Sonic boom by jet

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

In this video showing a Turkish airforce F16 flying over Ankara in July 2016 during the coup, a large bang can be heard. Most likely a sonic boom of the F16. It is at around 28 seconds in the video.

It could be people in Torez heard a sonic boom of a figherjet. Although I am not sure if there are reports of people who heard jetengines.

This is another video

Sonic boom


This video explains sonic booms


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

10 Comments on Sonic boom by jet

  1. Mr.Bushkin // July 19, 2016 at 10:28 am // Reply

    If the jet was engaging ground targets, then it was likely to fly with sub-sonic speed.

    • Daniel Been // July 19, 2016 at 10:38 am // Reply

      If it just had finished engaging, it would likely get the hell out of there.

      And from which altitude would this boom still be impressive to hear? It’s way more likely they would approach way over 6000m in cruise mode, then start a dive (boom not very likely to form when not steady) and then pull-up again. That’s what these jets are designed to do. If they only did some reconnaissance however, some supersonic speed could be imagined at lower altitudes.

  2. Charles Wood // July 19, 2016 at 11:21 am // Reply

    I recall a recent video interview (Billy Six?) that mentioned a double bang just prior to the MH17 shootdown. Double bangs are characteristic of supersonic transit.

    I’ve read the internet chatter that says rockets don’t make sonic booms. However that is for rockets that take off vertically. The missile in MH17 would be travelling much more horizontally – maybe even level or descending at the end – so a sonic boom is much more likely.

  3. Excellent video of Israel Iron Dome rocket system (tamir rocket, 90 kg, 300 m/s) — all actions was above our head (start, fly, maneuvering and intercept):

    And some bench of rockets fly above heads:
    1. Calibr missile over Syria:
    2. Many calibr misslies over Syria:
    3. BM-21 Grad rockets on Ukraine:
    4. Tockka-U tactic rocket fly and explode over city in Ukraine:
    5. Another Iron Dome work in Israel:

  4. Graph of sonic booms create on the ground after the dive the plane: (interestingly what the first sonic boom will be heard on the ground only after second come in).

    Example (5:25):

  5. Rob Heusdens // June 6, 2018 at 3:56 pm // Reply

    Interesting point of investigation. So we have following situation:
    point A. This is the launch location from which rocked is launched.
    After few seconds, and moving mostly in horizontal direction and accelerating (with possible a speed up of acceleration as fuel burnt makes rocket lighter) it reaches sound speed. The location is B. Ground projection of that point is B’. The after yet another few seconds it reaches the target and explodes. That is point C. Ground projection is point C’.
    Exactly between point B’ and C’ on the ground there is point M. There we can draw a line exactly orthogonal to the line A – B’ – C’, and on that line the sound of both explosions would have been heard simultaneous. On the one side of that line (closer to A) one should have heard the sonic boom before the explosive boom, and the other side of the line the explosive boom before the sonic boom with increase in duration further from the line.
    There are 2 maxima for the duration between the booms. One at point B’ and one t point C’.

    How precise could a witness have heard the duration between booms (without being able to tell the distance, direction or which boom it was), and if data of many witnesses would have been collected (point where they were and what their estimate was of the duration, tested with an example of booms following each other with increasing duration between booms in steps of 1/10 second) we could have constructed point B’ with a precission of perhaps smaller then 330 meter (sound speed is 330 m/s, so it would be a 1 sec difference/variation in duration, but I guess for small durations more precise measurements would have been possible) and from the flight profile of the rocket one could have constructed point A, the probably launch location. Perhaps with accuracy of less then 1 km2.

    But this kind of analysis based on what duration between the booms witnesses heard have not been made so far as I know. But it could have been fairly accurate method for calculating launch location. It would be almost bias free, because a witness can not directly infer from their testimony what location can be calculated as you need many data points for calculation of location, and since you already know the (theoretical) pattern of the data, you can directly spot data points which are not in line. For very small durations between the booms, witnesses might in fact have heard only a single boom, and it is quite good distinguishable (perhaps within 1/10 of a second or less) if two booms occur simultaneous or with a duration of 1/10 of a second or more.

    Maybe this kind of analysis is still possible after 4 years, even though it becomes less accurate over time.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.