Sub-supersonic 777: Jetstream blasts BA flight over the Atlantic

It’s an ill wind…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11337617/Jet-stream-blasts-BA-plane-across-Atlantic-in-record-time.html

[quote]
Rob Crilly, New York
5:14PM GMT 10 Jan 2015
Boeing 777 reported at speeds of up to 745mph as it flies from New York to Heathrow in just 5 hours 16 minutes

Concorde may have been retired but a British Airways passenger jet approached supersonic speed this week as it rode a surging jet stream from New York to London.

The Boeing 777-200 jet reached a ground speed of 745mph as it rode winds of more than 200mph across the Atlantic. At ground level, the speed of sound is 761mph.

The happy result was a flight time of just five hours and 16 minutes for BA114, which arrived an hour and half before schedule, according to the tracking website, FlightAware.

Dozens of other flights also benefited from the jet stream’s winter surge, but those same windshave also triggered severe storms across Britain.

Pilots have long used jet streams - which flow across the globe from west to east - to cut journey times and save fuel.

Although airlines advertise the route at seven hours, it is not uncommon for flights to save an hour in the air, said Alastair Rosenschein, a former British Airways pilot who flew 747s between London and New York.

“It’s just like surfing. It’s extraordinary how fast you can go,” he said.

But at only 10 miles across and about 2000ft deep it takes skill, planning and a bit of luck to ride one for an entire route.

“You try to sit in the core of the jet where it’s not too turbulent and where you can pick up some free mileage. It’s not unusual to get 100mph tailwinds but they have got more than that,” he said. “This must be a record.”

Wednesday’s weather charts show the jet stream was running at 220 knots (250mph) and was unusually wide, he added, making it easier for pilots and their passengers to benefit.

Concorde’s fastest transatlantic crossing was on 7 February 1996 when it completed the New York to London flight in 2 hours 52 minutes

They are generally found between 23,000ft and 39,000ft - perfect altitudes for cruising airliners - and are caused by a combination of the earth’s rotation and heat from the sun.

This week’s extreme effects are thought to be the result of plunging temperatures in the United States hitting warmer air from the south.

Whatever the cause, it has proved a boon to travellers. Online flying forums were abuzz with passengers describing their own experiences of flights that had taken less than five and a half hours to cross the Atlantic, along with reassuring messages from pilots that the speeds were well within the tolerances of modern planes.

But while it may help trans-Atlantic passengers arriving from New York, pilots have to plot routes that avoid the high winds when they fly west.

And they can be responsible for what is known as “clear air turbulence”, forcing pilots to switch on the fasten seatbelts sign when planes are buffeted by disturbed air surrounding the smooth core. Man-made climate change is blamed for making the problem worse.

For many people in Britain there has been no avoiding the jet stream’s effects. Meteorologists say its high winds are responsible for bringing two ferocious Atlantic storms to northern Britain.

The high winds sparked a string of severe weather warnings, forcing train services to be suspended across Scotland, where record-breaking winds of up to 113mph lashed the country - and leaving thousands of homes without power.

Meanwhile, meteorologists say disturbances in the jet stream have brought a cold snap to America’s eastern seaboard and midwest, forcing cold air south from Canada, closing schools and even freezing fountains [/quote]

wilf_san

[quote]But at only 10 miles across and about 2000ft deep it takes skill, planning and a bit of luck to ride one for an entire route.
[/quote]

Er, no… Not across the Atlantic. Due to the very large density of traffic, there is a pre-determined route structure called the North Atlantic Track system. These are calculated to maximise traffic flow to incorporate minimum flight times (= minimum fuel used) using the forecast winds. In general, on UK timings, the tracks are westbound by day, & eastbound by night.

An aircraft will be allocated a specific track, such as NAT A, based on aircraft type, timings, maximum altitude, etc, so that deconfliction can be made with other aircraft. There is a minimum spacing between the different tracks & timing constraints (= distance between aircraft on the same track) to consider as well.

So, no planning by the crew, they were allocated a specific track. Yes, it might have been a lucky choice for them though. B)

[quote=“MikeJenvey” post=2289]

So, no planning by the crew, they were allocated a specific track. Yes, it might have been a lucky choice for them though. B)[/quote]

I’d thought that under MNPS http://www.ibac.org/Files/CNSATM/Library/MNPSA_2008.pdf and the mandatory(?) dual altimeter requirements there was maybe a bit more scope for cabin crew planning input to NATS tracks? We’re getting a talk from a current 777 captain next week (hopefully), so this’ll be an interesting topic for discussion.

wilf_san

There are several mandatory requirements in order to “play” in RVSM/MNPS airspace, & if there are failures or degradation of equipment in flight, then you have to declare yourself as “unable to play” & follow the appropriate procedures &/or ATC instructions.

Authority document

The allocation of a specific track takes several factors into account, such as aircraft type = cruise speed & initial flight planned (cruising level. For example (not representative figures), you might have 2 x “heavy” B747s trekking across to Los Angeles or San Francisco with full pax load, lots of fuel, maximum height to start with of 34000 ft, speed, M0.84. A B747 going to the New York area wouldn’t have so much fuel of board, so could cruise higher (38000 ft) than the other 2, but at similar cruising speed; the 3 aircraft might be allocated the same track, but with different flight levels. Now add different types to the equation, with different cruising speeds (ranging between M0.78 & M0.85) maximum cruising levels between 34000 ft & 40000 ft) = a complex planning situation to ensure the required separation - also with no expected conflicts if possible looking further down track when the aircraft are lighter, & able to climb higher in order to reduce fuel consumption.

Thanks for that, I couldn’t remember RVSM as an abbreviation for the life of me. And the example / links are appreciated (only been over the pond a few times myself, company transport, to/from CYYR, so not exactly conventional GAV fltplan!-)

wilf_san

Ah, the delights of the Goose (& Gander). Lots of fun days at Goose, Ice Carnival, skidoo-ing, ski-ing, winter survival, great flying…