before it even got on the ground.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    "...The mystery of the missing fuel...it was lost overboard due to an error in the placement of fuel vents, Fossett said. When the air in the tanks expanded at high altitudes, fuel instead of air was vented overboard...If you're in Oshkosh, Wis., on Tuesday, July 26...catch....GlobalFlyer, SpaceShipOne, and White Knight all together...if you can't wait...The Virtual Virgin GlobalFlyer..."
    http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#189407

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,088
    July 29
    "...[Fossett] announced a new plan to take the aircraft around the world again, and then keep going...The fuel vents were in the wrong place, and now they have been moved...engineers have told him the aircraft is capable of nonstop flight of up to 29,000 miles..."

Similar Threads

  1. comparing 2.1 hours vs 7.8 hours exp.time
    By stargazer_7000 in forum Astrophotography
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2007-Aug-30, 09:49 PM
  2. A Book a Minute
    By Josh in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2005-Sep-14, 02:13 AM
  3. Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer
    By BigJim in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2005-Mar-01, 03:43 PM
  4. Now wait a minute!!
    By vonmazur in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 2004-Feb-29, 08:06 AM
  5. Wait a minute...
    By Psionyx in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 2003-May-19, 05:04 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •