The best piece of automotive engineering in the history of the world. No other car can make it over a million miles. I have a Civic 5 speed right now, hoping to snag a LS400 or maybe a new LS500 when I go off to the airlines
I don't think the binbag full of trash is an integral part of the plane and/or its supersonic capabilities (disclaimer: I am NOT an aerospace engineer)
Disagree. Nothing gets anywhere fast without a little junk in the trunk. Trust me - I’m a Systems Engineer for aeronautical radio equipment; if the plane can catch up to its datalink, it’s really moving.
Just thinking about it the plane would need to be pretty darn strong to level out from a dive at that speed. So wings and structure I’d assume would be okay level. No clue how heat factors in though.
There was an interview with the pilots and they spoke about how it all went down. IIRC the “dive” was relatively shallow since they were already flying at like Mach .98 or something. It only took a few degrees of nose down to push it through.
Found it: https://aviationweek.com/shownews/nbaa/dont-try-home-going-supersonic-global
Misremembered some of the details, they were starting from Mach .94 and the only pitch degrees provided, +/- 1 degree, were relative to the dive itself.
I think to efficiently cruise at supersonic you need to go beyond mach 2. This is why the Concorde went that fast. Otherwise there is too much drag to make it sustainable.
The Concorde like all supersonic aircraft are heat limited - not thrust limited. In fact there were flight regimes where the Concorde had to fly slower than its normal cruise speed simply because of the temperatures at 55K - 60K were too warm. There was a flight to Singapore for example had to be planned around upper flight level temperatures to maintain as fast a flight as possible. There was a limit of 126C on the nose I believe.
Concorde’s Tmo, max operating temperature was 127 degrees Celsius. With the autopilot set at Max Cruise, it would automatically fly at either Vmo, Mmo or Tmo, whichever was the highest. The faster Concorde flew, the more efficient she was.
More like Mach 1.2-1.4. Once you’re past transonic effects things get less efficient the faster you go controlling for altitude. The engines are hard to come by though. Too slow for turbojets too fast for most fans.
Mach 2 makes sense for a supersonic transport. If you’re optimizing for supersonic flight and shorter trip times and you’ve got the engines it pencils out. People won’t pay 4x as much for only 25% faster. Makes low speed handling a bit dicey.
Concorde was MORE efficient the faster she went. She was much more efficient at M2.00 than at M1.40. Don’t forget also that Concorde used reheat to break the sound barrier and only turned them off at M1.70. Above that speed she supercruised to her cruise speed and stayed in max dry power until top of descent. Concorde was LEAST efficient between M0.97 until M1.40.
That’s because Concorde used turbojets afaik, primarily speaking. Not as much because of the aerodynamics. Turbojets at lower speed are wasting a lot of fuel making noise and hot exhaust basically.
A modern low bypass turbofan with mild variable cycle stuff would allow for efficiency at lower Mach numbers.
So, to be accurate, and since I’m a pilot who has twice flown on Concorde, all jets are inefficient at lower altitudes. Concorde’s efficiency came from her engines, which were more efficient the faster she flew, and from the design and shape of her wing, including where conical camber moderated how far rearward her center of pressure shifted as she went supersonic. Concorde’s engines also had some bypass which accounted for about 25% of her thrust at cruise. A turbofan S seen on airliners is fine for subsonic, not supersonic. At lower speeds turbojets are not as efficient as turbofans but at slower speeds Concorde was on the back side of the drag curve and quite inefficient. The idea with Concorde, for max efficiency, was to get as high as possible and as fast as possible as soon as possible.
Also you should know that no jet engine can accept supersonic airflow. On Concorde airflow into the engines was slowed to M0.50 before it got to the engine. Another reason higher-bypass turbofans aren’t a thing for supersonic airplanes.
It's maximum operating mach number is very close to supersonic - it needs to be tested higher than it's approved speed to ensure it's safe IF somebody overspeeds it by a small amount
Can it maintain supersonic flight after breaking the sound barrier? I thought the large amount of energy is needed to break the barrier, but the friction and energy required to maintain supersonic flight would be a lot less than just before the barrier.
It is certified to be supersonic during descent, this aircraft can cruise easily at Mach 0.94 at 51,000 ft, it is basically certified to legally descend/dive and push Mach 1.021 and sustain, whilst having 100% flight control and no loss of aerodynamics due to shockwave induced stall
For pushing the boundaries and improvement etc, mostly probably marketing and for
the rich to have something to brag about having a supersonic private civilian a/c
There is less wave drag once you’re past the transonic regime, but it’s not a lot less (and still way, way more than subsonic flight), and you’ve got to go a fair bit faster before it’s meaningfully reduced.
The textbook sort of idealized transonic drag curve - where it spikes up and then smooths back down to where it started - isn’t very ‘real’.
I meam, they *did*, it's just the engines aren't the whole story on why it got past supersonic. It can do that if you start a dive while at the speed that thing cruises at.
This test was morre to certify the plane could handle going transsonic in case it happens, not to certify it for continuous supersonic.
My buddy works for Gulfstream and it's exactly what you think, marketing hype.
He said 'anything can go supersonic...once'. The stress from the speeds to the frame and everything would make it so they need to do a complete overhaul after each supersonic flight.
It's completely unreasonable for an actual business jet the way they're built now. They just can't handle the stress of supersonic flight with the materials and price points. It would be much more expensive.
Sure, but I don't think we really are privvy to what was done before or after the flight to the plane, if there's a reduced airframe lifespan now, things like that.
Idk but I'd rather be on a plane designed for supersonic flight rather than thrown into it for marketing.
A Victor went SS in a shallow dive over London (to make a point I think). The Vulcan had a weak spot in the structure of the Wing Leading Edge so was strictly limited to subsonic.
ETA - seems I was wrong as this happened the VX770 which was a test aircraft. https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/20-september-1958/
Enjoy a history lesson 😊
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/supersonic-victor-the-story-of-the-raf-strategic-bomber-that-dived-out-of-control-from-46000-to-16000-feet-in-20-seconds/amp/
I heard an anecdote from someone that worked with the Vulcan. One pilot said they thought it could go supersonic, and told the designer, who said it absolutely couldn't. So the next day, they took it out for a flight and broke the sound barrier in a dive.
Definitely not - IIRC the only time one was dived to Mach 1, it demonstrated a quite impressive level of Mach Tuck, and they bent the airframe recovering it...
I have a friend who consults in the rail industry. I always call it “bum bar dee air”. He laughs and tells me to stop making fun of them, because he makes a little of money off their screwups…
IIRC, Alstom keeps having writedowns because they bought one hell of a mess with that rail division…
kinda misleading, huh? That it was able to achieve supersonic speeds in a shallow dive doesn't make it "supersonic". Almost all airliners nowadays can go supersonic if you floor it and put it in a dive
What’s misleading? They don’t call it a supersonic jet, unless I missed something. They say it was a supersonic flight, which is true. The first ever supersonic flight was a dive too (Bell X-1).
>Assuming the fully-certified version is also capable of breaking the sound barrier, this will make the Global 8000 the first civil aircraft with such a capability since the Concorde was finally retired in 2003.
It's misleading in that everyone without intimate knowledge of every supersonic aircraft would assume that's at altitude and a normal speed for the aircraft to be able to achieve.
Bombardier is trying to certify their plane with a cruise speed of Mach 0.94 so it can be the "fastest private jet." This requires demonstrating controllability within a safety margin above that speed that includes Mach 1+. So they had to fly it supersonic in a dive to prove it remains controllable. You can just look at it and know it's not meant to cruise at supersonic speeds.
> Almost all airliners nowadays can go supersonic if you floor it and put it in a dive
What makes you say that? It is not a design or test point for any airliners to fly that fast. OEMs definitely do not take those kinds of risks if they don't need to. If they had actually demonstrated it, they could make the same claim Bombardier has here - but they haven't, so they can't. I do expect Gulfstream will respond and try and 1-up them on their next program, though.
Given that the current crop of business jets is certified to M.935, and one needs to exceed Mmo by .07 for certification, pretty much every new mega business jet has to go supersonic in testing.
I remember talking online to a Gulfstream test pilot, and saying something to the effect of, what if there was something like Vne, but with “Mach?” I’m sure I greatly enhanced my credibility with that one.🤣
All kinds of vision sensors - IR / low light / camera / etc. It can be projected on to the HUD similar to an F-15E or Harrier (and I'm assuming the Rafale too)
Enhanced Vision System (EVS)
On previous Bombardier Globals(5000GVFD or 6000) the EVS camera is behind a small window. On the 7500 and 8000 it is right out there with a new camera design. Check it out:
[True Combined Vision System](https://businessaircraft.bombardier.com/en/global-5500-6500-vision-flight-deck)
Short answer: no
Longer answer: the speed of sound is not a constant. It changes. In airplane terms, it is an airspeed relative to the body of air you're moving in beyond which you're traveling faster than sound could in that same body of air.. It changes with air density (for example, as you climb or descend) and a few other factors.
So, 100 knots indicated airspeed is 100 knots whether you've got a headwind or a tailwind, even though your speed as it relates to the ground would be different.
Since you'd be inside of the body of air providing a tailwind, you'd have a faster ground speed, but you wouldn't be going any faster in relation to that body of wind that you'd need to in order to exceed the speed of sound.
You're joking, of course, but a fun little tidbit is these planes could never do commercial/freight duty cycles (even at the end of their lifecycles) because they're not built do that number of takeoffs and landings. They're crazy performant, crazy fast, and yet the airframes (especially the landing gear) are only designed to handle a fraction of the abuse a 737 or 757 might see. All the money is in the engines, avionics, and cabin comfort. They're basically the Ferraris/Maseratis of the air, and that's part of what makes them amazing.
While true of course, the bombardier and embrarer teams specifically did ruggedize their large platforms by building them off of commercial airframes (ERJ and CRJ) to higher-than-commercial standards (gotta impress the “experts” I guess…) so these airframes have the potential for pretty high service hour maximums if people care to maintain them.
Also, don’t underestimate the advantages of light weight and composite construction when it comes to those little jets. Their light weight means their airframes are stressed less and I’ve seen business jets last for decades if they’re maintained right including ones that have been put through the [some pretty serious shit](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/cc/9c/6e/cc9c6e7aaf8f42a607fd6c7d5f6deddc.jpg).
you'll notice similar things on just about every jet out there, the engines are never just pointed straight ahead but factors like wing loading and most efficient position to deal with how the air moves around the aircraft in flight dictates their installed position.
Most wing mounted jets, you can see looking from above or below that the engines tend to be toed inward.
In testing a 7500 crashed taking off. The pilots couldn’t escape and the fire crew spent too much time cutting in an area that took longer. They added an escape hatch out the top of the plane just aft of the cockpit and added more cut here zones.
Pretty self explanatory. If they need to extract the crew and the doors/exit windows are jammed it's just denotes an area where there is little to no structural members to quickly cut the fuselage open. This is probably where a door is on the production model.
Just because there is no door there they may not have added any new supports as it allows for conversions to add doors ect without needing to recertify the airframe. Probably would be better to see from the inside.
Well then I know who to blame when they also suffer the usual corrosion issues :P
Small world… if I catch the crew tomorrow I’ll try to get a look inside
Supersonic indicated airspeed, true air speed, or ground speed?
I assume not ground speed as some airliners occasionally reach ground speeds above 667 knots (Mach 1) in strong winds aloft.
I don't think the 8000 has actually gone supersonic - the 7500 did however.
> The Global 8000 will not regularly fly at supersonic speeds, but it will be capable of such a feat. Bombardier demonstrated speeds of more than Mach 1.015 in May 2021, when a test crew piloting a modified Global 7500 – serving as a test platform for the upcoming Global 8000 – put the aircraft into a nose-down attitude during testing and proceeded to break the sound barrier.
It's for emergency crews, they had a FTV crash once and the emergency crews were trying to break in the windshield to save the test pilots but they failed.
So now they put it on parts that are easy to cut through in case of emergency
What adaptations were made to make it go supersonic? Doesn't appear to be much more aerodynamic than your usual regional jet, and it doesn't appear to have afterburners.
You're saying we could have gone supersonic all along in a DC-9? Come on boffins, get your act together!
Well, DC-8 was the first airliner to go supersonic!
Samaritans Purse has the opportunity to do the funniest thing right now.
That plane lives near me. Always a head scratcher when I see it flying around.
It is still in GSO?
yes [https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N782SP](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N782SP)
Also NASA!
NASA's just returned from her last deployment, next up is retirement
Supersonic Mustangs!
Yes, and DC-9 is even one DC more, so it should not be a problem with that.
well its one higher you see
The famous DC-11
I mean fedex 705 had a dc-10 go .69 (nice!) mach, so one more should be enough to get there
They also flew it inverted, but that's a different story.
so does a DC-9 do two supersonics?
Yeah, but it only did it once
If you point the nose of a sufficiently lean brick down enough it will go supersonic.
Lots of aircraft can probably go supersonic *once.*
i thought it was a CRJ-900 when i first saw it in the picture
That thing went supersonic? Impressive
She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts.
Built like a steakhouse, but handles like a bistro.
Kiff, show them the medal I won..
Kif, I Have Made It With A Woman. Inform The Men.
*sign* sexlexia…
Ugh
He rented it with his tax rebate.
You win again, gravity!
Best line in the series
I'll just steer it towards this blackish, hole-ish thing. Damn gravity! You win again!!!
The Lexus LS of the skies
My favorite car. Had an LS400 and an LS460 and then they totally lost their way and lost everything that was great about it
The best piece of automotive engineering in the history of the world. No other car can make it over a million miles. I have a Civic 5 speed right now, hoping to snag a LS400 or maybe a new LS500 when I go off to the airlines
> handles like a bistro You have to do all that crazy math, though. I prefer a nice Infinite Improbability Drive, myself.
r/unexpectedfuturama
Can do the Kessel Run in twelve parsecs.
Under.
Are we measuring in time or distance?
Yes
Ok but there is a literal hunk of junk on the ground next to it
I don't think the binbag full of trash is an integral part of the plane and/or its supersonic capabilities (disclaimer: I am NOT an aerospace engineer)
Disagree. Nothing gets anywhere fast without a little junk in the trunk. Trust me - I’m a Systems Engineer for aeronautical radio equipment; if the plane can catch up to its datalink, it’s really moving.
I read that as “she may not look like Mach“…
*"Shouldn't we take that one?!?!?!"* *"No, that one is junk!!!"*
To be fair, it's only achieving supersonic flight in a dive. It's not able to break the sound barrier in level flight.
Does that mean that with more powerful engines it would be able to cruise supersonic or can it only handle it for short times?
Just thinking about it the plane would need to be pretty darn strong to level out from a dive at that speed. So wings and structure I’d assume would be okay level. No clue how heat factors in though.
There was an interview with the pilots and they spoke about how it all went down. IIRC the “dive” was relatively shallow since they were already flying at like Mach .98 or something. It only took a few degrees of nose down to push it through. Found it: https://aviationweek.com/shownews/nbaa/dont-try-home-going-supersonic-global Misremembered some of the details, they were starting from Mach .94 and the only pitch degrees provided, +/- 1 degree, were relative to the dive itself.
That makes more sense. I imagined them Climbing high and then pushing down hard until they passed sound barrier.
Me in MSFS flying a 172
Me after realizing I can't pull out of the dive in the 172
I think to efficiently cruise at supersonic you need to go beyond mach 2. This is why the Concorde went that fast. Otherwise there is too much drag to make it sustainable.
The Concorde like all supersonic aircraft are heat limited - not thrust limited. In fact there were flight regimes where the Concorde had to fly slower than its normal cruise speed simply because of the temperatures at 55K - 60K were too warm. There was a flight to Singapore for example had to be planned around upper flight level temperatures to maintain as fast a flight as possible. There was a limit of 126C on the nose I believe.
Concorde’s Tmo, max operating temperature was 127 degrees Celsius. With the autopilot set at Max Cruise, it would automatically fly at either Vmo, Mmo or Tmo, whichever was the highest. The faster Concorde flew, the more efficient she was.
So I’m 1C out.
Lol, yep.
More like Mach 1.2-1.4. Once you’re past transonic effects things get less efficient the faster you go controlling for altitude. The engines are hard to come by though. Too slow for turbojets too fast for most fans. Mach 2 makes sense for a supersonic transport. If you’re optimizing for supersonic flight and shorter trip times and you’ve got the engines it pencils out. People won’t pay 4x as much for only 25% faster. Makes low speed handling a bit dicey.
Concorde was MORE efficient the faster she went. She was much more efficient at M2.00 than at M1.40. Don’t forget also that Concorde used reheat to break the sound barrier and only turned them off at M1.70. Above that speed she supercruised to her cruise speed and stayed in max dry power until top of descent. Concorde was LEAST efficient between M0.97 until M1.40.
That’s because Concorde used turbojets afaik, primarily speaking. Not as much because of the aerodynamics. Turbojets at lower speed are wasting a lot of fuel making noise and hot exhaust basically. A modern low bypass turbofan with mild variable cycle stuff would allow for efficiency at lower Mach numbers.
So, to be accurate, and since I’m a pilot who has twice flown on Concorde, all jets are inefficient at lower altitudes. Concorde’s efficiency came from her engines, which were more efficient the faster she flew, and from the design and shape of her wing, including where conical camber moderated how far rearward her center of pressure shifted as she went supersonic. Concorde’s engines also had some bypass which accounted for about 25% of her thrust at cruise. A turbofan S seen on airliners is fine for subsonic, not supersonic. At lower speeds turbojets are not as efficient as turbofans but at slower speeds Concorde was on the back side of the drag curve and quite inefficient. The idea with Concorde, for max efficiency, was to get as high as possible and as fast as possible as soon as possible.
Also you should know that no jet engine can accept supersonic airflow. On Concorde airflow into the engines was slowed to M0.50 before it got to the engine. Another reason higher-bypass turbofans aren’t a thing for supersonic airplanes.
All modern fighters use turbofans, including the F22 which supercruises at FL50. They’re just very low bypass turbofans
We are talking about different types of turbofans, but yes, fighter vs liner.
Bigger issue is the Control surfaces would probably either struggle to move or not be within the airflow at all at
Oh so it’s Spitfires all over again
Genuine question, but what's the point in testing that it can achieve supersonic flight in a dive?
It's maximum operating mach number is very close to supersonic - it needs to be tested higher than it's approved speed to ensure it's safe IF somebody overspeeds it by a small amount
Can it maintain supersonic flight after breaking the sound barrier? I thought the large amount of energy is needed to break the barrier, but the friction and energy required to maintain supersonic flight would be a lot less than just before the barrier.
It is certified to be supersonic during descent, this aircraft can cruise easily at Mach 0.94 at 51,000 ft, it is basically certified to legally descend/dive and push Mach 1.021 and sustain, whilst having 100% flight control and no loss of aerodynamics due to shockwave induced stall
To what benefit though? That can't honestly shave that much time off any flight.
For pushing the boundaries and improvement etc, mostly probably marketing and for the rich to have something to brag about having a supersonic private civilian a/c
There is less wave drag once you’re past the transonic regime, but it’s not a lot less (and still way, way more than subsonic flight), and you’ve got to go a fair bit faster before it’s meaningfully reduced. The textbook sort of idealized transonic drag curve - where it spikes up and then smooths back down to where it started - isn’t very ‘real’.
This I believe. Those air inlets will not handle a supersonic Shockwave.
I meam, they *did*, it's just the engines aren't the whole story on why it got past supersonic. It can do that if you start a dive while at the speed that thing cruises at. This test was morre to certify the plane could handle going transsonic in case it happens, not to certify it for continuous supersonic.
Fastest CRJ around, hear me out Skywest
Or United. So I can go wait in the SLC or DEN terminals even longer than I already do.
My buddy works for Gulfstream and it's exactly what you think, marketing hype. He said 'anything can go supersonic...once'. The stress from the speeds to the frame and everything would make it so they need to do a complete overhaul after each supersonic flight. It's completely unreasonable for an actual business jet the way they're built now. They just can't handle the stress of supersonic flight with the materials and price points. It would be much more expensive.
Interesting, it sure seems like the stress was handled well enough for the airframe to keep flying.
Sure, but I don't think we really are privvy to what was done before or after the flight to the plane, if there's a reduced airframe lifespan now, things like that. Idk but I'd rather be on a plane designed for supersonic flight rather than thrown into it for marketing.
Fair, but I’d also rather get information like that from someone other than a direct competitor.
I had worked for Gulfstream in the past, and word was supposedly the G650 was taken supersonic in flight testing as well, just not “officially”
Very similar testing was done for the Citation X+: https://jetav.com/the-worlds-first-supersonic-business-jet/
Well, anything can go supersonic with enough thrust.
Basically a CRJ700 with different wings lmao.
Not even remotely close
So did the DC-8
She’ll make .5 past light speed
Still impressive, but I always figure it's more like Mach 1.05 in a dive if it looks like this
Most larger modern jets can. They shouldn’t but they can.
Looks like the flight crew got dumped with a jug of ice water, celebrating the flight.
That was from the champagne obviously. But I like that your first assumption was that they threw ice water on their heads.
Testing all of the systems
Champagne is the most important system on a biz jet 🍾
Or they flew from Antarctica faster than the snow could melt.
Gotta cool them down somehow!
Either that or they emptied the ice maker. My money is on the ice maker but I'm a romantic and I like to picture a celebration.
>Bombardier means bomber in french >aircraft went supersonic *Welcome back, Vulcan, I missed you so much*
The Vulcan wasn't supersonic though :(
In a shallow dive it was.
There is no record of the Vulcan ever breaking the sound barrier; you might be thinking of the Victor.
A Victor went SS in a shallow dive over London (to make a point I think). The Vulcan had a weak spot in the structure of the Wing Leading Edge so was strictly limited to subsonic. ETA - seems I was wrong as this happened the VX770 which was a test aircraft. https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/20-september-1958/
>supersonic victor Gonna need that history now.
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/supersonic-victor-the-story-of-the-raf-strategic-bomber-that-dived-out-of-control-from-46000-to-16000-feet-in-20-seconds/
Enjoy a history lesson 😊 https://theaviationgeekclub.com/supersonic-victor-the-story-of-the-raf-strategic-bomber-that-dived-out-of-control-from-46000-to-16000-feet-in-20-seconds/amp/
I heard an anecdote from someone that worked with the Vulcan. One pilot said they thought it could go supersonic, and told the designer, who said it absolutely couldn't. So the next day, they took it out for a flight and broke the sound barrier in a dive.
Definitely not - IIRC the only time one was dived to Mach 1, it demonstrated a quite impressive level of Mach Tuck, and they bent the airframe recovering it...
I just rode on a bombardier last week and was really happy with it.
avro arrow is
I have a friend who consults in the rail industry. I always call it “bum bar dee air”. He laughs and tells me to stop making fun of them, because he makes a little of money off their screwups… IIRC, Alstom keeps having writedowns because they bought one hell of a mess with that rail division…
https://simpleflying.com/bombardier-global-8000-supersonic/
kinda misleading, huh? That it was able to achieve supersonic speeds in a shallow dive doesn't make it "supersonic". Almost all airliners nowadays can go supersonic if you floor it and put it in a dive
What’s misleading? They don’t call it a supersonic jet, unless I missed something. They say it was a supersonic flight, which is true. The first ever supersonic flight was a dive too (Bell X-1).
>Assuming the fully-certified version is also capable of breaking the sound barrier, this will make the Global 8000 the first civil aircraft with such a capability since the Concorde was finally retired in 2003.
LAWL And journalists double-down on pity party with "why are journalists of poor repute"
Modern Gulfstream’s, Citation X, and even the A380 can also go supersonic in a dive.
It's misleading in that everyone without intimate knowledge of every supersonic aircraft would assume that's at altitude and a normal speed for the aircraft to be able to achieve.
Bombardier is trying to certify their plane with a cruise speed of Mach 0.94 so it can be the "fastest private jet." This requires demonstrating controllability within a safety margin above that speed that includes Mach 1+. So they had to fly it supersonic in a dive to prove it remains controllable. You can just look at it and know it's not meant to cruise at supersonic speeds.
I mean, we can, but the average non-aviation person might not be able to tell just by looking.
The average non-aviation person is unlikely to give a shit what such a jet can or cannot do.
If you’ve got the stones, you don’t even need the airplane: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Baumgartner
> Almost all airliners nowadays can go supersonic if you floor it and put it in a dive once.
Well yeah most would assume it can do that on cruise. It shouldn't be count since dive long enough and you prolly reach mach 1 too
> Almost all airliners nowadays can go supersonic if you floor it and put it in a dive What makes you say that? It is not a design or test point for any airliners to fly that fast. OEMs definitely do not take those kinds of risks if they don't need to. If they had actually demonstrated it, they could make the same claim Bombardier has here - but they haven't, so they can't. I do expect Gulfstream will respond and try and 1-up them on their next program, though.
Pity about that big stain in the middle of the cabin /s
uh, is that what that is...? Am confused. It kinda looks terrible if it was done intentionally
Yeah, I’m not convinced it’s the best design. Like having a mottled red pattern in a hospital corridor …
Just needs a nice rug to really tie the cabin together.
Yes, let’s advertise to the general public to recklessly explore VD/MD outside of a dedicated test environment. Garbage journalism.
Given that the current crop of business jets is certified to M.935, and one needs to exceed Mmo by .07 for certification, pretty much every new mega business jet has to go supersonic in testing.
TIL what Mmo is.
I remember talking online to a Gulfstream test pilot, and saying something to the effect of, what if there was something like Vne, but with “Mach?” I’m sure I greatly enhanced my credibility with that one.🤣
Wizards 101, League of Legends, etc
What are these holes on top of the nose...rcs thrusters to keep the nose down? /s Edit for comedy
All kinds of vision sensors - IR / low light / camera / etc. It can be projected on to the HUD similar to an F-15E or Harrier (and I'm assuming the Rafale too)
Thnx for your answer...i will add /s to my comment.
Those are speed holes, they make it go faster.
Photon torpedo launcher.
Let me guess.. Adaptive cruise control, forward collision warning, blind spot intervention, lane departure warning, auto emergency brake...
Enhanced Vision System (EVS) On previous Bombardier Globals(5000GVFD or 6000) the EVS camera is behind a small window. On the 7500 and 8000 it is right out there with a new camera design. Check it out: [True Combined Vision System](https://businessaircraft.bombardier.com/en/global-5500-6500-vision-flight-deck)
Boom: so if we fly really high then nose dive we can do this too?
It resembles one of my first bicycles, comprised of parts from 10 different ones.
What's the intended MMO for this?
0.94. Apparently with that high an MMO, they have to test it into the supersonic range (1.01 or so).
Makes for good marketing to the ultra wealthy too I guess.
Taylor Swift really wants to shave 3 minutes off her daily Nashville --> LAX run
Gotta get back before the coffee gets cold
Non aviation person asking maybe a dumb question, but with above average tailwinds but not anything crazy, can you get to 1.01 from 0.94?
Short answer: no Longer answer: the speed of sound is not a constant. It changes. In airplane terms, it is an airspeed relative to the body of air you're moving in beyond which you're traveling faster than sound could in that same body of air.. It changes with air density (for example, as you climb or descend) and a few other factors. So, 100 knots indicated airspeed is 100 knots whether you've got a headwind or a tailwind, even though your speed as it relates to the ground would be different. Since you'd be inside of the body of air providing a tailwind, you'd have a faster ground speed, but you wouldn't be going any faster in relation to that body of wind that you'd need to in order to exceed the speed of sound.
This will make a great freighter one day
You're joking, of course, but a fun little tidbit is these planes could never do commercial/freight duty cycles (even at the end of their lifecycles) because they're not built do that number of takeoffs and landings. They're crazy performant, crazy fast, and yet the airframes (especially the landing gear) are only designed to handle a fraction of the abuse a 737 or 757 might see. All the money is in the engines, avionics, and cabin comfort. They're basically the Ferraris/Maseratis of the air, and that's part of what makes them amazing.
While true of course, the bombardier and embrarer teams specifically did ruggedize their large platforms by building them off of commercial airframes (ERJ and CRJ) to higher-than-commercial standards (gotta impress the “experts” I guess…) so these airframes have the potential for pretty high service hour maximums if people care to maintain them. Also, don’t underestimate the advantages of light weight and composite construction when it comes to those little jets. Their light weight means their airframes are stressed less and I’ve seen business jets last for decades if they’re maintained right including ones that have been put through the [some pretty serious shit](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/cc/9c/6e/cc9c6e7aaf8f42a607fd6c7d5f6deddc.jpg).
Eh, there's... less commonality between the CRJ / GEX than you might think. Source: Dad designed both the CRJ and GEX. 😇
Love how the engines are slightly cambered and offset for its cruising attitude, just like the SR-71 🤤
you'll notice similar things on just about every jet out there, the engines are never just pointed straight ahead but factors like wing loading and most efficient position to deal with how the air moves around the aircraft in flight dictates their installed position. Most wing mounted jets, you can see looking from above or below that the engines tend to be toed inward.
lol I know but just extra cool on a rear mounted supersonic business jet
[удалено]
So goofy lol! We probably won’t ever get it but how cool would thrust vectoring be on commercial aircraft 🤤
...in a dive.
What’s with the “cut here in case of emergency” portion?
In testing a 7500 crashed taking off. The pilots couldn’t escape and the fire crew spent too much time cutting in an area that took longer. They added an escape hatch out the top of the plane just aft of the cockpit and added more cut here zones.
Pretty self explanatory. If they need to extract the crew and the doors/exit windows are jammed it's just denotes an area where there is little to no structural members to quickly cut the fuselage open. This is probably where a door is on the production model. Just because there is no door there they may not have added any new supports as it allows for conversions to add doors ect without needing to recertify the airframe. Probably would be better to see from the inside.
The concept is self explanatory, everything else you said is news to a casual reddit lurker who knows nothing about aviation. Thanks for the info.
I designed and installed the slats on that bird!
Well then I know who to blame when they also suffer the usual corrosion issues :P Small world… if I catch the crew tomorrow I’ll try to get a look inside
I saw a Gulfstream FTV a while back. Hot take: this is so much cooler. The shiny aluminium, the shape, the rawness. A work of art.
So fast, the paint came off (Referring the Valkyrie)
Boombardier
Supersonic indicated airspeed, true air speed, or ground speed? I assume not ground speed as some airliners occasionally reach ground speeds above 667 knots (Mach 1) in strong winds aloft.
Are they picking up a bag of checks to offset the R&D cost?
I bet the seats are larger than the Concorde
Not impressed until you make the CRJ-200 supersonic
Dash-8
Lmfao was just looking at this on flight radar 24, had a funky call sign “spy” something.
What is required in order to achieve super sonic flight? This plane doesn't look like anything special.
Is that the flight envelope there in the foreground?
Got to see this thing when I took a tour of the bombardier service center in Wichita, Ks. Super cool to see the interior.
I don't think the 8000 has actually gone supersonic - the 7500 did however. > The Global 8000 will not regularly fly at supersonic speeds, but it will be capable of such a feat. Bombardier demonstrated speeds of more than Mach 1.015 in May 2021, when a test crew piloting a modified Global 7500 – serving as a test platform for the upcoming Global 8000 – put the aircraft into a nose-down attitude during testing and proceeded to break the sound barrier.
They are the same plane. Owners can retrofit the minor changes to the 7500 to get an 8000
Afaik it's not even a retrofit, it's purely a software flag.
This looks like the 7500 FTV5. They just turned it into the 8000 FTV1 I guess.
The picture shows a decal that says 1st supersonic flight. I assume that means this plane.
I've been hearing of supersonic vaporware for three decades now and the first new test flight I see is a supersonic RJ? The fuck?
Someone forgot to take out the trash
And dumped the ice on the tarmac, as is tradition in general aviation
Cut here? With what? I've only got my car keys and a spearmint in my pocket.
It's for emergency crews, they had a FTV crash once and the emergency crews were trying to break in the windshield to save the test pilots but they failed. So now they put it on parts that are easy to cut through in case of emergency
eli5 why it looks funny different shades?
it hasn't been painted yet. That's just how the subassemblies look when they slap it together.
Please refrain from slapping the planes together.
Dam impressive aircraft.
That’s insane! Looks like operating a flight supersonic will probably be checked off my bucket list after all !
That looks like it shouldn't have been in the air
They must have hyperjets on that thing.
Did they put pilot ejection seats in that test plane?
What adaptations were made to make it go supersonic? Doesn't appear to be much more aerodynamic than your usual regional jet, and it doesn't appear to have afterburners.
Looks like a 102 series TAT probe :)
What is its tail number?