Scaled Composites builds plane for solo nonstop globe circumnavigation attempt

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:01:42 GMT, Bernie the Bunion
wrote:

Corky Scott wrote:


Sir Richard Branson and Steve Fossett announce plans to attempt the
world's first non-stop solo flight around the globe without
refuelling.


Well now the Bunion is confused...... I thought that had already been
accomplished by the voyager flight.

where did they stop for fuel or what part of the globe did they not fly
around.

Heh heh, what does the word "solo" mean to Bunion's?

Corky Scott


This time without Jeana? Well, they couldn't hardly stummick each other
the last time.

"Bernie the Bunion" wrote in message
...
| Corky Scott wrote:
|
|
| Sir Richard Branson and Steve Fossett announce plans to attempt the
| world's first non-stop solo flight around the globe without
| refuelling.
|
|
| Well now the Bunion is confused...... I thought that had already been
| accomplished by the voyager flight.
|
| where did they stop for fuel or what part of the globe did they not fly
| around.

Still a play on words.. 'around the globe' should apply to a distance equal
to that at the equator or through the poles.. in other words a 'great circle
route'.. not merely around at some far shorter latitude.. just visit the
north or south pole, take one step aside, then circle the globe in a few
easy steps.. [g]

Corky Scott wrote:

Heh heh, what does the word "solo" mean to Bunion's?

Corky Scott

Well Corky that depends on whether or not it is a Saturday nite.

Just reading the thread in a casual manner I kept seeing
Sir Richard Branson and Steve Fossett's name being mentioned
and I couldn't quite figure out where the solo part was.

With the ego and money those two have it will be interesting to
see who the solo pilot is and who gets to sit on the ground and watch.

Larry Smith wrote:

This time without Jeana?

This time without Dick too.

Dave 'No pun intended' Hyde

David O wrote:

To me, though, 18,000 lb of fuel kinda screamed "unrefueled" anyway.

It's all a matter of scale. When I'm using my GA brain it
screams 'massive fuel spill,' but when I'm using my professional
brain it screams 'double cycle' or 'buster.' Both of my
brains tend to scream a lot, so it's sometimes hard to
decide which to listen to. Sometimes, and it happens here
a lot, I don't use either one.

Dave 'LALALALALALA' Hyde

Bernie the Bunion wrote:

Corky Scott wrote:

Heh heh, what does the word "solo" mean to Bunion's?

Corky Scott

Well Corky that depends on whether or not it is a Saturday nite.

Just reading the thread in a casual manner I kept seeing
Sir Richard Branson and Steve Fossett's name being mentioned
and I couldn't quite figure out where the solo part was.

With the ego and money those two have it will be interesting to
see who the solo pilot is and who gets to sit on the ground and watch.

Maybe they're both going: one as pilot and one as passenger.

Russell "it's all in the interpretation" Kent

Russell Kent wrote:

Maybe they're both going: one as pilot and one as passenger.

According to one person's account that's already been done. ;-)

Dave 'insider trading' Hyde

Russell

Don't have the magazine in front of me and to lazy to go get it from
house.

It did say that 'one' (Branson???) was the "back up" pilot.

Big John



On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:18:43 -0600, Russell Kent
wrote:

Bernie the Bunion wrote:

Corky Scott wrote:

Heh heh, what does the word "solo" mean to Bunion's?

Corky Scott

Well Corky that depends on whether or not it is a Saturday nite.

Just reading the thread in a casual manner I kept seeing
Sir Richard Branson and Steve Fossett's name being mentioned
and I couldn't quite figure out where the solo part was.

With the ego and money those two have it will be interesting to
see who the solo pilot is and who gets to sit on the ground and watch.

Maybe they're both going: one as pilot and one as passenger.

Russell "it's all in the interpretation" Kent

"David O" wrote in message
...

P.S. The distance shown for the Voyager is the actual distance flown,
not the FAI credited distance. The Voyager average speed is based on
the actual distance flown. The max altitude figure for the Voyager is
the maximum achieved (over Africa) in an attempt to get above weather.
Notice that although it will be a solo attempt, the GlobalFlyer's
useful load would allow for two people plus full fuel.

As long as they didn't eat or drink for three days.
Gives a whole new meaning to the term "a fast flight".

Tim Ward

nafod40 wrote:

Actually, Dave, the clip I posted was the entire article. To me,
though, 18,000 lb of fuel kinda screamed "unrefueled" anyway.

A friend of mine logged a .3 while flying an F-111 at 300 feet and Mach
.95 (ingress) and Mach 1.3 (egress) in a Maple Flag exercise in Canada.
They burned 20,000+ lbs of go juice. I guess 18,000 lbs screamed "low
fuel light" to them. : )

One word: context. A single Williams FJ44-3 turbofan, 18,000 lb of
fuel, and a composite aircraft built by Burt Rutan for an around the
world attempt screams "unrefueled" to me. It should also scream
unrefueled to those with a knowledge of modern small turbofan SFC's
and a modicum of common sense.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com