Skip to main content
Aviation

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Based on my rudimentary knowledge of these things, I feel like Mach .94 doesn't really make sense for anyone. Wouldn't that put it firmly in the trans-sonic flight scheme, where the plane would have to be built for supersonic flight anyway? And nudging it into supersonic territory would also be more efficient? $\endgroup$
    – BlackThorn
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 16:35
  • $\begingroup$ @BlackThorn indeed. Each plane is built for a certain purpose. In most business and airliners speed is not one of them. But as answer stated, business jets try to save time and so are a little fast. So technically speed is one of its purposes but is not the #1 priority. $\endgroup$
    – Deko Revinio
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 16:47
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ @BlackThorn The higher Mach number gives you bragging rights later at the golf course or the country club. Invaluable for some! $\endgroup$
    – Peter Kämpf
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 17:35
  • $\begingroup$ @BlackThorn: Most jetliners are already well into the transonic regime at M0.85; bizjets are just somewhat further in than jetliners. $\endgroup$
    – Vikki
    Commented Feb 17, 2023 at 22:38