40 comments

  1. It’s always the same : I buy what’s supposed to be the top shelf private jet, AND A NEW ONE is released few weeks after I get it delivered. Annoying.

  2. i hope this makes rich people even richer! YAY for people who can afford this, you guys are the best people on the planet!

    1. Yes your failure to perform in society is the fault of the rich. We need more people like you……

    2. @Big Picture Thinking – Nah, we don’t. There’s already plenty at every Democrat rally.

  3. I saw the photo-shoot flight over the coast about a week ago. They’re very beautiful. For a couple of days (at magic hour) several planes headed out. I thought they were naval/military but didn’t recognize them.

  4. *Those of us who don’t see how this jet gonna improve their financial income let’s gather here*

    1. It’s just another toy for rich folk to spend their cash on. I doubt that they even get to fly it themselves. What’s the point of having a private jet if you can’t fly it yourself?

  5. The high speed does NOT equate to more range on the same amount of fuel (@2:10), due to the laws of aerodynamics and fluid flow, the optimum speed for lowest fuel burn is around mach 0.84, which is where most commercial airliners fly now. I have not looked up the “owner’s manual” for the global 8000, but I am willing to bet that speed for optimum long range cruise, is mach 0.84 ± 0.03. I do agree that the maximum speed of 0.94 is for bragging rights. The top of the line Gulf-stream is nearly identical.

    1. @Chris It’s not just something you “look up,” you have to know enough to talk to an expert…. like the OP apparently. The math says there is a sweet spot for efficiency. But most news agencies don’t think scientifically and don’t have science-minded people in their staff.

      This piece was nothing more than free advertising for a private company. Nothing is really that amazing here, but isn’t it great that Bombardier gets FREE nationwide advertising in the US with reporters fawning over things they don’t understand.

      News companies should be banned from doing these kinds of pieces. Either no companies get free advertising or they all get it. Pick one, CNN. This is shameful.

    2. @John Smithe I’m aware, I’m actually a physicist and by look up I also meant consult an expert. You are right though, It does seem more like a commercial than an actual piece of news.

    3. Yeah, it’s a bunch of nonsense hype. The Gulfstream G650ER has a ‘long range’ cruise speed of M 0.85, and a maximum cruise speed of M 0.90. At 85% the speed of sound, its range is 7500 nautical miles. Increase to Mach .9, range drops to 5000 nautical miles. The upshot? At maximum cruise speed, you burn 50% more fuel to save about 35 minutes on a ten hour journey. The cost to do that? 2400 extra gallons of jet fuel, at ~$4 a gallon, about 10,000 bucks.
      Also, the tag for the video is misleading. The jet went supersonic in a controlled dive, not in level flight. Idiot reporters gushing about nothing…

  6. Me: going from New York to Tokyo for business while watching Titanic 1997, from opening to end credits

  7. I flew on BA Concorde G-BOAF from Heathrow to JFK in 2002. We did it in 3 hours and 29 minutes, at a sustained cruise speed of M.2.03.
    Did you know there were 20 Concordes in all? Two prototypes, four development ships, and 14 built for Air France and BA. All but two survive.

    1. 7 are in the UK,
      6 are in France,
      3 are in the US,
      1 in Germany, and
      1 in Barbados.

      Since they’ve stopped flying, I’ve seen 3, and been inside 1. I never kept track of how many in the air. Probably because I never expected it would end.

  8. So it (0.96) goes 2% faster than what’s already out there (0.94). And it once went above mach 1 in testing but it probably won’t be supposed to when it’s released to buyers. ….Cool.

    1. Now if they could only make us go Supersonic through the Check in, Check out and Customs this would be worth it…

  9. This may be the dumbest thing I have watched in a long time. So it’s only a tiny bit faster, does not go supersonic, and is half as fast as the concord was…. Mind blowing stuff CNN

  10. That Jet is going to be so amazing but I wonder if it’s going to be cheaper or expensive to fly on that🤔

  11. So the new 2022 Bombardier is slower than the 1969 Concorde.
    Is 92 year old Buzz Aldrin from Apollo 11 the pilot?

  12. The Concorde went Mach 2.22. 0.94 isn’t much more than 0.92. Subsonic and supersonic jets are just 2 different breeds. And this is a subsonic jet. Now it’s range is insane.

  13. Concorde went >Mach 2. The 8000 went just over Mach 1, plus it’s strictly built as a private jet.

  14. The reduction in speed relative to Concorde mirrors the way the USA is regressing politically.

  15. businessmen have to travel faster than the rest of us otherwise they wouldn’t be able to keep us in their state of economic subjugation.

  16. This is a non-story with a clickbait title. This plane is not intended to go supersonic. Other commercial aircraft have exceed Mach 1 during testing. Mach 0.92 vs 0.94 on an 8 hr flight would save you 10 minutes if the plane could travel at max speed the entire flight. Because this obviously does not happen we are talking maybe mere minutes at best.

  17. If the plane is rated at a max speed of 0.94, it can hardly be called Supersonic. If it can only achieve it under very few circumstances, it’s not much more impressive than regular passenger craft. It has pretty impressive range, I’ll give it that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.