Slashdot Mirror


Successful Supersonic Jet Launch

Cave_Monster writes "Japan has hailed the test of a supersonic jet in South Australia's outback as a success. Unlike the attempt in 2002, this test saw the jet launch successfully from Woomera, South Australia." From the article: "Data gained through the test will be used in joint research by Japan and France towards a next-generation supersonic jet. No budget projections have yet been made for the entire project, which Japanese hope will produce a supersonic passenger jet capable of flying from Tokyo to New York in just under six hours - less than half the current time of a Concorde." We reported on the plan to do this, earlier.

15 of 256 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, what a rush! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "No budget projections have yet been made for the entire project, which Japanese hope will produce a supersonic passenger jet capable of flying from Tokyo to New York in just under six hours - less than half the current time of a Concorde."

    OK. So what's the rush? New York leaving?

    1. Re:Oh, what a rush! by toomz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obviously the rush is that we need a better overseas broadband connection. If it takes 48 hours for me to download a dvdrip hosted in Tokyo, then it will be way more convenient for me to get someone in Tokyo to put the DVD on one of these jets.

      --
      If a chair is thrown in a forest, and there are no witnesses, did Ballmer still do it?
    2. Re:Oh, what a rush! by HermanAB · · Score: 4, Funny

      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a supersonic plane full of DVDs...

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
  2. The Concorde doesn't go that fast any more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... since they grounded the fleet.

  3. I for one... by W3BMAST3R101 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I for one welcome our new super-sonic overlords.

  4. Re:Intercontinental US by Kohath · · Score: 3, Funny

    fly over Canada

  5. Re:Launch window by hayden · · Score: 4, Funny
    Does anybody know why this limitation exists?
    Mating season of the Australian inland puma-leopard.
    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  6. Re:Only six hours at Mach 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I still think the Blackbird was a fucking amazing plane. I guess maybe it wasn't feasible, but that doesn't take away from how brilliant it was, at the time. The enemy tries to shoot us down? Sounds fine to me. Hit the gas! Weeeee!

  7. Re:Intercontinental US by iamlucky13 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unless, of course, you consider Canada to be land.

  8. Re:Intercontinental US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm sure they can be bought off for a couple of cases of Molson Gold per flight. The quebecers can probably be pacified if we agree that the captian has to put on a beret for the 2.5 minutes he is over their territory.

  9. Yeah, I was going to say... by jd · · Score: 1, Funny

    Right now, I could walk the distance in less than half the current time Concorde would take, unfuelled and in museums.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  10. Tokyo to New York in Six Hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That means the flight time will equal the sum of the taxi/security/queing times at either end. Quite an improvement.

  11. weee! by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..im on A SUPERSOOOOOONIC PLANE right now....

    ...yyooouuu caaAAAANNN TEEELLLLLL Byyyyy theee.....

    ... dddooopppppleeRRR EFFECT ON mmmmyyy teeexxxxxttttt....

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  12. Re:Launch window by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know you're being funny, but Woomera is in outback South Australia, probably about 1000km away from the Gippsland region of Victoria

    At mach 2 that's less than a half-hour drive, traffic permitting.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  13. Re:Intercontinental US by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 2, Funny
    If you went in a straight line, you'd end up in outer space.
    Yeah, but first you would plunge into the ocean, then plow through the Earth's crust and upper mantle.
    This might cause some damage to the plane, and the view for the passengers, especially during the subterranean part of the trip, would be less than spectacular, and possibly somewhat alarming, what with the total darkness, super-high pressures, searing heat from magma, and the like.
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana