Three cheers for Steve Fossett

This may not be the appropriate forum for this type of post, but I thought it was appropriate to congratulate Steve Fossett at his soon-to-be completed world record solo circumnavigation of the globe in his Global Flyer. At this writing this great Aviator should land in Salina, KS at 19:17 UTC after being airborne for over 70 hours.

I figured if anyone would appreciate the success of composite aircraft, it would be this group.

I passed by the global flyer this morning on my way to the fly-in at KTRM. I didn’t get to see it because he was much higher, but it was cool to hear the controller talk about it & give position reports to the other jet traffic.

And how many of those 70 hours will he be able to log as “cross country” time?

In reply to:


This may not be the appropriate forum for this type of post, but I thought it was appropriate to congratulate Steve Fossett at his soon-to-be completed world record solo circumnavigation of the globe in his Global Flyer. At this writing this great Aviator should land in Salina, KS at 19:17 UTC after being airborne for over 70 hours.

I figured if anyone would appreciate the success of composite aircraft, it would be this group.


Stan,

Your post is completely appropriate post for this forum. [:)] What an inspiration the Global Flyer is! It still amazes me how much of our current aviation technology (Global Flyer, SpaceShipOne, Cirrus, Lancair, UAV’s, UCAV’s) comes straight from EAA homebuilders tinkering in their garages and barns in the ‘70s and ‘80s!

Post deleted by cirius

In reply to:


And how many of those 70 hours will he be able to log as “cross country” time?


None. At no point did he land more than 50 nm away from his point of departure. To the FAA it was a local flight where he left and returned to the same airport with no intermediate stops.

In reply to:


And how many of those 70 hours will he be able to log as “cross country” time?


One could argue that he can log it as 70 hours of aerobatic time. After all, his flight was basically an outside loop of very large diameter…

Cheers,
Roger

In reply to:


Stan,
Your post is completely appropriate post for this forum. What an inspiration the Global Flyer is! It still amazes me how much of our current aviation technology (Global Flyer, SpaceShipOne, Cirrus, Lancair, UAV’s, UCAV’s) comes straight from EAA homebuilders tinkering in their garages and barns in the ‘70s and ‘80s!


Andy,
Isn’t that the truth!!?? I have a six year old son that it just as enfatuated with anything that flies as I was at his age. I really, really look forward to what he will be able to fly in twenty, thirty, and forty years. The pace of developement has picked up again, and he is too young to know what is in store for him. I never thought (even as late as ten years ago) that I would be able to have a plane that would be able to carry my family of four at over 200 miles per hour, in high comfort, with satellite navigation, and a huge MFD to any place I wanted to go. I still remember four years ago, while pondering the Cirrus purchase, drawing a 630 mile arc centered on my home airport and realizing I could reach almost anywhere in the eastern half of the country in three hours.

Now, for the first time in my lifetime, there are significant developements in powerplants and avionics. The future truly does look bright for propeller heads like us.

What an interesting point in our culture, when after this astounding feat, the larger headline is, “Martha Stewart Freed From Prison”.

In reply to:


I have a six year old son that it just as enfatuated with anything that flies as I was at his age. I really, really look forward to what he will be able to fly in twenty, thirty, and forty years.


In reply to:


Now, for the first time in my lifetime, there are significant developements in powerplants and avionics. The future truly does look bright for propeller heads like us.


Greg,
Very well said! Forty years from now, your son may be flying around in a no-boom supersonic personal jet that can land itself (not that most pilots would let a computer have all the fun). [:)]

In reply to:


None. At no point did he land more than 50 nm away from his point of departure. To the FAA it was a local flight where he left and returned to the same airport with no intermediate stops.


Special dispensation was accorded Rutan and Yeager to allow them to log their world-circling flight as cross-country, and I expect the same will be granted in this case.

I did not know that. Neither does Neil Boortz since he mentioned the lack of cross country credit on his radio program.

In reply to:


I did not know that. Neither does Neil Boortz since he mentioned the lack of cross country credit on his radio program.


Could be an OWT, but I have heard it from several sources, none of which I’d bet the farm on!

In reply to:


One could argue that he can log it as 70 hours of aerobatic time. After all, his flight was basically an outside loop of very large diameter…


And now that the records for largest outside loop are taken (aside from orbiting satellites), the record for largest inside loop is up for grabs; anyone for a circumnavigation inverted?

In reply to:


So Kudos to the engineers, the builders, and the team that put it all together, and a much ,much smaller kudo to the Monkey that flew it.


I agree except for the idea that it was actually a technological achievement! From everything I have read there was no new technology built into this plane. In fact they built the plane entirely with off the shelf stuff and borrowed heavily from the design of the Rutan - Yeager plane and international logistics setup to create Fossett’s. Other than actually DOING it, nothing in Fossett’s trip broke new ground in ANY aspect of aviation. As far as proving it could be done, Fossett’s trip could have been modeled in a good computer simulator since there were no unknowns to test. The trip itself was completely worthless and a waste of time, money, and resources. Unless you want to count Fossett’s need for gloryhounding. To compare this event with the truly groundbreaking flights of the early aviators only sullies the image of those great adventurers and inventors. Perhaps that is why it (appropriately) got so little media coverage compared to the “Spaceship 1” suborbital flights and the Rutan - Yaeger circumnavigation flight.

<<So sorry to ruin all you fun but I give a lot more credit to the pioneers who were actually integral to the design, building, and ultimately risked their lives to create the way.
So Kudos to the engineers, the builders, and the team that put it all together, and a much ,much smaller kudo to the Monkey that flew it.>>

Wow, this is a pleasant post. Even Chuck Yeager respected the seven human “monkeys” of the Mercury spaceflights, if for no other reason than they truly had to have some real brass to sit on a rocket. How many of us would be willing to do what Fossett did? That Pacific Ocean is one big body of water, don’t forget. I think ol’ Steve, and his team, did well in my book.

Neo,
You’re not alone in being a bit underwhelmed by Steve Fossett’s flight. See, for instance, this article by a writer in Salina, Kansas, where the world flight began and ended.
I’m personally much more impressed by the U. S. Army crews who did the very first round-the-world flight in 1924 (click here). It took them 175 days, but without GPS or telemetry and with many more adventures along the way.

The Douglas World Cruiser Chicago, part of the 1924 round-the-world flight.

Cheers,
Roger