I do recall a TV show where it was said that you could tell you got to mach 1 on the Concorde only by looking at a sign indicating you were at the speed of sound. I would have enjoyed the flight and now I wish I had since it won't be long before supersonic flight on the commercial level disappears.
Jim A. > From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Stanley, Powers & Matyola > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 13:11:31 -0400 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT:No camera=first Concord siting > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:21:49 -0400 > > I suspect that you would have been disappointed in the Mach 1 flight. While > there > was a lot of shaking and buffeting in the early supersonic planes, in modern > aircraft it is a nonevent that you can tell only by the mach meter. (I flew > in > fighter jets that could easily breadk Mach 1, and I flew over Mach 2 on one > occasion). > The Concorde is a very luxurious craft, from what I've heard, so you might > have > enjoyed that aspec of the flight. > > Jim Apilado wrote: > >> I saw the Concord come in to Portland, OR back in 90's. The tower called it >> "speed bird". I did have a camera. They offered a flight towards Hawaii >> where >> the plane would reach mach 1. There were few takers for the $1000 a seat >> flight, >> so it was lowered to $500 a seat. Had I had the bucks I would >> have taken it. >
