Airlines flying at the ‘speed of sound’ right now

[reader]

From CNN Travel

Savior of many a cramped pair of legs, the jet stream is well known for lopping roughly an hour off long haul west-to-east flights. 

But it’s working especially hard for travelers in economy class right now, with the jet stream over the Atlantic so strong that flights heading from the US to Europe are reaching speeds equivalent to that of sound.

Sound travels at about 761 mph or 1,100 feet per second in “sea level standard conditions,” according to NASA – a little over 661 knots. 

In the past 24 hours, passenger aircraft traveling east from the US across the Atlantic have reached up to 778 mph. That’s a little over 200 miles per hour faster than normal cruising speeds.

But if you’re thinking these flight times are a match for the much-missed Concorde, whose sonic booms used to mark it breaking the sound barrier, it’s time to think again. There’s a difference between ground speed and speed in the air (indicated air speed, essentially the speed of the plane in relation to the air around it). These passenger flights, however speedy, didn’t break the sound barrier. 

But they did slash flight times. Emirates flight 222 from Dallas to Dubai arrived 57 minutes early on November 1, having reached a top speed of 675 knots, or 777 mph, off the coast of Newfoundland, according to flight tracking site Flightaware.

American Airlines flight 106 from JFK to Heathrow arrived 54 minutes early on Wednesday morning, with a flight time of just six hours and seven minutes. It reached a top speed of 778 mph, or 676 knots, also just past Newfoundland.

Meanwhile Delta flight 186 raced from Los Angeles to London with top speeds of 760mph, arriving half an hour early on November 1 at 1.08 p.m.

Continues at

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/jet-stream-flights-speed-of-sound/index.html

[PeterRS]

Great for those flying from west to east. A bit of a pain for those in cramped economy flying from east to west since flight times will be very considerably longer. Bugger!

Interesting part of the article is at the end. In 2020 a British Airways 747 gained the record with a JFK/LHR time of just under 5 hours! In the time between reaching cruising altitude and starting its descent, there would have hardly been time to enjoy a couple of drinks!

[thaiophilus]

5 hours ago, reader said:

From CNN Travel

 There’s a difference between ground speed and speed in the air (indicated air speed, essentially the speed of the plane in relation to the air around it).

Not that it matters, but that's incorrect. There's a big difference between true air speed and indicated air speed.

True air speed (TAS) is the actual speed relative to the surrounding air. Indicated air speed IAS is (by definition 🙂) the speed indicated by the air speed indicator (ASI), which derives a speed from the pressure at the pitot tube, assuming sea-level air density.  At altitude the density is lower and so the IAS reads (a lot) lower than TAS.

Sorry, CNN.

[reader]

You’re right: it doesn’t matter. CNN’s provides a layman’s definition of the difference between ground speed and air speed to illustrate how the two differ in determining flight duration. I agree that it would have been better to omit “indicated” airspeed which has a more technical definition which you provided.

[vinapu]

Whatever technical niceties are what counts is that early arrival, been there , done that,  few times.

But as Peter noticed it may work other way around, Last year what  was  supposed to be 2 hr layover at Narita was reduced to 20 minutes sprint through security (granted, extremely well streamlined by Japanese and Thai jet was waiting for  us few conecting passengers ) . I made it to Bangkok  but my luggage did not until next day.

Nice gesture was that Just before we took off they warned us that fight to Narita will arrive 100 minutes late even if we departed on the dot.

Shocking for me was fact that First and Business passengers were also late exactly as much as we humble economizers.

[alvnv]

55 minutes ago, vinapu said:

Shocking for me was fact that First and Business passengers were also late exactly as much as we humble economizers.

What about their luggage? Did they have to wait until the following day, too?

[vinapu]

13 hours ago, alvnv said:

What about their luggage? Did they have to wait until the following day, too?

No idea as all was extremely efficiently handled by Thai. I did not expect my luggage to be reloaded in 20 minutes if that much .

By time I approach conveyor there was lady already with my name informing me about delay and telling me that it will be delivered next day afternoon and sent to my hotel. I told her don't bother as day after I'm flying to Phnom Penh so I will pick it up then and this is exacly what happened.

[unicorn]

On 11/5/2023 at 7:42 PM, vinapu said:

... fight to Narita...

 

😄

 

[PeterRS]

On 11/6/2023 at 10:42 AM, vinapu said:

Last year what  was  supposed to be 2 hr layover at Narita was reduced to 20 minutes sprint through security (granted, extremely well streamlined by Japanese and Thai jet was waiting for  us few conecting passengers ) . I made it to Bangkok  but my luggage did not until next day.

That is shocking!. Usually if there is more than a handful of passengers coming in on a delayed flight and transiting to a new flight, it is common airline practice to hold the outgoing flight to enable the transit passengers to board, even for different airlines in different alliances. This is especially true at hub airports like Narita. Luggage is a different issue and understandable if it does not make the next flight. I assume @vinapu was one of just a few making that BKK transit.

I once made the mistake of assuming that US gateway airports had international transit facilities. I learned the hard way! To maximise mileage on American, I booked Tokyo to Dallas and then Dallas to Vancouver, even though there are much shorter non-stop flights. No one warned me that I'd have to go through immigration in Dallas and enter the USA before then leaving it again minutes later. It so happened quite a number of international flights had arrived in Dallas at more or less the same time. My nice long transit time during which I expected to enjoy at least 2 drinks in the lounge had me panicking that I would miss the Vancouver flight, so long were the queues.

I do not know if the situation has changed, but it seems crazy that the USA required passengers on an incoming international flight connecting with an outgoing international flight actually to enter the country first! I didn't know then of any other countries who did the same. Now I understand a completed online ESTA form is also required. I totally fail to understand why!

[vinapu]

7 hours ago, PeterRS said:

That is shocking!. Usually if there is more than a handful of passengers coming in on a delayed flight and transiting to a new flight, it is common airline practice to hold the outgoing flight to enable the transit passengers to board, 

I was probably not clear, this is exactly what happened, they streamlined us through security ( I think it was 6 passengers total) and Thai jet was waiting. It even departed bit late to make sure all of us boarded. Luggage , as we said was another issue.

 

 

7 hours ago, PeterRS said:

No one warned me that I'd have to go through immigration in Dallas and enter the USA before then leaving it again minutes later.

I do not know if the situation has changed, but it seems crazy that the USA required passengers on an incoming international flight connecting with an outgoing international flight actually to enter the country first! I didn't know then of any other countries who did the same.

For all I know Canada and USA have the same system, if you land there you need to go through immigration at first point of entry even if you continue to another country or another destination within country. 

Travel forums are full of advices to try not to connect through those countries if you have other options.

There were stranger rules in the past, if plane stopped for refuelling , which in days before long range jets were developed was quite common if even one passenger was alighting at refuelling stop all passengers were required to have transit visas. 

Not sure how it works now if passenger from country , say Canada , requires visas is just transiting in Montreal on his way to Dallas or in New York transiting to Calgary. 

 

[PeterRS]

16 minutes ago, vinapu said:

For all I know Canada and USA have the same system, if you land there you need to go through immigration at first point of entry even if you continue to another country or another destination within country . . .

There were stranger rules in the past, if plane stopped for refuelling , which in days before long range jets were developed was quite common if even one passenger was alighting at refuelling stop all passengers were required to have transit visas. 

Not sure how it works now if passenger from country , say Canada , requires visas is just transiting in Montreal on his way to Dallas or in New York transiting to Calgary.  

 

In my experience, almost every country requires Immigration checks at the first port of entry. Customs checks, though, are sometimes left to the final destination.

I have also experienced your second point above. Flying on CX from HKG to JFK via Vancouver, every passenger had to deplane in Vancouver for an hour even though many passengers were continuing to JFK and there were no Immigration checks. We were just herded into a lounge to wait. I just thought it was something to do with refuelling!

[vinapu]

1 hour ago, PeterRS said:

 

I have also experienced your second point above. Flying on CX from HKG to JFK via Vancouver, every passenger had to deplane in Vancouver for an hour even though many passengers were continuing to JFK and there were no Immigration checks. We were just herded into a lounge to wait. I just thought it was something to do with refuelling!

reminds me my first flight to Thailand. It was just post 9/11 , early Nov2001 so plane was not full. Thai flight from Los Angeles had refuelling stop at Kansai(Osaka), we were made to deplane but because security checks it was going pretty slow. I, as always sitting in the back was one of the last to leave and by time I  reached scanner that already started boarding back so basically I just had circular walk and went straight back to my , still warm seat 

[paulsf]

Before Covid Cathay sold the Jfk Vancouver leg as a separate ticket. So you could buy just that or thru to Hong Kong.    They stopped selling it during Covid.   

[thaiophilus]

2 hours ago, PeterRS said:

In my experience, almost every country requires Immigration checks at the first port of entry.

Maybe, but in most countries "transit" is not "entry", and passengers in transit to a third country are not required to go through immigration checks if they remain airside.  Certainly I have passed through airports in France, Germany, Italy, Dubai, Jordan, Abu Dhabi and Qatar, to name a few, without immigration checks. Only in the USA was it different.

[vinapu]

13 minutes ago, thaiophilus said:

Maybe, but in most countries "transit" is not "entry", and passengers in transit to a third country are not required to go through immigration checks if they remain airside.  Certainly I have passed through airports in France, Germany, Italy, Dubai, Jordan, Abu Dhabi and Qatar, to name a few, without immigration checks. Only in the USA was it different.

You are correct, I'd even throw more exotic , when comes to transiting,  countries to the list  like Ecuador. Mexico , Jordan of Ethiopia. This seems unique North American feature just like charging sales tax on top of price posted.

[PeterRS]

8 hours ago, vinapu said:

This seems unique North American feature just like charging sales tax on top of price posted.

Please don't get me on to this! When I stay at a New York hotel I seem to recall there are four different taxes/charges added to the basic room cost and these can add up to 25% or more!

[vinapu]

10 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

Please don't get me on to this! When I stay at a New York hotel I seem to recall there are four different taxes/charges added to the basic room cost and these can add up to 25% or more!

still beats sleeping on the platform of Grand Central, even if free

[PeterRS]

2 minutes ago, vinapu said:

still beats sleeping on the platform of Grand Central, even if free

So I take it that's your usual accommodation in the Big Apple whenever and if ever you visit. 🤣

[vinapu]

10 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

So I take it that's your usual accommodation in the Big Apple whenever and if ever you visit. 🤣

no, but taking into consideration cost of accommodation in NYC I proposed handy suggestion.

I was blessed with friends living there so my 20 or so visits were  accommodation cost free. Unfortunately they moved , divorced and died so that option is closed now  but at the same time it closed I discovered charms of Bangkok and don't miss NYC anymore. Specially now when  8th Avenue and Times Square are gentrified why go?

( Just kidding )

[PeterRS]

23 minutes ago, vinapu said:

Specially now when  8th Avenue and Times Square are gentrified why go?

( Just kidding )

A very good point. I recall on my first NYC visit going to The Gaiety Burlesque (think that was the name) and thought I'd gone to an early form of heaven (before I discovered Asia)!

Little anecdote. In the 1970s one of the Metropolitan Opera's regular sopranos was the Mexican Gilda Cruz-Romo. After rehearsal one morning, she popped into the office of the company's language coach to ask if he'd like to join her as she wanted to see a movie. He was too busy so she said she'd ask someone else. Half an hour later he was looking out of one of the Met's front windows and saw three divas sashaying down Broadway in their fur coats on their way to the movies. The film they wanted to see - Deep Throat!

[vinapu]

17 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

A very good point. I recall on my first NYC visit going to The Gaiety Burlesque (think that was the name) and thought I'd gone to an early form of heaven (before I discovered Asia)!

 

Gaiety ! I wanted to mention it in my post above but couldn't recall name, thank you for bringing it up.