← Back to Squawk list

81

Flight reaches 801 mph as a furious jet stream packs record-breaking speeds

2년 전 제출됨

A Virgin Atlantic flight from Los Angeles to London peaked at a whopping 801 mph Monday evening 35,000 feet over Pennsylvania. (www.washingtonpost.com) 기타...

F.O. Krupke

75 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Pileits 2년 전 22

25 years ago flying a 747 from Shanghai to Tokyo I had a ground speed of 790 knots for nearly an hour while South of Japan heading to towards Narita.
Because of that extreme ground speed I had to begin my descent 210 miles from our destination.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

dee9bee 2년 전 7

After landing, how long did you have to wait for a gate or stand? :-) It would be a shame to travel 790 knots, only to have the indignity of sitting on a taxiway for forty minutes or so at destination. Little you can do about it, though.

On another site, I read of a few westbound (USA) transcons having to stop for fuel enroute the last few days.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 2

Did you mean mph instead of knots? That speed would take a tailwind in excess of 330 knots

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Steven Macom 2년 전 5

I'm glad I'm not the only weirdo that watches this stuff closely. I'm just south of PHL; last night AFR 65 was clocking 707mph on its way from LAX to Paris, overhead PHL.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

jaymeinen 2년 전 5

I had a groundspeed of 716 knots/823 mph out of Japan in a 787. The most amazing thing about it was that it was perfectly smooth.

Here’s a fun site: https://groundspeedrecords.com

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

SmokedChops 2년 전 9

from Pilot log "whatever MX did at LAX, do it again.."

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Andy Schechter 2년 전 4

Well I was going the other way GS was 288 TAS was 485

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 3

Been there too. Schedule Seattle-Tokyo 10:10...actual 11:30...GS-295k. Almost diverted to Missawa. Boeing 707-320
NO fun. Got stuck once at 290. rougher than h°°ll and had to backtrack/divert to ANC. Chief pilot said that I could have made it. I asked with how much fuel? 5,000#...I spit my coffee all over his desk laughing. Boeing 747-200

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Jeffrey Bryner 2년 전 4

Just looked at it just now and it's still strong. Here's the link. https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/250hPa/orthographic

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bentwing60 2년 전 4

Well this one has a lot of wind and I still like the SR71 drivers request for ground speed and the casual ATC guys response, 2100 over the ground. what was the wind at 750? Oh to have been that kind of Eagle! Hats off.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 2

The wind is pretty much zippo up there.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

John Lohr 2년 전 3

Gee, I had zero ground speed in a 172 south of Klamath Falls next to Mt. Shasta one night in the early days of GPS. Controller said I was below the 5 kt low end of his readout. Spent the night in K. Falls and hit 225 kt gs on the way back to the field. Dead smooth, if you can believe it.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

[This poster has been suspended.]

Thomas Stevens 2년 전 3

Hey, the groundspeeds are getting up so high, they're becoming the aviation version of fish stories!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Bryan Shannon 2년 전 2

I was flying KLAS to KSTL on Monday and flight tracker was saying we were cruising at 695ish MPH several times. I was pretty impressed for a B737-700!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bob denton 2년 전 2

I was on UA 880 IAH to LHR departing on the 25th Feb on a 777. I always carry a Garmin Oregon GPS to track my flights and when I checked on it later in the flight, maximum speed clocked at 740 mph. I thought the GPS had glitched. We were almost an hour early.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

ferminbf 2년 전 2

I’m wondering, why the plane didn’t remain in the “jet streak”?. I mean, is it for technical and aerodynamic reasons or because civil aircraft are not allowed to fly that fast?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 5

At some point you need to leave that wonderful tailwind to land at your destination or it may go one way and you have to go another. Aerodynamically, the plane doesn't know or care what the wind is so pilots try to find the least headwind or most tailwind during flights. The only speed limit up there for civilian aircraft is mach 1 or the speed of sound in true airspeed in still air. There are no limits on the speed you can have across the ground due to favorable winds.

I hope that helps.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

ferminbf 2년 전 2

Thanks for the explanation sir.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 2

Well done, Bill

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 2

My best was in a 707-320, Tokyo to Seattle. Scheduled 8:30 actual 7:40. Top ground speed 724 knots or 833 mph. Wind 260° @ 260 knots. GS was over 700k for the first 4 hours.
Had to wait at the gate for customs and immigration to come to work.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 1

Reported several winds at check points as 265° 265 knots. Had to always repeat it to Tokyo Radio. Wind 265 Diagonal 265...265 @ 265 over

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

anthony geinopolos 2년 전 2

Dang

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 2

Several weeks ago while with Atlanta Center I heard a pilot for a major airline request the controller to update their speed to 615. A couple of minutes later he said,"It looks like WE are closer to 610 so let's go with that." I found the flight in Foreflight and saw this was a 737. My question becomes; Can a pilot get to a major airline without knowing what speed is used in a flight plan or even worse not knowing what true airspeed is?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bentwing60 2년 전 3

Apparently so, and a major US carrier I assume. Might have a bit of trouble with an international ops. class. But it's O.K., some of the new generation of controllers probably don't know the difference either.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

THRUSTT 2년 전 5

I'm hoping my 401K pays off by the time I retire. I'll be transporting myself in a 185 amphib.!!!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

bbabis 2년 전 0

Good for you! I hope it works out even though I’ll be jealous.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

bbabis 2년 전 0

Sure glad I’m getting short. Like Thrustt, lookiing forward to going light and off the radar.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Thomas Stevens 2년 전 1

Me, too. Except by next year we're looking at ADS-B out having to be on the airplane.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Highflyer1950 2년 전 3

Makes you wonder these days doesn’t Bill?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

THRUSTT 2년 전 4

Surely, you didn't ask that question. The quality of most of this generation of pilots, sucks!!!
I have had to correct my son, a 1300 hr. pilot on many an occasion, because of his high time instructors BS instruction!!!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Thomas Stevens 2년 전 1

Hey, maybe they were filed for 600 knots TAS! They taxi fast, too!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Ed Maxwell 2년 전 2

As with most of our US airports, most of the money that goes into them is federal. There is little doubt that an individual, or even a city, does not have the right to destroy what those funds have done. Daley was a criminal who must have believed the old axiom that it is better to ask forgiveness than permission. (Although he did neither)

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Phil Knox 2년 전 1

https://www.windy.com/?200h,43.322,-86.807,4,i:pressure

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Highflyer1950 2년 전 1

I’d have been more concerned with the north/south traffic and the possible shear associated with that strong jet?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

siriusloon 2년 전 0

Cross traffic is routed above (rarely) or below (usually) the jet stream.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Highflyer1950 2년 전 5

That’s fundamentally incorrect. The jet stream varies in height and width and meanders around. The only info ATC has is pilot reports and by that time there is good chance quite a few aircraft have been affected. While it’s true that aircraft experiencing heavy turbulence usually request lower, there still is tremendous co- ordination required from ATC to maintain separation from traffic in all directions. I’ve seen the jet as low as FL230 and as high as FL390 depending on lat/long and hemisphere and trust me you don’t want to cross it at it’s core altitude where shear can be as high as 6 or 7. The lower the number the less shear to be expected. Another indicator is the level of the Tropopause.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

bentwing60 2년 전 1

That's fundamentally incorrect is absolutely correct. In the fun but not so great freight days in 20 something Lears from BRO to CYYZ, or any other car part destination, you knew that 620 or whatever over the ground would be 3 something on the way home. 450 would still be a rough ride, and descending below the bumps meant a stop in MEM. The worst of the bumps are usually in the north quadrant of the jet core but turbulence is where you find it. The Lear guys were usually askin for a higher, it was busy down low.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

siriusloon 2년 전 1

The original post was about aircraft crossing directly through the jetstream, presumably caught by surprise and THAT is what I was responding to. Fundamentally.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Chris Bryant 2년 전 1

Pretty impressive. Never been on a flight with that much tailwind. Would've sucked as headwinds though. That I have been on. Continental Connection (ERJ) from EWR to JAX with a 120kt headwind most of the way down. Made for a very long flight.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Phil Knox 2년 전 1

http://www.askthepilot.com/the-big-push/

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

James Simms 2년 전 1

Hmmmmmm. Flight 33, I presume? (those that are old enough will know what I’m talking about).

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 1

Love the theme song...gives me chills

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Chris B 2년 전 1

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/VIR8/history/20190218/2305Z/KLAX/EGLL/tracklog

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Mark Andrew 2년 전 1

I'm sorry, record wind speeds.
https://www.wcax.com/content/news/Record-breaking-wind-gusts-recorded-on-Mount-Washington-506373531.html

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Mark Andrew 2년 전 1

There were record or near record wind speeds at the summit of Mt. Washington as well.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Elliot Cannon 2년 전 1

I saw 700 knots over Japan in a 747-100. Who still uses MPH?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

YPAD AVIATION 2년 전 1

Everyday you learn something new! This is something I will never forget!!!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

JOHN KOLA 2년 전 1

Ground/ air... They were still zooming!
Nice flight!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Daniel Griscom 2년 전 1

If you're going hell-bent-for-leather in a jet stream that fast, is there any concern that the plane will wander out of the stream (or the stream will wander away from the flight path), causing the plane to violate its air-speed limitations? Alternately, just how high and wide is the jet stream, and how suddenly does the speed change as you move across it?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 5

That's too much to be answered here Daniel. Google will turn up plenty of sites for your own research. As far as planes and the Jetstream goes, there is not a concern of wandering in and out of jet streams per se. Because of the wind speed difference there is turbulence around the Jetstream edges and that is what pilots do not care for.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

SmittySmithsonite 2년 전 1

I was just on a FlightAware map earlier today hovering my mouse pointer over every jet around the Northeast that was headed west, looking for the highest ground speed. Quite a few in the 700 range today!

Here on the ground in MA, it's gusting to 50+.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 4

Directional dyslexia. Don't worry Smitty, a lot of us get it :>)

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

SmittySmithsonite 2년 전 1

HA! I mean EAST, as you know. Ol' brain ain't what it used to be ...

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Joe Vincent 2년 전 1

Am I mistaken, or don't the ATC read-outs display the planes's speeds as knots Ground Speed? So, that "801" in the display would be knots of ground speed, right? Which would equate to @ 920mph,and not the 801mph" indicated in the article.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

bbabis 2년 전 3

I believe the whole story was already converted to mph so as to make it more readable and impressive to those not familiar with knots.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

SmittySmithsonite 2년 전 1

ATC goes by speed through the air in knots, not the speed over the ground.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

SmittySmithsonite 2년 전 1

If I'm wrong on that - someone please correct me. I'm just a student of YouTube aviation videos after all.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Frederick Pack 2년 전 2

Good morning. You file a flight plan with ATC as your true air speed in knots. ATC radar indicates your ground speed in knots to compute separation and possible conflicting traffic

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

SmittySmithsonite 2년 전 1

AHH, I didn't know that - thank you for the heads up, Frederick! I appreciate it.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

LUCIANNA DOMINICO 2년 전 1

Wow

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

DICK WARREN 2년 전 1

Well, GEE WHIZ

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Paul Hurford 2년 전 1

The Weather is a changing. Heaven only knows what other miracles or disasters loom in the future.

I do remember a time on a winter evening in February 1973 returning to MDW airport in a Piper Cherokee Arrow. I checked in when I was over Joliet heading North-East. They asked me to repeat my aircraft type. When I did they told me I had a ground speed of 328 knots. The active runways at MDW was 22's. I started my base turn 2 miles before the West Airport Barrier. It still put me after turning for final nearly a mile away. The traffic below me was moving much faster than I was. It was an interesting landing to say the least. More like flying a helicopter than a fixed wing aircraft.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Patrick Charette 2년 전 1

On Saturday February 23rd on a flight from Dallas to Detroit near the southern tip of Illinois, a 737-700 Southwest jet that was near and in the jet stream, reached the speed of 754 mph according to the graph on flightaware.com at 35.000 feet. I was shocked when I watched this live. I was tracking my wife and granddaughters flight. It was a brief time span but I took a screen shot of this occurrence to have proof of what I saw. I didn't realize this was a common occurrence in the jet stream flow.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Ken McIntyre 2년 전 1

I friend of mine was on a flight like this from Manila. They got to SFO soooo early, they had to circle for a landing slot. Then, wait for a gate.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Buster Chappell 2년 전 1

I feel the need, the need for speed!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

randy3 2년 전 1

It was pretty brutal heading west on I 80 too!ð«

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

s2v8377 2년 전 0

According to FlightAware 695kts airspeed. That's impressive in its self!!!

VIR8/18 LAX-LHR B789 Tail: G-VZIG

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/VIR8/history/20190218/2305Z/KLAX/EGLL

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

siriusloon 2년 전 16

No, it wasn't doing any such thing. Please learn the difference between air speed, which this wasn't, and ground speed, which this was. It was subsonic in the air regardless of what its ground speed was.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Tom Bruce 2년 전 -3

it was going faster than the speed of sound... but not supersonic

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

siriusloon 2년 전 3

The speed of sound is measured relative to the medium in which the object is moving. That aircraft was NOT supersonic because it was not exceeding Mach 1 in the air through which it was flying. The speed of sound also varies with altitude and temperature. If you're basing your statement on sea level Mach 1, then it applies even less in this case to an aircraft at altitude.

You had to be online to post your reply so you could have checked the facts very easily before hitting send. Try this to get started: ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound

I'll narrow it down for you even more: "The ratio of the speed of an object to the speed of sound in the fluid is called the object's Mach number. Objects moving at speeds greater than Mach1 are said to be traveling at supersonic speeds."

Ground speed has nothing to do with airspeed within the portion of the atmosphere in which you're flying and THAT is where your Mach number is determined. Below Mach 1.0 is NOT supersonic.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Andrew Bunker 2년 전 3

Hence why Concorde display to passengers the Mach number and not speed.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Chuck Yeager 2년 전 0

GREAT REPLY. I BROKE THE DAMN THING AND IT NEVER GOT FIXED.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

James Simms 2년 전 0

Keep on truckin.........

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

로그인

이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.

종료

FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?

FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..

종료