Timeline for Could anyone (non-military) in the present day "exceed mach 1 over a regulated area"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 13, 2019 at 8:09 | comment | added | Mike Sowsun | You are correct. The A-4 was a subsonic aircraft but probably did sometimes exceed Mach 1.0 in a dive. | |
| Jan 13, 2019 at 8:08 | history | edited | Mike Sowsun | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 13 characters in body
|
| Jan 13, 2019 at 5:44 | comment | added | Mike Brass | I don't think the Douglas A-4 is capable of Mach 1. | |
| Dec 30, 2018 at 15:38 | comment | added | StephenS | What are the odds one of those owners hasn't done it? I know that if I had a supersonic plane, I wouldn't be able to resist. Otherwise, why spend that kind of cash? It might be worth getting caught just to have proof you did it! | |
| Dec 29, 2018 at 21:40 | comment | added | Ian Kemp | There is also 1 (sadly non-flying) English Electric Lightning in Florida! | |
| Dec 29, 2018 at 5:20 | comment | added | jamesqf | @reirab: Nor was it a manned vehicle. And if you're going to include rocket sleds, why not rifle ammunition with supersonic muzzle velocity? And have people call the FAA every time you go target shooting :-) | |
| Dec 29, 2018 at 2:16 | comment | added | reirab | @jamesqf Mach 8 has also been exceeded on the ground. :) Granted, it was not by a private individual. | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 19:56 | comment | added | Todd Wilcox | As much as I might dream of privately owning an SU-27, I don't think I'd be able to resist attempting maneuvers that would get me killed on the first day. | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 18:50 | comment | added | jamesqf | @Ralph J: And if you happened to do your flying at low level over an unpopulated area - say the Black Rock desert - you might not even show up on radar - civil, at least: IDK about military. FTM, mach 1 has been exceeded on the ground there: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThrustSSC Which raises the question of whether that's a violation of the FAA rule or not. And then there are the various private suborbital spacecraft... | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 18:14 | comment | added | Ralph J♦ | ATC radar wouldn't catch it, since they see ground speed and know neither your head/tail wind component nor the exact temperature at your altitude (which determines the speed of sound). If you're flying SR-71 speeds, then yeah they'd notice, but the difference between M 0.95 and M 1.05 isn't enough that they'd notice. You'd be far more likely to be "busted" based on noise complaints from the ground. | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 17:40 | comment | added | h22 | Maybe they could quickly try over the sea? | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 17:10 | comment | added | BruceWayne | "It is quite conceivable that a privately owned fighter jet has exceeded Mach 1 but not reported it or been caught by the authorities." - Really? I would have assumed that all jets (especially ex-military types) would be monitored by local ATC, and they'd notice someone going Mach 1+, no? Or is it more passive and they'd only notice that if they're actively watching that specific plane? | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:59 | history | edited | Mike Sowsun | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 16 characters in body
|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:36 | history | edited | Ron Beyer | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 12 characters in body
|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:16 | vote | accept | h22 | ||
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:08 | history | edited | Mike Sowsun | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 289 characters in body
|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 15:52 | history | edited | Mike Sowsun | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 134 characters in body
|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 15:45 | history | answered | Mike Sowsun | CC BY-SA 4.0 |