Global Flyer Part 2

nsasch writes "The Global Flyer just wasn't enough for Steve Fossett. He's going again, this time to make the world's longest (in length) flight, ever. He is currently over the Atlantic ocean and can be tracked online. He will be flying for 3 days with 18000 pounds of fuel (~8164 kilograms). More information, tracking, Microsoft Flight Simulator models, and background images are available from Virgin Atlantic."

Comments

Him again?

[MyLongNickName]

What is so fascinating about Fossett? If he designed his own glider, I'd really be impressed. To me, he just seems like a rich guy who is doing what he wants to do in life... which I have no problem with. But, it seems like he has a PR staff who is constantly trumpeting: "Look at this guy! He is sooooo great" To me, that is a turn off.

If you are breaking records to prove it to yourself... that is one thing. When you are buying media time to brag... then you are a loser in my book. A dam rich loser, but a loser nonetheless.

Re:Him again?

[MyLongNickName]

To me, that is a turn off.

Why? Would you date him if he wren't so full of himself? Sheesh... get over it.

Re:Him again?

[aliscool]

He's going to be a Billionaire that smears himself cross a half acre of land somewhere if he keeps this stuff up.

Re:Him again?

[Thing 1]

OT:

from the never-coming-down dept.

That was a great song by the Godfathers, on Birth School Work Death.

Re:Him again?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure he feels that spending 3 and a half days without sleep in a tiny little capsule high above the Earth during a very risky endeavour is loser material too.

Re:Him again?

[Reaperducer]

Wow. I'm used to Slashdot being two or three days behind Digg, but with this story, it's a week or more behind American televisiion news. This was on the local stations in Chicago last week! Glad I don't pay for Slashdot.

Re:Him again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is he really going the whole voyage without sleep?

Re:Him again?

[kozumik]

Yeah, what's so amazing about what he's doing and why does our media cover this stuff? The endurance flights of old didn't have GPS, didn't have autopilot, they didn't have sattelite communications. It all individual skill done in isolation. What Fosset does could be accomplished by any decent pilot with a little determination, and a lot of money to blow on the technology, aids, and backups he has. A computer could fly it, with a monkey along for the ride, which is pretty close to how Fosset flies. Your ordinary anonymous test pilot is pushing the envelope way more than Fosset. Guys who fly small planes around the world in small hops have a way more adventures spirit than an endurance flier with GPS and autopilot who basically just stays up in the air and never taking any risks or requiring much skill. Acrobatic pilots are far more technically skilled. Your average bush pilot probably takes more risk and is a better pilot than Fosset. It's a lot of PR fluff.

Re:Him again?

[beauzo]

Burt Rutan and the Scaled Composites team designed and built his glider. They are the ones who should get the credit. The pilot, especially in this case, is just balast.

I consider Melvil and the rest of the SpaceShipOne test pilots, "real" pilots...

-B

Re:Him again?

[Darth_brooks]

To me, he just seems like a rich guy who is doing what he wants to do in life... which I have no problem with. But, it seems like he has a PR staff who is constantly trumpeting: "Look at this guy! He is sooooo great" To me, that is a turn off.

If you want to really get down to it, the whole X-prize was nothing more than a giant PR stunt. "Hey! look at us! we can get a bunch of rich guys to spend money! We're boldy going where man has been going for about 40 years now!"

But before you break out the flamebait mods: It was a PR stunt with a purpose. Without the X-prize, private space flights would've remained a "neat idea." Now, in a few years, maybe (if you're rich enough. Or if you win a contest) you could take a quick flight into space. Ya blatant PR and shameless rich guy whoring!

Yeah, we've already flown around the world and Fossett isn't exactly treading new ground. But maybe stunts like this spur on new advances in aviation. Maybe a company decides they want to be the next scaled composites and starts kicking money to R & D. Maybe somebody is inspired to look at the way things are being done and decides they can do better. Maybe.

Re:Him again?

[anagama]

Wow. I'm used to Slashdot being two or three days behind Digg, but with this story, it's a week or more behind American televisiion news.

So how far did he manage to go in his three day flight last week??

Re:Him again?

[Andrzej Sawicki]

Greatly increasing local land value. Now, where does he plan to land...

Re:Him again?

[stiggle]

Think of this as a proving ground for the technology. An extra step in the march forward. Various governments are currently after high altitude, long endurance aircraft. What better showcase for Scaled Composites than to say that they hold the record.

Re:Him again?

[dave1212]

you're on crack, he took off yesterday morning.

Re:Him again?

[Reaperducer]

My mistake. I confused last week's announcement of the flight with the more recent Slashdot artice saying he had actually taken off. I guess I should have more faith in /.

Re:Him again?

[Anne_Nonymous]

>>Fossett... a turn off.

Fossett? Yeah, it's a turn off. The guy's a slow leak. Kind of a drip really. All wet. And his sucesses aren't consistant; really he runs hot and cold. Some say he's washed up, but that's sinking really low.

Oh, Fossett? I thought you said Faucet. Nevermind.

re: him again?

[ediron2]

In no particular order to the rants above:
-- Lindberg didn't strap wings on and *fly*, he used ENGINES. With all that technology, anyone could have done it. Thus, no big deal. Besides, what'll ever come of it? Ditto every other pioneering act.
-- Astronauts are, by your offhand and disparaging definition, just ballast.
-- So are racecar drivers, stunt doubles, vice-presidents and moms. And don't even get me started on redundant hardware.
-- Anyone that thinks that gadgetry prevents problems hasn't paid attention to critical systems failure modes.
-- Fosset's difference may in fact only be a willingness and wherewithal, but it is still *his* thing. And his seems like a slightly more technically challenging hobby than whatever you (we!) do. With greater lessons and challenges.
-- 'Basic research is what I do when I don't know what I'm doing' -- Von Braun
-- and as for massive wastes of time and money, here's three words: Ultimate Case-Mod.

Get a grip, folks. This guy's the only rich fscker I know willing to forego 3 days of toilet-stops and basic hygiene while travelling strapped to 9 tons of aviation-grade fuel in a flimsy aircraft that he had to subsidize. Crazy rich white dude risks everything is why the rest of the world cares. His crashing is what we're contemplating. As for us slashdotters, the aircraft itself deserves our attention. Fossett's just the rich guy that's into ubergeek-toys. Toys we all should at least be able to agree are pretty damn cool.

Re:Him again?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

> He will be flying for 3 days with 18000 pounds of fuel

Since I'm mathematically illeterate ("innumerate") I think, "What a waste of fuel!" We should ban him from doing this. Derring-do and records and forging new ground and exploration and "pushing the envelop" have no business in a modern democracy. If you don't have the permission of the people, you have nothing .

My leaders tell me that! I voted for them.

Tear him down! If he wants to do this, make him do it from some other stupid country.

Re:Him again?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

> is loser material too

He lands and the ladies swarm him. "Do you want sex with me because I'm a billionaire or because I own a music company or because I'm a daring adventurer?" "Can't we love you for all three reasons?"

We should all be such losers.

The astronauts had it right

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Jump really high and let the world spin below you.

Unfortunately, this Fossett guy is going to end up dead or in jail one of these days.

(And if you're in jail...)

Re:The astronauts had it right

[drgonzo59]

Interesting. What if he lands in Iran or Pakistan due to some failure. Will he be able to bribe his way out to freedom? And will the US commandos go in to save his arse?

Re:The astronauts had it right

[massivefoot]

If he isn't welcome in those countries he won't be overflying them anyway. He's unlikely to have any form of failure that would cause him to lose directional control. If he has to make a forced landing, well, the GF appears to be designed along the lines of a sailplain, he'll probably be able to travel a good few kilometers before landing.

How do they define "longest flight"?

[afaik_ianal]

The reference on that site to "Virgin Galactic" got me thinking. How do they differentiate between "flight", and "orbit"?

Do they say that the record is only available to jet-powered flight? Or do you have to be under power the whole time? Why doesn't a space agency hold this record?

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[jcr]

How do they differentiate between "flight", and "orbit"?

"Flight" is when you travel through the atmosphere, relying on aerodynamic lift or bouyancy to keep you off the ground. "orbit" is when you're on a ballistic trajectory that doesn't intersect the earth.

HTH,

-jcr

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[mnemonic_]

The FAI differentiates between atmospheric and space flight. Where does the atmosphere end? The FAI's definition is 62 miles ASL.

And no, the Guiness Book of World Records holds no authority in the aerospace community.

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[bleckywelcky]

Flight: if you stop thrusting, you crash and burn within an hour or two.
Orbit: if you stop thrusting, you crash and burn after a year or two.

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[jcr]

Orbit: if you stop thrusting, you crash and burn after a year or two.

For fairly low orbits.. Satellites out in Geosync aren't likely to come down in just a couple of years, without some retro-orbital thrust.

-jcr

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[kfg]

"orbit" is when you're on a ballistic trajectory that doesn't intersect the earth.

Or, to rephrase slightly, orbit is when you throw yourself at the ground and miss.

KFG

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what does a rocket do when it's launching? Other than "go up".

Flight? Nope, not bouyant, no aerodynamic lift.

Orbit? Nope, it's not ballistic, and if you turned off the engine to make it ballistic it'd intersect the Earth, loudly.

Would it have killed you to paste in proper dictionary definitions? The extra 10 seconds sure weighs heavy on me.

FLIGHT:
      1.
                  1. The motion of an object in or through a medium, especially through the earth's atmosphere or through space.
                  2. An instance of such motion.
                  3. The distance covered in such motion.
      2.
                  1. The act or process of flying through the air by means of wings.
                  2. The ability to fly.
      3. A swift passage or movement.
      4. A scheduled airline run or trip.
      5. A group, especially of birds or aircraft, flying together. See Synonyms at flock1.
      6. A number of aircraft in the U.S. Air Force forming a subdivision of a squadron.
      7. A round of competition, as in a sports tournament.
      8. An exuberant or transcendent effort or display: a flight of the imagination; flights of oratory.
      9. A series of stairs rising from one landing to another.

ORBIT:
      1.
                  1. The path of a celestial body or an artificial satellite as it revolves around another body.
                  2. One complete revolution of such a body.
      2. The path of a body in a field of force surrounding another body; for example, the movement of an atomic electron in relation to a nucleus.
      3.
                  1. A range of activity, experience, or knowledge.
                  2. A range of control or influence: "What magnetism drew these quaking ruined creatures into his orbit?" (Malcolm Lowry). See Synonyms at range.
      4. Either of two bony cavities in the skull containing an eye and its external structures; an eye socket.

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[jcr]

So what does a rocket do when it's launching? Other than "go up".

Flight? Nope, not bouyant, no aerodynamic lift.

Orbit? Nope, it's not ballistic, and if you turned off the engine to make it ballistic it'd intersect the Earth, loudly.

Flight and orbit are not the only options for describing something that's not on the ground. I would describe a rocket in its boost phase as neither flying nor orbiting.

Would it have killed you to paste in proper dictionary definitions?

Why bother? I knew some pedantic asshole would save me the trouble.

-jcr

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[INeededALogin]

I thought that was the directions on how to fly... I am so confused now

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[kfg]

Yes, that was my unspoken point. Adams fucked up and got it backwards. What he called "flying" was really VLEO.

He also left out the fact that to pull it off successfully you need to take a running start.

KFG

Re:How do they define "longest flight"?

[bleckywelcky]

Sorry, that should have been a "minimum" of a year or two. I was basically trying to say "less than 2 hours = flight, greater than one year = orbit".

Re:On this I have to say...,

[gumbright]

To expand on this (was shooting for FP), just how much money has this idiot wasted on POINTLESS records? Its one thing to actually push the envelope in a useful fashion, something that actually advances us. But this douchebag is setting records of the 19th century. What is the point? You want to be remembered for something Fosset? How about using the money to help somebody out instead.

To reiterate...asshat.

At least someone . .

[Leroy_Brown242]

. . . is pushing the flight envelope these days.

It really puts a smile on my face to hear about this sort of thing. The sooner we make ultra distance flights old hat, the sooner our solar system won't seem so big.

Re:At least someone . .

[mnemonic_]

Yep, just wait, with longer wings we could build an aircraft that can fly to Mars. That's all it takes.

Re:At least someone . .

[ASUSanator]

Look, http://www.virginatlanticglobalflyer.com/Aircraft/ Introduction/index.jsp. It's not like it is any help whatsoever in researching/developing long distance passenger flights. It's a specially designed plane for one person and lots of fuel to make it able to fly long distances. It just proves he has money, not that he has any scientific merit.

Re:At least someone . .

[mnemonic_]

Well of course, Steve Fossett didn't design it; Scaled Composites did.

Long distance flights haven't mattered for heavier than air vehicles since the 1930s. People can fly anywhere on earth without more than a couple connecting flights. The distance problem today is largely solved; what matters now is speed. Two hours from NYC to Tokyo would be nice. Wing/body aerodynamics aren't the only issue there of course... vast reductions in flight times require improvements in propulsion that we've all heard about (scramjets, ramjets, pulse detonation). No one cares about distance today.

Re:At least someone . .

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Somehow, I doubt new propulsion systems will really help since it takes a lot of expensive fuel to either be able to leave the atmosphere or to just go faster through the admosphere, there are basic physics that can't be surmounted by using more advanced technology or larger amounts of money. Also, either would seem to be environmentally damaging if adopted on a wide scale. The reason why Boeing didn't develop its own SST was because they found stratospheric flights to be damaging to the atmosphere. Europe let the Concorde fly simply because it was done, somehow I doubt that the stated tech will drive down the cost of transatlantic supersonic flights to a tenth of the Concorde's ticket prices.

Re:At least someone . .

[Anonymous Coward]

SST travel died due to sonic boom and noise restrictions for flights over land.

My Prediction:

[MikeSty]

He will crash into a marsh in Ireland :O

Re:My Prediction:

[Masami Eiri]

Except he's over Africa right now.. heading roughly east...

Oh No!

[Aqws]

It seems the Atlantic Ocean has consumed Africa!!!

Seems the article has been in limbo for a while.

What about efficient use of our resources?

[Anonymous Coward]

18 000 pounds of fuel? That's roughly 2250 gallons. At 30 miles per gallon, that's 67 500 miles one could travel. Just how many hybrids does this cancel out?

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[Anonymous Coward]

Less than one, unless you throw your car out every 60,000 miles.

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[Anonymous Coward]

He paid for it, didn't he?

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[NormalVisual]

Show me any car, hybrid or otherwise, that gets 12 mpg while maintaining 425 mph. :-)

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[Darth_brooks]

0. The same number of Hybrids that run on Jet A.

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

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[Anonymous Coward]

And where does this jet fuel come from? It's not pumped straight out of the ground. It is created through a refining process whereby jet fuel is selectively created from crude oil.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry)

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[deadweight]

WTF! He BOUGHT the gas (well keroseene to be precise) for his airplane. He can do what he wants with his gas in his airplane. Guess what - I am flying my airplane this weekend just to go eat breakfast at an airport 30 miles away. I will likely use about 4 gallons of gas roundtrip. I am doing this for no other reason than I like to fly in the morning and I don't give a flying fuck if anyone thinks there are better uses for gasoline or not.

Re:What about efficient use of our resources?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who is contributing to fuel-saving technology like this is entitled to burn some fuel in the process.

And might I add...

[mnemonic_]

A no-impact orbit is very unreasonable to maintain below the FAI definition of "space." It is fair to assume that if a craft is in an orbit, then it is in space.

At least he exploits some good people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Such as Einar Enevoldsen (refer Perlan Project). He's an ex USAF and NASA test pilot, and one hell of a fine flyer and guy. Fossett could have picked a worse set of coattails to ride, that's for sure.

The longest...

[syukton]

The longest...in length...

As opposed to what, exactly? Isn't "longest" usually a relative measure of, uhm, length?

Do you mean longest in terms of distance or duration? I'm fairly certain you ment distance, but you were totally ambiguous in the posting even though you made an attempt to clarify parenthetically.

Re:The longest...

[ScrewMaster]

Yes, but you're assuming that size matters.

Re:The longest...

[Tyler Eaves]

Time record is way longer, over a month. Done by a couple of crazy guys out in the desert in a Cessna. They refuled by passing up cans of gas from a car speeding along the runway.

Well thanks for clarifying than then.

[XSpud]

the world's longest (in length) flight

"Duration" or "distance" might have been more informative IMO.

Now I've got to read the damn article!

Re:Well thanks for clarifying than then.

[nsasch]

I was looking forward to the flight, and I've never made a post on /. I figured it was a race against others who probably knew of this flight. I wanted to make a clear summary, and noticed having to re-read the "longest" part, so I tried to clarify it, but obviously didn't read it over carefully enough to catch how redundantly pointless and repetitive (pun intended) the parenthetical clarification was. I knew I must've done something wrong, as it is my first accepted article. Oh well, only fools make the same mistake twice, and I'm not a fool, so I'll learn from my mistake.

It's the longest (in length)

[shiftless]

longest (in length) flight

Ah! Thanks for the explanation.

Re:It's the longest (in length)

[EvanED]

"Longest" can also very easily mean in time. You always hear people talking about how "long" movies are, that someone's been around a company "longer" than another person, etc.

The disambiguation was completely necessary.

Re:It's the longest (in length)

[Walkiry]

>The disambiguation was completely necessary.

The point was that the disambiguation wasn't very good. Longest in lenght could refer to length... of time. "Longest (in distance)" would have been much better.

snark

[Herr Proktor]

longest in length, huh? do you mean, as measured in units of length?

This is imporant for Aviation

[FoxyFox]

I believe this is important. To learn more about long flights is indeed useful. Also how long you can fly before the fuel weight works against you, how fast you can fly in order to get the longest distance etc. Boeing belives that in the future there will be a better market for direct planes, and less market for big planes between the big metropoles.(Airbus believes that this market is growing, so time will show who is right) Distance, speed and weight are therefore 3 very important variables for aviation, because in the future you can't make money only taking care of the number of passangers you can carry in a big jumbo. You need to fly longer and carry less passanger, that is, if Boeing is right.

Re:This is imporant for Aviation

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget that the US strategic air command has in the past flown air craft for several days continuously with in flight refueling.

Re:This is imporant for Aviation

[Brett Buck]

> I believe this is important. To learn more about long flights is indeed useful.
> Also how long you can fly before the fuel weight works against you, how fast
> you can fly in order to get the longest distance etc.

      These were all burning questions - in 1935. Charles Lindberg did exactly this sort of analysis in 1927 and the basic concepts are completely unchanged since then. The only reason this couldn't have been done in the 30's is that the engines weren't reliable enough.

          No offense to anyone, but to suggest that Fawcett is discovering some new principles in aeronautics by doing this flight is absurd. This type of information has been perfectly well understood for at least half a century. It's a neat stunt, but that's all it is.

          Brett

Re:This is imporant for Aviation

[FoxyFox]

>>These were all burning questions - in 1935. Charles Lindberg did exactly this sort of analysis in 1927 and the basic concepts are completely unchanged since then. The only reason this couldn't have been done in the 30's is that the engines weren't reliable enough. In computer science we don't stop developing CPUs because there exists an 386. In medicine we do not stop research on AIDS because there are some medicines out there. The distance, weight and speed variables are indeed useful, I do believe. >>No offense to anyone, but to suggest that Fawcett is discovering some new principles in aeronautics by doing this flight is absurd. This type of information has been perfectly well understood for at least half a century. It's a neat stunt, but that's all it is. There are colours between black and white. In science you seldom find the "colour" white og black in one try.

Re:This is imporant for Aviation

[FoxyFox]

>>Don't forget that the US strategic air command has in the past flown air craft for several days continuously with in flight refueling.

Yes, but this is how far you can get without refueling. Thats the whole point. To refuel commercial plains in the air is hardly a good alternative.

Latest update on web page

[MichaelSmith]

Next country to cross is Libya

Sounds like a blast to me.

Re:On this I have to say...,

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"How about using the money to help somebody out instead."

How do you know he's not? Even if he isn't who are you to judge? What if I said your posting on Slashdot was pointless and that you should take the $50 a month you're spending on your internet connection and send it to the local homeless shelter? You'd think I was a git, right? Think about it.

i agree

[Anonymous Coward]

I am sick of rich, attention seeking whores.

Re:On this I have to say...,

[Anonymous Coward]

INTRAWEB = TEh LifE!!

Bah-leeted!

Where is the BSD Catagory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Has Slashdot confirmed BSD death? Or has some one mistakenly removed the catagory?

Viva La BSD!

wings

[LordMyren]

his wings are feeling better this time?

he was planning on setting a new record a couple months ago with global flyer, but the crew scrapped up one of he wings, iirc.

3530 lbs unloaded. Pretty cool.

Yeah, so?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who gives a shit about some rich dick flying around the globe in a fuckin balloon?

Re:Yeah, so?

[massivefoot]

Offtopic, he's in an aeroplane. And hey, even if you're not impressed by the piloting of it, the aircraft itself is quite a technical achievment.

Re: Let me clarify...

[MikeSty]

If I recall, he is travelling over the Atlantic a second time, correct?

So my prediction still may hold true. This was a reference to an old attempt at a transatlantic flight which ended as I had said.

More efficent

[Rickler]

I'd rather see an ultra light weight air craft make the distance with little or no fuel. 18,000 lb. of fuel is such a waste.

Re:More efficent

[Alioth]

The aircraft IS ultra light weight for a flight of this distance.

Re:More efficent

[deadweight]

I think I would like to see cars that drive cross country with no fuel too! Why not make computers that require no electricity while we are at it.

Drugged up?

[Michael Woodhams]

Three days with no real sleep, only catnaps, then he has to land an airplane.

Does he get to take amphetamines during this time? Or are US drug laws too strict to allow this (given that he started in Florida.)

Re:Drugged up?

[Anonymous Coward]

Worlds most advanced long distance flyer..can't afford under 100lbs for autopilot hardware?

Why isn't this autonomous? What is the obsession with "manned" flight for anything terrestrial?

If this turd left his ego on the ground and had a system to regulate fuel consumption that knew the best way to ride a jetstream given current weather data and local observations, then couple that with GPS and a handfull of other optimizations I can only gesture at. Bam, this guy gets beaten by a 486 sitting in his spot at a fraction of the weight in seats/instrumentation/life support/human body/piss tank/food/water.

Re:Drugged up?

[massivefoot]

They probably can't fly an unmanned aerial vehicle through many countries. For example, from CAP 393 (UK Air Navigation Order):

The commander of a flying machine or glider registered in the United Kingdom shall cause one pilot to remain at the controls at all times while it is in flight.

You can't have an aircraft without a pilot in command, and I imagine most other countries have similar provisions. More information on this anyone?

Re:Drugged up?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Or are US drug laws too strict to allow this (given that he started in Florida.)"

In Florida that law is waived if you can deliver 12 or more Electoral votes.

No--it's quite important

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe this is important. To learn more about long flights is indeed useful. Also how long you can fly before the fuel weight works against you, how fast you can fly in order to get the longest distance etc. Boeing belives that in the future there will be a better market for direct planes, and less market for big planes between the big metropoles.(Airbus believes that this market is growing, so time will show who is right) Distance, speed and weight are therefore 3 very important variables for aviation, because in the future you can't make money only taking care of the number of passangers you can carry in a big jumbo. You need to fly longer and carry less passanger, that is, if Boeing is right.

longest (in length)

[fanblade]

"...the world's longest (in length) flight, ever."

As opposed to longest in...not length? Thanks for clearing that up!

Windows Media only?

[toddbu]

If these guys are so advanced, can't they come up with a video stream that works on more than one platform? At least this time their tracking web site seems to be keeping up with the traffic. I found it ironic that for all Branson's money, they couldn't handle all the page views last time.

Re:Windows Media only?

[Anonymous Coward]

So use VLC

Does it have to be in production right now?

[zippthorne]

http://www.moller.com/skycar/

What do I win?

Re:Does it have to be in production right now?

[NormalVisual]

Nothing, until it's something more than a pipe dream that's not done much more than hovered a few feet up for a little while. :-) Moller's idea *is* pretty cool, but the Global Flyer is on its second non-stop trip around the world as we speak, while the SkyCar has still yet to fly untethered after 40 years of development.

branson just flew in

[pintomp3]

and boy are his arms tired.... sorry. i'll go back to my corner now.

check dates

[Anonymous Coward]

your other sources must have amazing psychic powers then, because he took off this morning, not last week.

Longer in length?

[VincenzoRomano]

the world's longest (in length) flight

I'm wondering whether there can be other types of length where this flight cannot be the longest one.

Re:Longer in length?

[cyclomedia]

length in time, you could probably break that with a helium baloon

Re:Longer in length?

[VincenzoRomano]

Aye! I was not taking even in consideration the "time length".
In that case the Sputnik satellite should be among the winners: it'd quite hard for a hydrogen baloon to fly years! :-)

Microsoft Flight Simulator?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we know this flight is doomed. He shoulda used X-Plane....

X-Plane model

[caveat]

Here. It's a little out of date (v7.63), but for those of us who don't slum around with MSFS, it's a nifty little toy. And a real pain to fly, I couldn't manage 80 hours no way.

I'm curious how this beats 64 days in the air...

[Anonymous Coward]

According to this,http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0949972 &WxsIERv=Prffan%20172&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Unpvraqn%20Ubgr y%20Ynf%20Irtnf&QtODMg=Ynf%20Irtnf%20-%20ZpPneena% 20Vagreangvbany%20(YNF%20%2F%20XYNF)&ERDLTkt=HFN%2 0-%20Arinqn&ktODMp=Bpgbore%2015%2C%202005&BP=0&WNE b25u=GM%20Nivngvba&xsIERvdWdsY=A9172O&MgTUQtODMgKE =Guvf%20vf%20gur%20npghny%20nvepensg%20juvpu%20uby qf%20gur%20Jbeyq%20Raqhenapr%20Sylvat%20Erpbeq.%20 Frg%20ba%2007-Sro-1959%2C%20Eboreg%20Gvzz%20%26%20 Wbua%20Pbbx%20gbbx%20bss%20sebz%20ZpPneena%20nvecb eg%2C%20qrgrezvarq%20gb%20syl%20sbe%20ybatre%20jvg ubhg%20gbhpuvat%20gur%20tebhaq%20guna%20nalbar%20r yfr.%20Fcbafberq%20ol%20Ynf%20Irtnf'%20Unpvraqn%20 Ubgry%20gurl%20syrj%20sbe%2064%20qnlf%2C%2022%20ub hef%2C%2019%20zvahgrf%20naq%205%20frpbaqf%20-%20gu r%20rdhvinyrag%20bs%20fvk%20gvzrf%20nebhaq%20gur%2 0jbeyq.%20Gurl%20crevbqvpnyyl%20ershryyrq%20sebz%2 0n%20gehpx%20qevira%20nybat%20gur%20serrjnl%20haqr earngu%20gurz%2C%20svyyvat%20gur%20hahfhny%20rkgre any%20shry%20gnax.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=1787&NEb25uZWx s=2005-11-02%2008%3A42%3A31&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=367 72&static=yes&width=1200&height=812&sok=JURER%20%2 0(nvepensg%20%3D%20'Prffan%20172')%20%20BEQRE%20OL %20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=10&prev_id=0953307&nex t_id=0946016 he's got a long ways to go.

Get back to me, OK, Richy-B

[caluml]

Well, their feedback page doesn't work. "Document contains no data".

"Video requires a Windows Media compatible player - the free Microsoft Windows Media Player is available for download for your platform."

That's a little presumptious. Don't think Microsoft do a download for Linux.
Perhaps next time you might use a fully open video codec?

I'm hoping I'll get a personal reply/visit from Richard Branson regarding this.

Re:I'm curious how this beats 64 days in the air..

[P3NIS_CLEAVER]

May I suggest http://tinyurl.com/ ?

41 GPH?

[Darth Muffin]

I did the math (using rough numbers from memory for weight of fuel), and came up with about 41 gallons (US) per hour fuel consumption. We're supposed to be impressed by this? Granted, it doesn't fly (or carry 18,000 lbs of fuel), but my car could run for 30 hours on 41 gallons of fuel.

Re:41 GPH?

[ArtAesthete]

what a waste of limited resources for someone's ego-stroking.

Re:41 GPH?

[Anonymous Coward]

And you would get how far?

Re:41 GPH?

[Darth Muffin]

In your average car that gets 35mpg, more than 4 times around the earth at the equator, assuming we had a road around there :)

Re:41 GPH?

[mph]

Granted, it doesn't fly (or carry 18,000 lbs of fuel), but my car could run for 30 hours on 41 gallons of fuel.

Granted, it doesn't drive, but my cat could run for 30 hours on a half cup of cat food.

Re:41 GPH?

[Darth Muffin]

Point taken--comparing apples and oranges here. My original point was that 18,000 lbs of fuel just to stay aloft for 72 hours does not seem efficient at all. Anyone know what the normal fuel consumption for an aircraft is?

Compared to U.S. military in Iraq...

[Anonymous Coward]

According to an article from last month

the U.S. military is now using about 3 million gallons of fuel per day in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom

I'll leave it up to you to decide whether this is an efficient use of resources or not.

Global Flyer: the Movie

[metaltoad]

My company generated the tracking images being posted on the Global Flyer website. Using the individual images we created showing Global Flyer's position, we generated a time-lapse animation of Steve Fossett's latest trip. Kind of fun...!