Are you talking about the Concorde? Indeed too bad that’s not flying anymore,
but if we want to mourn great supersonic planes no longer flying, let’s start
with the SR-71. And we can add the XB-70 Valkyrie (which Jim worked on, I
think! So cool…) to that list too. I saw a concorde and SR-71 at Udvar-Hazy
this spring, what a great place. Need to see the Valkyrie someday when I can
get to W-P.
F-35 seems like a cool ride (bummer about the ceiling cracks though) but I wish
they had continued the F-22 program instead.
-Ed
On 6/15/16, 6:16 AM, "olympus on behalf of olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<olympus-bounces+ed.sawyer=unh.edu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of
olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Well it was certainly noisy but, as for not being ready for action, it flew
>for over 25 years and I don't know how many flights.
>It seems such a shame that we had the technology but abandoned its
>development...
>
>Jez
>
>On Tuesday, 14 June 2016, Jim Nichols <jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Hi Jez,
>>
>>Having tested aircraft/engine combinations,in the world's largest
>>supersonic wind tunnel, up to Mach 3.0, I'm not a fan of supersonic
>>commercial flight. To me, the requirements are too stringent and the
>>benefits too few, to make this a worthwhile way to spend resources. And I
>>still have cracks in my kitchen ceiling that were caused by sonic booms
>>provided by USAF F-35s flying their test corridor which passed near my
>>house. From what I read, it is still not ready for action.
>>
>>Jim Nichols
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|