Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Round the World Flight Set for Monday

Posted by Zonk on from the where-he-stops-nobody-knows dept.

An anonymous reader writes "LiveScience is now reporting that Burt Rutan's GlobalFlyer is set for Monday takeoff. The plane, piloted by Steve Fossett, has been grounded since January by weather. The mission: the first solo, nonstop circumnavigation of the globe via jet powered craft without refueling." Commentary also available from the BBC.

129 comments

  1. Oh yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I would certainly love to fly around the world! SIgn me up!

  2. Good Luck! by Kid+Zero · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope what goes around comes around. :)

    1. Re:Good Luck! by khrtt · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This would've made great news around 1930, I suppose, but why is it a big deal in the 21st century? Just because noone has done it before doesn't make it difficult. There are many things that noone has done before because they weren't interesting enough for te trouble. These things usually make it into the Guinnes book once someone does them. They don't have to make big news, really.

    2. Re:Good Luck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      "Just because noone has done it before doesn't make it difficult."

      But it is difficult, you dumb stupid cunt, which is why it has never been done before. Stop being such a dumb stupid cunt, you dumb stupid cunt.

      Moderators: Mod this post up. it should be +6, fucking super-Insightful.

    3. Re:Good Luck! by chimpo13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's always easy to bitch about someone doing something. There's plenty of stuff in the Guinness book that's not difficult. This one is more difficult then you realize.

      --
      riding round the world on an old motorcycle
  3. stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The mission: the first solo, nonstop circumnavigation of the globe without refueling.

    This is a really stupid question. Would that be a "low-altitude" circumnavigation of the globe? I mean, we've had manned orbits, right?

    1. Re:stupid question by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      ok, add:

      The mission: the first solo, nonstop circumnavigation of the globe, in an aircraft, without refueling.

      Satisfied?

    2. Re:stupid question by mickyflynn · · Score: 1

      I don't think that "orbit" and "flight" are the same things.

    3. Re:stupid question by zach_d · · Score: 1

      actually, the article states that its the first "jet powered" circumnavigation of the globe, so unless someones come up with a new way to launch objects into orbit, and not told anyone about it, then orbits are not included.

  4. Fuck that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    fucking whore

  5. Hasn't it been done before? by DoorFrame · · Score: -1, Troll

    This seems kind of silly, but haven't space ships done this thousands and thousands of times?

    --

    --
    RumorsDaily
    1. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Freefall90 · · Score: -1

      Not sure on this, but I don't think there's even been a space flight that has done this with a one person crew. Don't have the patience to search it, I'm at the in-laws this weekend...slow dialup.

    2. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not powered. They're satellites once their up there.

    3. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not sure on this, but I don't think there's even been a space flight that has done this with a one person crew.

      The many NASA Mercury flights, and the first set of Russian flights.

    4. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      Yes, in SPACE, this is an aircraft, built to fly through the air (lower atmosphere).

      Spaceship == Space
      Aircraft == Air

      Think before asking silly questions mmmkay?

      --
      moo
    5. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Colgate2003 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Most of the early orbital flights were solo. If not, why was Yuri Gagarin the "first person to orbit the Earth;" singular?

      John Glenn did it for the Americans soon after.

    6. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by mlush · · Score: 3, Informative
      Not sure on this, but I don't think there's even been a space flight that has done this with a one person crew. Don't have the patience to search it, I'm at the in-laws this weekend...slow dialup.

      I think a chap called Yuri Gagarin may qualify, and if he does not another Russian or one of the Mercury pilots definatly will

      It may come as a suprise to you, but it is possible to store information in this thing called a brain

    7. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Spaceship == Space
      Aircraft == Air      "

      Space is just an arbitrary definition on where the atmosphere ends. It has no real justification other than the fact that atmospheric forces (such as friction) are significantly less. But that could be said of the upper atmosphere that isn't considered space. At a cruising altitude of 100,000 feet, the X-43 didn't experience the same forces as a 747 experiences, but the X-43 is still considered an aircraft. Before you enter space you are flying in an aircraft and when you reenter the atmosphere you are flying in an aircraft. Why then would your spacecraft not be considered an aircraft for its entire flight?

      "Think before asking silly questions mmmkay?"

      He/She did. Accepting the party line that space and air are concrete and different things makes life easy but doesn't really help describe the significance of major events, like the first solo around the world flight in the 60s by the Soviet Union.

    8. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      Next you will be telling me my spoon is not a spoon, it is however a tea spoon.

      --
      moo
    9. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between wing-borne flight and orbit. That's not a "party line", it's a clearly understood distinction.

      Some craft are capable of doing both. Some craft are capable of only doing one or the other. Some craft fly through the atmosphere without the benefit of wing-borne flight.

      Why are you trying to conflate atmospheric flight and orbital flight? They're very much not the same.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    10. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the clear distinction? Spacecraft have been affected by the Earth's atmosphere when they were clearly defined as being in "space". For example, Skylab prematurely burned up do to the expansion of the Earth's atmosphere in the 70's due to increased solar flux. Skylab was clearly a spacecraft. Clearly the definition of space as just a non-interacting medium is incorrect.

      Where do you define the end of the atmosphere? Many scientists define the end of the Earth's atmosphere at about the magnetopause, which is further than the Moon! They also define the Sun's atmosphere to be at the heliopause which is much further than Pluto meaning that the Earth's atmosphere is a bubble in the Sun's.

      For a spacecraft such as the Mercury spacecraft to get into "space", which is arbitrarily defined as being 63 miles, it must be able to be designed for aerodynamical forces. The Mach 1 cloud around the spacecraft being launched is clear evidence of this. To be able to return, it must also be able to withstand aerodynamic forces. The only difference in space is that the forces are much much smaller. But there is no clear point where they go away. They just get much smaller the further you go out. These small forces are evident with satellites that periodically need to boost their orbit by some means (such as Hubble) before their orbit degrades due to atmospheric drag.

      I think your definition of wing borne aircraft being the only definition of aircraft is too narrow. Helicopters (which is just a modification of the wing borne aircraft), VTOL aircraft such as the harrier, and rockets all operate according to one principle: lower pressure up top, higher pressure down below, and if the difference taken across the surface area of the craft is greater than its weight it goes up. Bernoulli's principle isn't the only one that allows flight.

    11. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you understand what orbit IS?

    12. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better than most. I realize that it is not necessarily a steady state condition because it is occuring within the atmophere. Other items kill this perpetual motion as well (such as the tidal forces on Phobos which will cause it to impace Mars in about 50 million years). To consider space to be a different condition than that of the atmosphere rather than a limiting condition is narrow minded.

    13. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by sconeu · · Score: 1

      And the Chinese flight.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    14. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Log in and ask, and I'll explain it to you. If you don't feel the need to log in, I won't bother.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    15. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its always amusing during a discussion that when one party does not have a valid response to an argument and they don't want to admit it they either: a) resort to personal insults, or b) refuse to continue the discussion citing some social construct. While you haven't done the former (and I'm thankful for that), you have done the latter by implying that the correctness of any argument that I put out is related to whether I have "Anonymous Coward" or "PZRocketScientist" as a name and by the assumption that your signature makes you an authority. Both of these hold no weight on whether or not the facts or fictions (depending on point of reference) that I have said are correct. Considering that you did bother to write that you wouldn't bother rather than just ignoring my previous post outright gives credence to this argument.

    16. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      What I meant was, if you make the effort to put your name on your thoughts, I will be glad to discuss them. If you don't, I'll assume that you don't value them, and I won't bother responding.

      But, hey...don't let me kill your buzz. Feel free to tell yourself whatever story makes you happy.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    17. Re:Hasn't it been done before? by SupremeTaco · · Score: 1

      Love that sig.
      You just gained a friend!

      --
      You have a constitutionally protected right to be wrong, and I the right to ignore you.
  6. Salina, Kansas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's awesome. I'm from Salina, KS and nothing ever happens here. It's about time something cool happened.

  7. Great to hear. by game+kid · · Score: 0, Troll

    Hopefully someday a solo session of Windows would last that long.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:Great to hear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      oh for fuck's sake, stop trolling.

      Faggotry like this is why slashdot is so lowly percieved by the rest of the internet.

    2. Re:Great to hear. by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 1

      The Internet is able to perceive things? Explain.

      --
      I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    3. Re:Great to hear. by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      No slashdot is so lowly percieved because tacho is a wako and you are a fool for replying to a troll.

      --
      moo
  8. Other notable Circumnavigation attempts: by GillBates0 · · Score: 5, Informative
    available in this Wikipedia article.

    The first successful nonstop, nonrefueling flight was made by Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager in their Scaled Composites Model 76 Voyager back in 1986. That one wasn't solo though.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:Other notable Circumnavigation attempts: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't jet powered either.
      This flight should prove to be a little faster than that one was, though I'm still wondering how that guy plans to stay awake for the duration of the trip.

      Better bring lots of coffee.

    2. Re:Other notable Circumnavigation attempts: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... there were plenty of nonstop, nonrefueled rocket-powered flights before this one.

  9. Why is this cool? by Imposter_of_myself · · Score: 1

    Why is it cool when a rich guy PURCHASES technology and uses it? Had he invented flight, or lightweight materials or the combustion engine or something cool, then I can see it. Like his trip around the world in a balloon, what kid hadn't thought of that before - circling the world in a balloon. He just had the money to do it.

    1. Re:Why is this cool? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The pilot is secondary. The aircraft, and its technology, is the key thing. However, Fossett has proven, at least to Rutan, that he is a capable pilot, able to navigate all the way around the world (mostly), by himself. The people who have done that comprises a very short list.

    2. Re:Why is this cool? by TWX · · Score: 2

      Well, If this succeeds I'm going to give a lot more credit to Rutan than I am to the pilot, excepting the endurance that the pilot will need in order to do this at all, though that is a fairly critical thing.

      Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites seem to be popular lately, though they've been pushing the envelope now for many, many years. The first time that I heard of Rutan was when he developed his asymetrical "Boomerang" aircraft and it made its debut in 1996, and from then on I've seen him and his company do increasingly cool things. Seeing as how Rutan's SpaceShipOne was the first private craft to go suborbital, he's going to make the news.

      Let the rich people play with this stuff, at least it's pushing things into new realms, not like some rich guy who buys an existing small passenger jet just for a toy.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Why is this cool? by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Funny
      Why is it cool when a rich guy PURCHASES technology and uses it?

      Hel-LO, but isn't that exactly what Batman does? And Batman's cool!

    4. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it cool when a rich guy PURCHASES technology and uses it? Had he invented flight, or lightweight materials or the combustion engine or something cool, then I can see it.

      It's cool (and impressive) because Fossett not only has the money to try these stunts, but the guts to put his life on the line doing it. Not many people his age have the endurance and spirit of adventure it takes to pull off round-the-world trips. There are countless dangers involved, from mechanical failures to weather to the unlikely but real risk of a trigger-happy air defense officer somewhere thinking he's an enemy entering his nation's airspace.

      If you're not impressed, let's see YOU try it. As much as I like the idea of doing something adventurous I'm not sure I'd take such a chance even if I had the money.

    5. Re:Why is this cool? by Moofie · · Score: 2, Informative

      Surely you're aware that Rutan's first design was one that you (YOU!) could literally build in your garage, right?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rutan isn't the one with all the money anyway. He's just the one with the ideas. Paul Allen is the rich guy who funded the spaceshipone project and I'm pretty sure the guy that owns Virgen records had a hand in it too cuz he was at the first launch at least. Burt Rutan is just a guy with a vision. On top of that, you can't purchase the creativity that went into the building of the machines he makes. Sure people have thought of it before, but he has the creativity and knowledge to get it done and an amazing staff to help him. Could you do it?

    7. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I love you.

    8. Re:Why is this cool? by TWX · · Score: 1

      No, I was not aware of that actually. I haven't gone into real depth on his designs, because so much is presented whenever something newly-cool happens that I haven't had to.

      I'll have to check it out.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    9. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, Fossett has proven, at least to Rutan, that he is a capable pilot, able to navigate all the way around the world (mostly), by himself. The people who have done that comprises a very short list.

      I've done it several times with Microsoft Flight Simulator, flying entirely visually as well.

    10. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Batman's a scientist.

    11. Re:Why is this cool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "able to navigate all the way around the world (mostly), by himself. The people who have done that comprises a very short list."

      Is it that hard to go in a straight line?

    12. Re:Why is this cool? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Batman designs and builds his own equipment - at least insofar as a fictitous character does anything. That's what that big underground lab in the caves is all about.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Millionaires follies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    I hope the rich bastard pilot fatally crashes into his rich bastard financier.

  11. For my next trick by lcnxw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a nonstop solo flight around the world twice blindfolded without a parachute with my eyes closed.

    why do we need to keep proving that yes, we _can_ fly planes and do amazing feats.

    1. Re:For my next trick by eric1207 · · Score: 1

      blindfolded with your eyes closed... wow! i've got to see this feat

    2. Re:For my next trick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why do we need to keep proving that yes, we _can_ fly planes and do amazing feats.

      For the same reason that a dog licks his balls.

  12. Frequent Flyer Miles by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hopefully he gets some frequent flyer miles for this trip. It would be great if he could go back to the places he flew over and actually visit them.

    --
    Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
  13. Pfft. by ColonelFubster · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hal & Viola Leveller fly to Laughlin, Nevada from Southern California every week without refueling. And you don't see them being the subject of an article on Slashdot.

    --
    :-M
    1. Re:Pfft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who the hell are Hal & Viola Leveller and how is this even remotely informative?

  14. It's a matter of terminology by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Informative

    In this context, the term circumnavigate historically meant by boat or ship, however recently aircraft have been added. Spacecraft aren't included in this illustrious set.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumnavigation

    1. Re:It's a matter of terminology by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Kinda dumb, but if I actually read that wikipedia page down near the bottom it includes spacecraft circumnavigations in the aerial set.

      Nonetheless the term is normally reserved for boats and aircraft, and I only linked wikipedia because I know it's highly regarded around these parts.

  15. If you believe in that sort of thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This seems kind of silly, but haven't space ships done this thousands and thousands of times?"

    Only if you believe in that sort of thing. I learned on "Coast to Coast AM" that the highest altitude above the earth by human craft has been achieved by invisible black jets creating a web of chemstrails.

  16. first with a Jet engine by Bart+van+der+Ouderaa · · Score: 4, Informative

    Burt was the first with an airplane, but it was powered by props. Steve is trying to be the first with a jet engine. A single jet engine in this case.

    1. Re:first with a Jet engine by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interestingly enough, that single engine is more reliable than the two props that were used before. The probability of both props failing, plus the probability of either one failing is higher than the probability of the single jet failing any time during the flight. (Although if it did fail, it would be rather close to the end of the flight, if you get my drift...)

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    2. Re:first with a Jet engine by flyingsquid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Spirit of Saint Louis was built with one engine because two engines increased the probability of engine failure. Extra engines are safer but only if you can fly with one not functioning. I'm going to guess that continuing the flight across the Atlantic on a single engine wasn't a realistic possibility with the technology of the day.

    3. Re:first with a Jet engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's a turbofan, which is a little different. A jet engine would make the attempt more difficult without refueling.

    4. Re:first with a Jet engine by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Spirit of Saint Louis was built with one engine because two engines increased the probability of engine failure.

      Funny, I thought it was for fuel economy, weight and space...

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    5. Re:first with a Jet engine by rv8 · · Score: 1

      Burt was the first with an airplane...

      That would be Dick Rutan who flew around the world, not Burt.

      --
      Kevin Horton
    6. Re:first with a Jet engine by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager flew it. Burt built it.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    7. Re:first with a Jet engine by Stregone · · Score: 1

      A turbofan is a jet engine, it usualy refers to a high bypass jet engine.

    8. Re:first with a Jet engine by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      If you read his (Lindburgh's) books, interviews, etc., he goes into a bit of discussion about it. The parent posting was the main reason for a single engine. If Lindburgh thought that two engines were better, he would have not thought twice about the extra fuel, weight, or space.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    9. Re:first with a Jet engine by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      Dammit, the grandparent posting, now the great-grandparent posting is correct.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    10. Re:first with a Jet engine by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Old aviation maxim:
      It's better to lose an engine rather than the engine.

    11. Re:first with a Jet engine by welshie · · Score: 1

      But Mr Gagarin is generally acknowledged as the first to circumnavigate the globe solo in a flying machine. Okay, so it was projectile flight, the flying machine wasn't really very useable at the end of the flight, and he had a hell of a lot of backup on the ground, and very little pilot control.

  17. 'Round the World in 80 Hours by Bitwaba · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The around-the-world flight should be completed inside 80 hours" Jules Verne thought 80 days was hard to pull off. Imagine what he would think of this.

    1. Re:'Round the World in 80 Hours by FlipmodePlaya · · Score: 1

      Even more impressive was Klaatu's 'Around the UNIVERSE in 80 days'

    2. Re:'Round the World in 80 Hours by legirons · · Score: 2, Informative

      285 mph - does that sound like an 87-hour trip when you do the calculations?

    3. Re:'Round the World in 80 Hours by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      ...and imagine what he's going to say when he finds out there are no nasty people or monsters at the centre of the earth.

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
  18. *Round* the world, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried rounding the world. All I got was 42. I keep getting that number. Why?

  19. Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone else find these sorts of things funny?

    Filthy rich guys with tons of time who build nearly indestructible toys that (in theory) have little chance of failure.

    When they finish, they are called "heros" and "adventurers".

    While it would be fun no doubt... the amount of money these guys play with removes many if not most of the problems from the equation. Where is the "adventure" in that?

    Do something like the Atlantic Rowing Challenge...now THAT takes balls (you and a boat together for 60-70 days vs the ocean? yikes).

    I just don't see why these people can get records, awards or title of "first one to do xxx"... with the amount of money and support these guys have--I would be shocked if they DIDN'T complete what they set out to do.

    1. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed

      They usually have a team behind them with full communication and constant location tracking.

      Should something ever FUBAR they have a rescue team in there faster than you can blink.

    2. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, asshole, don't be jealous. You know if you had the money, you'd be trying to get your name in the news, too.

  20. Blue skies by uttaddmb · · Score: 1

    "The plane, piloted by Steve Fossett, has been grounded since January by weather." Does he expect to have nice weather around the entire globe? No wonder it's taking so long.

    1. Re:Blue skies by cmd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      During launch the plane is so loaded with fuel that it can barely liftoff. Yes, they do need good weather for this. Once airborne they//// he can fly over most weather and (hopefully) avoid the rest.

    2. Re:Blue skies by Gunnery+Sgt.+Hartman · · Score: 2, Funny

      They're taking off from Kansas State University-Salina, which is almost dead center Kansas. It seems that every week they cancel the thing because of bad weather. It's friggin' Kansas in February, of course it's going to be bad weather!! But on the other hand, they cancel it a day or so in advance when they could just wait five minutes for the weather to change.....

      --
      [ ]
    3. Re:Blue skies by Tobril · · Score: 0

      No such luck, it takes something like 8 hours just to fuel the monster, they need the whole day to get off the ground. What's really nice is that classes are cancelled that day so we can screw off for a little while.

  21. China: Space Threat to USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Although the latest effort to circumnagivate the globe by a single one-manned spacecraft is an interesting technological pursuit, it has enormous implications for national security. Mr. Rutan should ensure that all his crew and engineers are vetted and that there are no Chinese nationals or former Chinese nationals (including those from Taiwan province and Hong Kong) on his staff. Beijing would surely use this space technology to accelerate the Chinese program weaponizing space. Note that the entire space program in China is part of the Department of War.

    By contrast, NASA in the USA is an entirely civilian effort.

  22. woo woo by jbridge21 · · Score: 3, Informative

    flight tracking via gpsd

  23. China: Space Threat to USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    Although the latest effort to circumnagivate the globe by a single one-manned spacecraft is an interesting technological pursuit, it has enormous implications for national security. Mr. Rutan should ensure that all his crew and engineers are vetted and that there are no Chinese nationals or former Chinese nationals (including those from Taiwan province and Hong Kong) on his staff. Beijing would surely use this space technology to accelerate the Chinese program weaponizing space. Note that the entire space program in China is part of the Department of War.

    By contrast, NASA in the USA is an entirely civilian effort.

  24. What next? by Bazman · · Score: 1

    The first human-powered non-stop round the world trip?

    1. Re:What next? by darkpixel2k · · Score: 1

      Oh great--then we'd have to hear: "I just flew around the world...and boy are my arms tired."

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
  25. Much better link by caryw · · Score: 4, Informative

    Much more information suitable to the slashdot crowd is available at:
    http://www.virginatlanticglobalflyer.com/
    We don't like press releases or watered down news articles.
    Also, I bet the US government has some recon plane that has/can do something like this. I know it's possible with mid-air refueling but I bet they can do it without. Just my $0.02
    - Cary
    --Fairfax Underground: Where Fairfax County comes out to play

    1. Re:Much better link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the thing with Rutan thoguh. He doesn't want the government to have all the glory. He thinks people should be able to do this without them having a hand in it and that's what he's out to prove.

    2. Re:Much better link by Stregone · · Score: 1

      There's that high altitude solar powered plane, can stay up 24/7 IIRC.

    3. Re:Much better link by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      The closest thing to what you describe is Helios, the autonomous solar-powered aircraft mentioned by the other commentor, though even at 100,000 feet it'd be awefully easy to shoot down with modern missiles. A more conventional round-the-world airplane like Voyager or Global Flyer has to be so light weight it would be useless as a spyplane, those cameras and their optics are BIG.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
  26. Money, money, money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Check out the Perlan Project website sometime. Einar, the brains behind that one, is an ex-USAF and NASA test-pilot...but he isn't rich. Fossett was the only one who'd pony up the cash necessary to get it going -- on the condition that he get to be one of the pilots. He ain't no ex-USAF and NASA test pilot, that's for sure, but he sure does love dressing up and playing the Master Aviator, and he has the cash...

    1. Re:Money, money, money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, why should we bother checking out some underfunded project that you didn't even provide the URL for just because some guy had a government job in agencies notorious for budget abuses. Fosset is a very accomplished individual in many areas (ironman, etc).

  27. around the north part you mean... by Duncan3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yet another "around the world" trip that's not around the equator, and just follows the jet stream.

    I can grab the north pole and run "around" the world in 2 seconds, and it would be just as valid as their definition - i.e. lame.

    But still, cool toys :)

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:around the north part you mean... by srblackbird · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's so NOT true ! The FAI's rules state that a record attempt like this must start and finish at the same airfield and cross all meridians of the globe. What's more the course must not be less than the very precise figure of 36,787.559 kilometres (around 23,000 miles) which is equal in length to the Tropic of Cancer. To allow the Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer to catch the vital jet stream winds, the FAI rules don't oblige that record attempts follow the imaginary line of the Tropic itself but simply that the distance flown exceeds it. That doesn't mean, however, that Steve Fossett could fly across the Poles. The course must also be kept away from the North and South "Frigid Zones", defined as being at latitudes of over 66degrees33minutes.

      --
      "The test of the morality of a society is what it does for it's children." -Dietrich Bonhoeffer
    2. Re:around the north part you mean... by srblackbird · · Score: 1

      That's so NOT true ! The FAI's rules state that a record attempt like this must start and finish at the same airfield and cross all meridians of the globe. What's more the course must not be less than the very precise figure of 36,787.559 kilometres (around 23,000 miles) which is equal in length to the Tropic of Cancer. To allow the Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer to catch the vital jet stream winds, the FAI rules don't oblige that record attempts follow the imaginary line of the Tropic itself but simply that the distance flown exceeds it. That doesn't mean, however, that Steve Fossett could fly across the Poles. The course must also be kept away from the North and South "Frigid Zones", defined as being at latitudes of over 66degrees33minutes.

      --
      "The test of the morality of a society is what it does for it's children." -Dietrich Bonhoeffer
    3. Re:around the north part you mean... by grozzie2 · · Score: 2, Informative
      The formal definition of a 'round the world' is that it must pass over 2 points that are diametrically opposed on the globe, cross every line of longitude, with a landing location at or 'past' the point of departure, defined as either landing at or overflying the point of departure after completing the other requirements. That doesn't mean around the equator. Your 'run around the north pole' will qualify, if, it also includes a pass over the south pole, and returns you to the point of departure, landing there, or somewhere past it after passing over it.

      Your definition is, well, lame.

    4. Re:around the north part you mean... by Kirby-meister · · Score: 1

      Does it count if he flies in the opposite direction the earth rotates? Because then really all he has to do is hover above the ground for 24 hours and he's golden.

    5. Re:around the north part you mean... by m50d · · Score: 1

      It's all relative though. It would take him just as much acceleration to "hover above the ground" as to fly around the world the other way.

      --
      I am trolling
  28. Does the pilot sleep? by Rauchbier · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is an 80 hour trip - when does the pilot sleep? Does he use an auto pilot?

    1. Re:Does the pilot sleep? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Duh.

      Even if he didn't sleep he'd use an autompilot.

      Probably sleep + autopilot + alarms that go off if anything unplanned happens.

      Heck, you could even control the plane remotely from mission control (he's probably carrying an iridium phone or such). But that might be considered cheating.

    2. Re:Does the pilot sleep? by balster+neb · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to the BBC article, he will be getting next to no sleep.

      Apparently he's pretty used to feats of endurance, and he holds records in aviation and sailing. Due to the nature of the aircraft and the flying conditions, he will constantly have to be at the controls. The only sleep he expects is in the form of 5 minute naps, for which an autopilot backup and countdown alarm will be available.

      His voyage will only take around 80 hours. The first around the world flight of this sort (in 1986) took about 9 days. The two pilots had to work in short shifts, but were severely fatigued at the end of the journey. This solo journey is possible for Steve Fossett because he is using a jet engine.

    3. Re:Does the pilot sleep? by HugeFatty · · Score: 1

      Good question. And doesn't the FAA, for example, have flight limits like a pilot may not fly more than x hours at a time, and not more than y hours in z days? I'm too lazy to look up the numbers, but I am pretty sure there are limits. And I imagine that other countries have similar rules. Does anybody know how this guy is getting around those rules? Is he somehow avoiding flying over countries with those rules? Did he somehow get an exemption or something?

      --


      I am clearly fatter than you.
  29. Route Taken? by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 1
    Is there someway that we can see the planned route or route-in-progress via some data feed in GPSylon?

    Besides just being cool to see this with a free tool, I'd like to see what sort of path qualifies as circumnavigation.

    Obviously a round the world flight over Antarctica wouldn't qualify, but by staying in the Northern hemisphere and using the jet stream it would seem to abbreviate the full distance of the earth's circumference. (No doubt I'll get flamed by some people better informed than I, but I'm just asking for more info than the article and most entertainment-based media will give.)

    1. Re:Route Taken? by gfreeman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is there someway that we can see the planned route ...

      Yup, the BBC has a map of the planned route, here.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  30. So, it doesn't count if you do it on foot? by benhocking · · Score: 2, Funny

    It seems this lady is going to be upset when she learns that! Of course, she might also get upset when she realizes how hard it is to hold your breath when trying to cross the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans on foot. :P

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
    1. Re:So, it doesn't count if you do it on foot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did her - she was nothing special. She preferred water sports and rough trade, and always had that hint of JP4 under her pits and near her beaver. The Japanese thought so too.

    2. Re:So, it doesn't count if you do it on foot? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      For that matter she only has a 5 satellite GPS. She deserves to get lost.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  31. Autonomous by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1

    The first remotely-controlled non-stop circumnavigation. And the first autonomous non-stop 'round the world trip. Both will happen in my lifetime. I actually think the former is harder than the latter, unless one has Milstar at their disposal.

    --
    the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
  32. earth rotation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just imagine you were in a space ship looking down on earth from above the north pole, you would see the earth's rotation spinning counter clockwise, so would flying clockwise be more fuel effecient than counterclockwise???

    1. Re:earth rotation by Stregone · · Score: 1

      No, the atmosphere pretty much rotates with the earth. It only works if you are leaving the atmosphere. Nearly all orbital and interplanetary spacecraft launch eastwards from as close to the equator as possible, giving the spacecraft a free ~1000mph boost.

  33. Sleep? by Dreamland · · Score: 1

    What I'd like to know is how he plans on staying awake for the 75+ hours the flight will take. Amphetamines like the Navy jet fighters do it?

  34. Without an airplane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be newsworthy I suppose.

    Last time I flew from Gillespie field to Laughlin though, it seems to me the trip was somewhat less then +24,000 miles and I wasn't at flight level 57.

    1. Re:Without an airplane? by omahajim · · Score: 1
      flight level 57

      Missed something. That's FL 570.

  35. Snacks and coffee by Burning+Plastic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Chocolate covered coffee beans and a dash mounted espresso machine...

    I wonder if his cockpit will look like my car after a long drive - empty cups and wrappers strewn on the floor with a pile of loose CDs on the passenger seat (he'll have to use the floor or the dash)...

    -----------
    !!Danger!! Dissolves Fish

    --
    [All Your Fish Are Belong To Us]
  36. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See here

    It must be at least 36 787.559 kilometres, equal to the length f the Tropic of Cancer.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also see here

      -- The same AC

  37. 'round the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this girl who loves round the world....

  38. Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was quite sure US Air Force has done around-the-globe flights... I think a B-52 is capable of something like this... when it is not carring any bomb load...

    1. Re:Funny... by dmanny · · Score: 1

      The two key words here are "un-refueled" and "solo". Please see other links sprinkled throughout other comments.....

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  39. No seriously, wtf? by celerityfm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would love more information on this, please someone, explain the joke/info?

    --
    ...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
  40. Human nature by slashmojo · · Score: 1
    why do we need to keep proving that yes, we _can_ fly planes and do amazing feats.

    Because we're human..

  41. bitcH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Engiinering project

  42. Hal and Viola Leveller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hal and Viola Leveller are characters on the Phil Hendrie radio show. The recurring gag is that they call in to the show during their flight to Laughlin, and get into very animated discussions with Phil when they should be concentrating on flying their plane.

    It's not the funniest skit on the show, but it is mildly entertaining. I personally prefer Phil's commentary to his skits.

  43. Clarification about around the world by Foo2rama · · Score: 3, Informative

    The FAI's rules state that a record attempt like this must start and finish at the same airfield and cross all meridians of the globe. What's more the course must not be less than the very precise figure of 36,787.559 kilometres (around 23,000 miles) which is equal in length to the Tropic of Cancer. To allow the Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer to catch the vital jet stream winds, the FAI rules don't oblige that record attempts follow the imaginary line of the Tropic itself but simply that the distance flown exceeds it.

    with FAI being Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) - the world's air sports federation.

    Go Rutan, first non-stop around the world (voyager.) First Civilain plane into space (spaceship one,)and now this

    This also does not include his incredibly well known kitbuilt aircraft long and veri ez's, the Beech starship, or the numerous military projects he has done.

    Rutan will most likly go down as one the most important aircraft designers of all time.

    --


    ---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
  44. ive seen it by Raab · · Score: 1

    im actually going to school at kansas state salina and i have seen the global flyer close up. they shut down our cafeteria to set up their 'hq'... here are some pics. pic 1 pic 2

  45. Some finer points by codeButcher · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Popular Mechanics had a nice article the other day about this, which clears up some questions:
    • According to Fosset (the designated pilot for this mission) Dick Rutan (co-pilot of the previous circumnavigation together with Jeana Yeager, and older brother of designer Burt), they met at a party at Barron Hilton's in 1999 and Rutan told Fosset: "Steve, you could do me one better; you could do it solo."
    • The plane would have to carry a ratio of 83% fuel to body weight on takeoff. Mass (and structural safety margins) where cut seriously for this, consequently the plane will only fly once with full weight (a number of test flights have been done with less weight in fuel).
    • Fossett intends to fly route without sleep, but off the American West Coast would be a good place to nap (with autopilot on) to increase alertness for descent and landing. It seems that outside of takeoff and landing, the guy would not have much more to do than monitor dials and make the off adjustment.
    • The Fédération Aéronatique Internationale, which governs air sports records, requires a 22,858-mile minimum for the record attempt. So a simple equatorial circumnavigation will not do the trick, and Fossett will fly a huge turn south over the Eastern Pacific to add the required miles.
    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
  46. Speaking of circumnavigation.... by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...I've heard that Boeing plans to do a very spectacular long-distance flight with the new 777-200 Long Range model.

    It sounds like Boeing might try to fly a 777-200LR with a completely stripped-out interior and loading it down with the weight equivalent of the interior parts plus standard cargo load in pre-cooled Jet A fuel. That could make it possible for the 777-200LR to fly as much as 13,000 nautical miles or so.