Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Page / 6
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:32:46 PM EDT
[#1]
105 in a Nissan Sentra.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:33:32 PM EDT
[#2]
Tagged for interest.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:33:38 PM EDT
[#3]
Barber pole'd at Mach 0.78.  We've cruised backed a few times in and out of the bell.  "Look out for these guys."
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:34:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
1.39 in a F-18D here
View Quote


Yeah but you had 2x the engines!

Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:34:45 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HighPlains1911:
I haven't even hit Vno in a C172.
View Quote
Ya get close if you spin it
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:35:38 PM EDT
[#6]
This is pretty fast for a 900,000 lbs airplane.

Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:37:34 PM EDT
[#7]
Pussy.  

I did 102 in a Prius.  
Also did 94mph in an ambulance with 400k on it.

Legit though, I’d probably shit my pants at Mach 2
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:43:50 PM EDT
[#8]
164mph in a Corvette.
Regularly 150-175 on various sportbikes.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:47:13 PM EDT
[#9]
Originally Posted By KA3B:
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/05/what-it-felt-like-i-took-the-f-16-fighter-to-nearly-mach-2-0/

I was at 25,000 feet when I pushed the throttle forward, rotated it past the detent, and engaged full afterburner—

As I maintained my altitude, the jet started to accelerate. At 1.4 Mach, with only about 2 minutes of fuel left, I bunted over and started a dive to help with the acceleration. In my heads-up-display, 1.5 Mach ticked by, backed up by an old Mach indicator slowly spinning in my instrument console.

At 1.6 Mach, the jet started to shake. I was expecting it—the F-16 has a flight region around that airspeed that causes the wings to flutter. Still, this jet had a lot of hours on the airframe, and if anything were to fail, the breakup would be catastrophic. Similarly, ejecting at that speed would be well outside the design envelop—the air resistance at Mach 1.6 is about 300 times what a car experiences at highway speeds. A few pilots have tried, only to break nearly every bone in their body.

So now, the option was to slow down until the vibration stopped, or push through until it smoothed out on the other side. I was running low on fuel, so I elected to increase my dive so I could accelerate faster. Slowly 1.7 Mach ticked by, next 1.8, and then at 1.9, everything smoothed out. I was now traveling 1,500 mph over the Yellow Sea. The cockpit started feeling warm so I took my hand off the throttle and put it about a foot away from the canopy and could feel the heat radiating through my glove, similar to sticking your hand in an oven.
View Quote
An F-16 can't do this.  Sorry.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:49:11 PM EDT
[#10]
I pulled 2.1 g in a '74 Chevy Vega.

Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:54:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
If you are OK with junking the engines.
View Quote

F'in commies have been building jet engines for 75 g-d years and can't figure out how to use stolen tech well enough to make an engine that doesn't need rebuilding 3-4x sooner than a similar Western engine. I doubt they're 3-4x cheaper to build, too.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:58:07 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
And you were comfortable because Concorde uses a fuel-cooled intercooler between the compressor and turbine of the air cycle machine.  I don't think any model of F-16 has an ECS configured like that, and that's most likely why this pilot was feeling what he was feeling.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By Porkchop_Sandwiches:
2.04 in Concorde
And you were comfortable because Concorde uses a fuel-cooled intercooler between the compressor and turbine of the air cycle machine.  I don't think any model of F-16 has an ECS configured like that, and that's most likely why this pilot was feeling what he was feeling.


Umm no dude, thats called friction at that speed heating up canopy
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 10:59:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: rabidus] [#13]
Mach 678 for me.

(Our speed around the Milky Way)
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:09:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Mach 0.22 head down vertical speed racing competition
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:09:51 PM EDT
[#15]
Mach 0.13 in a Freightliner.

(Going downhill somewhere in West Virginia)
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:09:55 PM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:


Umm no dude, thats called friction at that speed heating up canopy
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By Porkchop_Sandwiches:
2.04 in Concorde
And you were comfortable because Concorde uses a fuel-cooled intercooler between the compressor and turbine of the air cycle machine.  I don't think any model of F-16 has an ECS configured like that, and that's most likely why this pilot was feeling what he was feeling.


Umm no dude, thats called friction at that speed heating up canopy
And you don't think that stagnation temperature at the SHX is a faster transient than an inch of polycarbonate?
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:10:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

It’s fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though.
View Quote



My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:15:19 PM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDennis:

My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.
View Quote

Not one, but two huge nuclear reactors on tap? I bet it’s hella fast.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:16:48 PM EDT
[#19]
1.1 T-38.......word!
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:18:56 PM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
1.39 in a F-18D here
View Quote

Because supersonic flight is hard.

The OP, as written as cut and pasted, didn't happen.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:19:53 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By azjeeper:

3+?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By azjeeper:
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By jordanmills:
That's pretty fast for an F-16.

It's fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though.

3+?
Then the engines are toast
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:20:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Mach .2189 in my '02 corvette on the Autobahn :)
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:21:00 PM EDT
[#23]
"Los Angeles Center, Aspen 20, can you give us a ground speed check?"
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:21:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kilroytheknifesnob:

Not one, but two huge nuclear reactors on tap? I bet it’s hella fast.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kilroytheknifesnob:
Originally Posted By JDennis:

My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.

Not one, but two huge nuclear reactors on tap? I bet it’s hella fast.

I remember reading somewhere that CVNs could push well over 40kts, enough to outrun Akulas that might hunt them. No idea if it's actually true, but wouldn't surprise me too much
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:22:41 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
And you don't think that stagnation temperature at the SHX is a faster transient than an inch of polycarbonate?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By DougFresh:
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By Porkchop_Sandwiches:
2.04 in Concorde
And you were comfortable because Concorde uses a fuel-cooled intercooler between the compressor and turbine of the air cycle machine.  I don't think any model of F-16 has an ECS configured like that, and that's most likely why this pilot was feeling what he was feeling.


Umm no dude, thats called friction at that speed heating up canopy
And you don't think that stagnation temperature at the SHX is a faster transient than an inch of polycarbonate?


Dude I have no idea what you’re talking about but it’s airframe heating and friction on canopy that limits some aircraft. It’s a well-known concept and I’ve read about other planes having windows heat up too hot to touch at speed. What would anything happen to do with an engine cause the canopy to heat up?
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:23:27 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kilroytheknifesnob:

Not one, but two huge nuclear reactors on tap? I bet it’s hella fast.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kilroytheknifesnob:
Originally Posted By JDennis:

My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.

Not one, but two huge nuclear reactors on tap? I bet it’s hella fast.

What about one with eight?
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:24:55 PM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mnd:
What about one with eight?
View Quote

Big E's were smaller units, though.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:25:01 PM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
I'm thinking the ECS knob was just set to max defog, or something.
View Quote


Bravo
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:27:37 PM EDT
[#29]
2,200 feet per second?
Did I math correctly?
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:27:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Keekleberrys] [#30]
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:28:49 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:


Dude I have no idea what you’re talking about but it’s airframe heating and friction on canopy that limits some aircraft. It’s a well-known concept and I’ve read about other planes having windows heat up too hot to touch at speed. What would anything happen to do with an engine cause the canopy to heat up?
View Quote


Pepper your angus
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:33:25 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sherminator:

I remember reading somewhere that CVNs could push well over 40kts, enough to outrun Akulas that might hunt them. No idea if it's actually true, but wouldn't surprise me too much
View Quote



As far as I know it is decently over 40. IIRC they are publicly known to run 36 knts or so. I said 40 in conversation and he smiled and said no. Which I assume meant faster. Still insanely impressive for the draft, drag, sheer size and weight, prop thrust, ect.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:39:04 PM EDT
[#33]
.845 in the L-1011.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:40:08 PM EDT
[#34]
What amazed me was how quiet everything got when we hit 1.0. I think my record was 1.4.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:45:02 PM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDennis:



My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDennis:
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

It’s fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though.



My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.


Ya, good thing those sneeky Chinee never thought to watch from a Satellite.  
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:45:24 PM EDT
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:
Dude I have no idea what you’re talking about but it’s airframe heating and friction on canopy that limits some aircraft. It’s a well-known concept and I’ve read about other planes having windows heat up too hot to touch at speed. What would anything happen to do with an engine cause the canopy to heat up?
View Quote

The principal cause of heating on a fast-moving body through atmosphere is not friction (drag) but compression of the air. Bolus of compressed, superheated air is radiating onto the aircraft much more strongly than slipstream cooling from the boundary layer can carry heat away.
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:45:39 PM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Porkchop_Sandwiches:
2.04 in Concorde
View Quote


I have a buddy that comes over for the air races every year who was a Captain on them for BA, he has some neat stories about their shenanigans with the crew post flight.


Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:49:23 PM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By alaskajetpilot:
1.1 T-38.......word!
View Quote


Wonder what's more fun, first time breaking the sound barrier, or the closed pull-up in a T38?
Link Posted: 5/11/2022 11:54:44 PM EDT
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
2,200 feet per second?
Did I math correctly?
View Quote

I think you did.

So, what do you think about that number?
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:00:15 AM EDT
[#40]
Originally Posted By KA3B:
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/05/what-it-felt-like-i-took-the-f-16-fighter-to-nearly-mach-2-0/

I was at 25,000 feet when I pushed the throttle forward, rotated it past the detent, and engaged full afterburner—

As I maintained my altitude, the jet started to accelerate. At 1.4 Mach, with only about 2 minutes of fuel left, I bunted over and started a dive to help with the acceleration. In my heads-up-display, 1.5 Mach ticked by, backed up by an old Mach indicator slowly spinning in my instrument console.

At 1.6 Mach, the jet started to shake. I was expecting it—the F-16 has a flight region around that airspeed that causes the wings to flutter. Still, this jet had a lot of hours on the airframe, and if anything were to fail, the breakup would be catastrophic. Similarly, ejecting at that speed would be well outside the design envelop—the air resistance at Mach 1.6 is about 300 times what a car experiences at highway speeds. A few pilots have tried, only to break nearly every bone in their body.

So now, the option was to slow down until the vibration stopped, or push through until it smoothed out on the other side. I was running low on fuel, so I elected to increase my dive so I could accelerate faster. Slowly 1.7 Mach ticked by, next 1.8, and then at 1.9, everything smoothed out. I was now traveling 1,500 mph over the Yellow Sea. The cockpit started feeling warm so I took my hand off the throttle and put it about a foot away from the canopy and could feel the heat radiating through my glove, similar to sticking your hand in an oven.
View Quote



2 minutes of fuel left?  Did he glide it back?
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:00:39 AM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:


Dude I have no idea what you’re talking about but it’s airframe heating and friction on canopy that limits some aircraft. It’s a well-known concept and I’ve read about other planes having windows heat up too hot to touch at speed. What would anything happen to do with an engine cause the canopy to heat up?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DougFresh:
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By DougFresh:
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By Porkchop_Sandwiches:
2.04 in Concorde
And you were comfortable because Concorde uses a fuel-cooled intercooler between the compressor and turbine of the air cycle machine.  I don't think any model of F-16 has an ECS configured like that, and that's most likely why this pilot was feeling what he was feeling.


Umm no dude, thats called friction at that speed heating up canopy
And you don't think that stagnation temperature at the SHX is a faster transient than an inch of polycarbonate?


Dude I have no idea what you’re talking about but it’s airframe heating and friction on canopy that limits some aircraft. It’s a well-known concept and I’ve read about other planes having windows heat up too hot to touch at speed. What would anything happen to do with an engine cause the canopy to heat up?
The air blowing along the inside of an F-16 canopy comes from ... the engine.  The compressor and turbine I'm talking about aren't part of the engine, but part of a refrigeration system downstream of the compressor stages of the engine.  The heat sink for this refrigeration cycle is basically the full stagnation temperature of the aerodynamic flow.

The canopy sees this stagnation temperature only on a very limited region at the front of the canopy.  The majority of the canopy, say 80%, sees roughly 7/10ths of this aerodynamic heating.  And then, you have to factor in the thermal conduction and thermal capacitance of the polycarbonate canopy, the latter being rather significant.

The most common issue with a high flying aircraft is that the canopy is cold soaked at altitude in subsonic flight, and when descending into air with higher moisture content at lower altitudes, the inside of the canopy can fog or ice up because of thermal lag and insufficient canopy heating on the inside, and outside for that matter.  To overcome this thermal lag/capacitance, some aircraft will have heating elements embedded in the interior of the windscreen laminate.
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:07:27 AM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

.9 at 200’ is much more exciting than 1.0+ at 25k
View Quote


@flynavy75

I raise you 10' at 100kts.

Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:09:52 AM EDT
[#43]
I've heard that some models of Mig-23 have very stringent speed limits set because of the risk of a canopy failure.

If an F-16 canopy failed under pressure would it shatter? Or would it crumple in? Has such a thing ever happened?
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:21:12 AM EDT
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hesperus:
I've heard that some models of Mig-23 have very stringent speed limits set because of the risk of a canopy failure.

If an F-16 canopy failed under pressure would it shatter? Or would it crumple in? Has such a thing ever happened?
View Quote
The canopy can go through a mind boggling amount of distortion without canopy failure, per se.
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:24:45 AM EDT
[#45]
197 mph at the Las Vegas Speedway in a Richard Petty race car. Pretty bad ass experience!
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:30:01 AM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:

I think you did.

So, what do you think about that number?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
2,200 feet per second?
Did I math correctly?

I think you did.

So, what do you think about that number?

Like a bullet! Radical!
I hope there’s enough momentum to coast back to the landing zone after fuel depletion.
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:30:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Geralt55] [#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDennis:



My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDennis:
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

It’s fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though.



My brother is retired from the Navy and last year when we were out on his sail boat, he said pretty much every performance number on a ship or aircraft is complete BS. Still wouldn't tell me the goods on a few ships and jets I asked about.  Did tell me that if he told me what a carrier could do in calm seas vs what is reported, I wouldn't believe him.



IIRC in the old days of the cold war,
I got the feeling that we were pretty honest about our capability, with that whole defense spending dick measuring competition we were held bent on winning by a country mile

The ruskies would then come out with their newest thingamajig and juust maybe they would exaggerate or embellish a wee tad little bit.

It looks like our style later became, understated AF.


"Oh man guys we are retiring the Phoenix missile but we toooooootally don't have a 1:1 replacement, oh we promise, tee hee "

Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:32:54 AM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hesperus:
I've heard that some models of Mig-23 have very stringent speed limits set because of the risk of a canopy failure.

If an F-16 canopy failed under pressure would it shatter? Or would it crumple in? Has such a thing ever happened?
View Quote
If a Mig-23 canopy is failing, it's probably because it's trying to distance itself from that repulsive, depressing, teal-green cockpit.  The fucking thing is like trying to gaze through the Eiffel Tower.  I'm trying to think how they could fuck that up, but I keep circling back to the work "Soviet".

Fuck it I know.
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 12:43:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Mr-Mockingbird] [#49]
.026 on a pair of Size 12s in HS track sprints
And that's at 600' above sea level so you can only imagine how fast I'd be at altitude
Link Posted: 5/12/2022 1:02:55 AM EDT
[#50]
-0.07 in a Cub.

Slow flight into a headwind = negative ground speed.
Page / 6
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top