Posts about: "Filton" [Posts: 73 Pages: 4]

Somebody is for sure going to come back and say I haven't a clue what I am talking about on this one! But here goes:

I had never heard of any such stiffeners before I started reading this thread.
The wing inboard of Rib 12 was pretty stiff as was Rib 12 itself, so it didn't need stiffening there.
I don't see how tiny stiffeners like that, mounted INBOARD of Rib 12 could ever have have any significant stiffening effect on the wing OUTBOARD of Rib 12. if anyone wanted to stiffen the outer wing it would be much more efficient to do it with internal structure, so any external addition would have been some sort of panic measure and I think I would have heard of it.
The external shape of the excrescence looks to me much more like a streamlined fairing to get some sort of cable or pipe from A to B when for some reason it couldn't be passed through inside the wing. In this connection I see that the objects in question run fairly close if not along, area where one might have something going from tank 5a to 6 or 7 to 7a.
Yes there would be a small performance penalty for these fairings.

In summary I don't really know, but would need a lot of convincing that these things really were external stiffeners!

CliveL

I've pulled this quotation out at random from what I have found a rather disappointing sequence of postings. I could write reams about this (and like everyone in this thread I would write as a Concordophile), but I won't - or at least I will try not to. In general I'm with Christian on this, and for the record I think a few 'counterfactuals' should be recorded. I am not trying to reopen a sterile debate - as CJ has said irrevocable decisions have been made and the subject is done and dusted. However, let us remember that:

G-BOAF was, and is the property of BA; BAe and now AI are merely caretakers.
AI's statement cross-posted from the Heritage website strikes me as a very reasonable statement; we found that your roof is leaking, if you don't get it fixed it is going to get worse rather rapidly; if you (BA) agree and will pay us to do it we will take it indoors and fix it. I don't see any sinister intent here, and given the weather we have had in the UK over the past weeks it must be regarded as a happy, if fortuitous decision!
Those who know Filton will also know that there is nowhere that Alpha Fox could be stored under cover except in the hangar where she was first assembled. They will also know that this hangar is buried in the centre of the factory and nobody, in a post 9/11 world, is going to give more or less unrestricted public access to somewhere containing a lot of valuable real estate! So when BA took the decision to locate AF at Filton it must have been in the knowledge that she would live in British weather until some form of shelter could be organised.
That it has taken so long to (fail to) organise such shelter is regrettable, but the blame can hardly be uniquely allocated to AI. BA own the aircraft, BAe/AI had a 40% share in building the airframe, RR a 60% share in building the powerplant. IMHO they should all have chipped in to construct some sort of shelter - it was never on the cards that local enthusiasts could have raised enough in a short time.
Although 'Dude' says that all the UK airframes were left out in the weather, this is not exactly true is it? 002 at Yeovilton (certainly) and 101 at Duxford (I think) are under cover and receive lots of TLC. It is at least arguable that these early airframes have more historical significance than Alpha Fox.

So far as AI's decision to hand back the C of A is concerned, they would have already recognised from the post-Gonesse activity that most people with sufficient expertise on the Concorde design were retired (or worse!) They have enough people to keep a subsonic aircraft going, but Concorde would, I think, require additional experience. AI management would certainly have consulted AI Engineering about this, and I have to say that the then Head of Engineering was someone I know well. He, like me, worked on Concorde in the early days and he is definitely not antiConcorde. I for one would respect his decision.

So far as the decision to stop services goes, we all knew they would be cut off sometime.the only question was when. When we were designing the aircraft the general feeling was that she would stay in service for about 30 years, but we also feared that it would only need one fatal accident to bring the whole lot crashing down. [Incidentally, it was that latter philosophy that made us (we hoped) ultracareful with airworthiness issues] In the event it was 28 years and one accident.
Even before Gonesse AF were losing money on their Concorde services. One might have thought that they would stop right away, but I suspect that a combination of Gallc pride and politics ensured that they would carry on.
But eventually there came a point where, on an airline losing money and in a recession, an unsentimantal and yes, generally unsympathetic, management would have to say enough is enough.
What else would you have them do? Continue to fly loss making services so that their rival BA could go on with their profitable? operations? One would have to say 'Get real!'
Once AF had decided to stop, what do you expect of AI? They are a company with a duty to make profit for their shareholders. OK, they had a duty, also to support in service aircraft, but that duty does not extend to doing that at a loss. With AF out of it therefore AI had no alternative but to ask BA to shoulder the full bill. I have no doubt that when BA declined to do this AI breathed a huge sigh of relief, but at the end of the day the decision to stop all Concorde services was above all an AIRLINE decision.

Sorry to go rabbiting on, but it is a subject that arouses strong emotions!

CliveL

CliveL , DozyWannabee ,
It's always fun doing a bit of 'aero-archaeology'.... isn't it?

You're both right.
At the roll-out, 01 was already marked "AEROSPATIALE", and the tracking camera 'target' was already painted on the right-hand side (but not on the left!).
So the earlier photo in question is definitely 002.

I recently re-scanned my ancient 'Filton' photos... only black-and-white, but maybe worth adding them to the 'records'.


G-AXDN being moved out of the hangar.
Interestingly, no tracking camera target on the left-hand side.... it must have been added very soon after, because I have a photo from a few weeks later, where it's in place on both sides.




Roll-out or not, G-AXDN still wasn't quite finished... three of the four engine nozzles/thrust reversers are still missing and replaced provisionally by 'space frames'.




This one again confirms the "AEROSPATIALE" marking. Also, somebody hadn't gotten round to painting the tail cone yet....



CJ


Oh, and a PS....

Another 'kinky' photo, this one of 001 when still outside the Le Bourget museum.



(Photo from the ConcordeSST.com site).

I don't think I agree with you Dude. We 'did' the performance calculations at Filton, and I honestly don't remember any performance shortfall. If you are just talking system reliability then OK, I wouldn't know.

One of the things I like about this thread is the way in which it reminds me of things I had forgotten about the design phase - or in this case informs me of things I maybe never knew! I just do not remember any improved Ultra AICU design. So far as the French 'choice' on the matter, they probably weren't given one. Like the rear fuselage alterations referred to in another posting , it was all a matter of timing. 102 came after 101 so 102 got the lengthened rear fuselage (which was done to improve the 'area rule' distribution and gave about 2.5% drag reduction). We (BAC) were going to do the AICU development so it made sense for 101 to get the early hybrid units. [If you were cynical you might equally say that there was no way we were going to let AS have them first!].

CliveL

ChristiaanJ, you wrote:Is that a typo and did you mean "it made sense for 102 to get the early hybrid units."?

No. it wsn't a typo, but you may have been misled by my use of 'hybrid' by which I meant the final AICU version which most people describe as digital.It had digital law generation but analogue servo control loops. We were responsible for development of the AICU 'laws' and with Fairford being less than an hours drive from Filton it was far more convenient to do the flight testing out of Faiford so that results could be evaluated rapidly and the next day's flight test sequence planned.

CliveL

OK, here is a photo that I took at Fairford in November 1976. I'd just had my very first Concorde flight on a brand new G-BOAD, and took this flight deck photo in the hangar later that afternoon (the doors are open hence the late afternoon Cotswold sky. The point of this rather poor (sorry guys, I was young for goodness sake) photo is to look at just how subtly different the 1976 flight deck WAS.



The first thing I know EXWOK and BELLEROPHON will (maybe) notice is that originally OAD had a 'normal colour' electroluminescent light plate on the visor indication panel. (If I remember rightly (it was a million years ago chaps) when this one 'stopped lighting' we could not get a replacement and had to rob 202 (G-BBDG) at Filton; this one being the same black development aircraft colour that OAD has to this day.
The OTHER first thing that you may notice is the Triple Temperature Indicator on the captains dash panel. (The first officer had his in in similar position). These got moved around (twice in the end) when TCAS was installed in the mid-90's. It was amazing just how much equipment got moved around over the years, in order to 'shoe-horn in' various bits of extra equimpent.
The cabin altimeter here fitted just above the #1 INS CDU also got moved (to the centre consul) when the FAA 'Branniff' modifications were embodied later in the 70's. It's spot got occupied by a standy altimeter mandated by the FAA but this was removed after Branniff ceased flying Concorde; the cabin altimeter returning to it's former home. The REALLY observant will notice that there is neither an Autoland Ca3/Cat2 identifier on the AFCS panel (glued on by BA at LHR) or the famous and precision built 'Reheat Capabilty Indicator' flip down plate fitted to the centre dash panel a few years later by BA.
Also not shown here, as they were buyer furnished equipment also fitted at on delivery LHR, are the two ADEUs (Automatic Data Entry Units, or INS Card readers). These were located immediatel aft of the CDU's and were used for bulk waypoint loading ('bulk' being 9, the most that the poor old Delco INU memory could handle). These were removed in the mid 90's when the Navigation Database was fitted to Concorde INUs, and bulk loading then was achieved by simply tapping in a 2 digit code. (Hardly the elegence of FMS, but still very elegent in comparison with the ADEU's, and worked superbly). A little note about these ADEU things; You inserted this rather large optically read paper data card into the thing and the motor would suck the unsuspecting card in. As often as not the ADEU would chew the card up and spit the remnants out, without reading any data, or not even bother spitting out the remnants at all. Removing these things FINALLY when the INUs were modified was absolute joy!!
ps. When G-BOAG (then G-BFKW) was delivered in 1980 it had neither any of the Branniff mods or ADEUs fitted. (Also the INS was not wired for DME updating). This meant that obviously she could not fly IAD-DFW with Branniff but also she could not do LHR-BAH either, because of the lack ADEUs. (You could not manually insert waypoints quick enough over the 'Med', or so the guys told me. So for the first few years good old FKW/OAG just used to plod between LHR and JFK. And plod she did, superbly. She never did get the ADEUs (not necessary thank goodness when the INUs got modified) but we wired in DME updating and so she could navigate around with the best of them.
My gosh I do prattle on, sorry guys.
Best regards

Dude

PS Welcome back Landlady, hope you've recovered from your fall XXXX

Since it was me who took the photo, I can confirm that.
Filton was 'taking in' RAF Brittanias for major overhaul at the time.

Reminds me of a funny tale, not Concorde-related.

Years before (mid '60s) I'd bought an ex-RAF vacuum-driven artificial horizon in one of those surplus shops in London, dated by a War Ministry label to 1939. I'd already run it once with a vacuum cleaner (oh, the vandalism the young get up to...).
Since the Brit had some vacuum-driven instruments, there was a test bench in the Filton lab for such instruments. So I brought in my ancient horizon, had it tested.... and it still met the basic specs! They made them well in those days....

CJ

ChristiaanJ
You young vandal you Christian. I'm just conjuring up the visual, a young ChristiaanJJ, vacuum cleaner hose in one hand and horizon in the other, the gyro whirring round at warp speed. (What voltage and frequency suction air did you use ? HAHAHA).
I seem to remember the Chipmunk used to use a cute little 'vaccy' gyro horizon. I pulled many of these apart during my RAF training. (Sometimes I even managed to get the odd one or two back together and working again).

Best regards
Dude

So many vivid memories from so many people.
I suppose personally I'll always remember the first time that I ever saw Concorde flying as well as the LAST time :
The very first, as I posted here many months ago, was in 1970 when I, as a young grotty little RAF erk, was in Swindon and heard this loud roar in the sky over what was then Bon March\xe9 (Now Debenhams). Looking up I saw this amazing sight of 002 complete with her attending Canberra chase plane flying over. (And trailing a sizable black exhaust plume to boot).
The very LAST time I saw her flying was in November 2003 at the side of LHR 27R as G-BOAF, the last Concorde ever built and the last one ever to fly, made her final departure out of a very dismal Heathrow bound for Filton. For me, the weather at LHR that day perfectly matched to gloom of the occasion I'm afraid.
A really lasting memory I wil always treasure is while my now VERY grown up children were still young, they were (almost) as big Concorde 'nuts' as their dad. Concorde would fly over our house daily and they would run to the window every time they heard the sound of an aeroplane. The general disappointed chant they would come out with was 'it's not Concorde dad, it's just a plane'. For the life of me I don't know why they would develop THAT kind of prejudice and from whom they would get it from . (I used this particular ditty in a 2003 Concorde BBC TV documentary we did, but my cover is blown here anyway, so what the hell .

EXWOK
I went over base for a meeting last week and saw OAB parked at the side of the apron. I had several lumps in my throat as I drove past too I have to admit. To think that the last time OAB flew was in August 2000. when Les and the boys brought her back empty from JFK after the CAA pulled the Concorde C of A.
Hopefully she will get a fitting 'home' soon so that more people can marvel at our absolutely beautiful and truly timeless aviation icon

Best regards
Dude

OK, I see where you are coming from. There is a change of line at the top of the fuselage, but this doesn't really constitute 'waisting' in my terms. I think of waisting as a local area increase followed by a reduction to fill in a bump in the area distribution. What you are seeing is the change in upper fuselage line where the extended rear fuselage fairs into the prototype fuselage line. This extension was introduced to stretch out the lifting length, but to keep enough ground clearance it had to be upswept, which gave rise to that upper surface kink.



This one really shows it up Alpha Fox after last landing at Filton.

">

Cheers

CL

Reading this fascinating thread, I hesitate to add my worms eye view.
In 1969, as a young chap freshly out of school, I was given a temporary job at Filton in the printing shop attached to the Brabazon Hanger where the Concorde prototype was being assembled. Things were badly in arrears, so we were on compulsory and lucrative, overtime, working from 7am to 9pm. We had a small workshop containing about a dozen old duplicating machines for drawings and documentation. The foreman was also shop steward and I soon learned that he was in charge, when, after clocking in, I began preparing my machine with paper and ink. He informed me that nothing was to be done until he activated all the machines with his big mains power supply lever, and that was not done until we\x92d brewed up a leisurely cup of tea. In fact, the tea breaks were often and long, there was absolutely no sign of the urgency that prevailed in the rest of the factory.
Draughtsmen and engineers would leave their work in a hatch with a request for so many copies \x96 sometimes with a note saying URGENT. This would invoke a snarling \x91cheeky bugger\x92 reaction as the unfortunate man's work was then shoved to the bottom of the pile. This treatment would eventually provoke a protesting manager to come through the door, which separated us from the Design Office. At this, down would go the power lever to the cry of \x91I smell management!\x92 More tea and lengthy negotiations before work limped on.
The job was of course boring, the printing machines had a variable speed control habitually set of course on the lowest stop, but I found the tedium could be eased by tweaking the many adjustable controls on the paper feed and cranking up the speed until the inevitable inky jam.
The result of my happy experimentation was that at the end of the day, I would have a pile of completed work about 3 feet high while my colleagues would have only about 3 inches. This led to an interview with my foreman in which he pointed out that while I was just a student mucking about, they all had families to support and I was in danger of causing the suspension of overtime. Furthermore, failure to see their point of view would lead to another meeting behind the bike sheds after work.
I am filled with wonder that Concorde was completed at all knowing that the massive dedication of so many was constantly undermined \x96 indeed sabotaged by the bloody-minded working practices of those dinosaurs \x96 now replaced by the print button on every computer.
Sorry, long post.

Great to hear from folk involved with this beautiful work of art (and engineering).
I tried to find that blueprint of the general arrangement of 01 but that trunk in my Garage has a lot of stuff in it.
My memory is not what it used to be and brake parachute indeed makes sense. Spinning one of these aircraft would not have been an option.
I did manage to get on board G-BOAC in the hanger at Filton and was permited to walk out onto the port wing wearing felt overshoes. When I saw that leading edge at close quarters I was stunned. Never got to fly the aircraft but once saw one over the Bristol Channel when I was in a Folland Gnat. He was climbing when I decided to take a closer look. Needless to say this was an exercise in futility. Not a hope in hell of catching him but still a wonderful sight.
Cheers.

'Dg still has her original fitted. It was not the same indicator, simply a 5deg lock indicator and a switch (poss wiper park). I wonder where this one came from!

CliveL (And ChristiaanJ)
Sure can Clive. These are the BA 5102 numbers, Air France 5101 numbers were corespondingly identical chronologically.: G-BOAC - 5102-01. G-BOAA - 5102-02. G-BOAB - 5102-03. G-BOAD - 5102-04. G-BOAE - 5102-05. Although G-BOAG (G-BFKW) and G-BOAF (G-BFKX) were originally Variant 192 (British Unsold) aircraft, these correspondingly became 5102-06 and 5102-07. I wonder if anyone here remembers G-BOAF doing her pre-delivery flying at Filton registered as G-N91AF? I remember when I was at Filton doing one of my Concorde type courses in 1980, and there was good old Foxy Lady with her 'Branniff' registration. She was re -re-registered to G-BOAF prior to delivery to BA.

The Component 30 skin thickness issue was not relevant for RELIFE 2 ; you and I know that the major 'skin' issue here was the centre fuselage crown area. The issue of Component 30 was a 201/202 issue only. (Assuming that the French had the need/desire/capability of adding another airframe to their fleet.
And sorry everyone about the \xa330 cost of converting 202 into an airliner, I meant (dumb ass that I am) \xa330 MILLION.

Best regards
Dude

or at least undercarriage doors. We had a bunch of guys up here at Manchester from AF at Filton last week. They needed a "Concorde fix". While underneath on of them said "Oh Yes your doors are different colours like ours."
I'd never noticed that the metal on the inside of the main undercarriage doors that are open when she's on the ground are different colours. One is a drab green and the other is khaki.
Is there any reason for this or is it just a new one has been fitted at some time and happens to be different ?

Glad the Filton AF guys enjoyed their Concorde fix. (There is no other Concorde in the UK, bar none, that able to achieve this fix better than G-BOAC can ). As far as the gear door colours go, well the 'normal' colour is the light brown one that you describe, the green primer colour door is a replacement one. (As to when we did that replacement I really can't remember I'm afraid - Extreme Brain Fatigue ).
I'll have a closer look at that door when I'm next up in Manchester in 10 days.

Best Regards
Dude

Well said M2dude!
I appreciate your comments greatly, which I am fully aware of are based on nearly 37 years of experience, starting with the construction of the Concorde airframes for BAC at Filton, and following this as an engineer with BA keeping these beautiful birds flying.
You are one of the real heroes and stars of the Concorde world, one of the most respected Concorde engineers in the world, add to this fact that you also basically wrote the book for BA on the air in-take system!
It's a pleasure to read all your truly amazing posts based on such great knowledge gained from your mass of Concorde experience, unlike some posts on here which are based on reading books, and listening to the rubbish that\x92s out there written by those who lack any experience regarding this great aeroplane


Steve

Save Bristol\x92s Concorde and the Brabazon Hangar

The Brabazon Hangar dominates the south side of Filton Airfield. During the 1960s it became the home of the UK Concorde production line, but Concorde wasn\x92t the first aircraft to be built within this amazing structure.
The hangar was originally built during the 1940s to enable the construction of the massive Bristol Aircraft Company\x92s type 167, which is better known as the Brabazon and hence this is where the name of the hangar came from . This giant airliner aircraft had a 230ft wingspan, and was powered by eight pair-coupled Bristol Centaurus piston engines and was Britain\x92s attempt at a non-stop trans-Atlantic airliner.

The prototype flew in 1949 six years and \xa33 million after the conception, and sadly the aircraft was already obsolete. The British de Havilland Comet jet-powered airliner was already well on the way and on the other side of the Atlantic, Boeing were developing their 707, and both of these would fly faster and carry more passengers than the Brabazon The prototype flew for a short while and a second turboprop-powered prototype (Brabazon II) was being built when the project was abandoned. Both aircraft were subsequently broken up in 1953.
With the demise of the Brabazon project Bristol was then left with one of the largest aircraft production facilities in Europe and therefore the giant Brabazon hangars were put to other uses, these included being used for the production line for the much more successful Bristol Britannia airliner.

But the Brabazon hangar has become more famous today as the birthplace of all the British built Concordes, ten airframes were built there, one prototype known as 002, one pre-production known as 01, one development production known as Delta Golf, and of course the seven airliner production airframes detailed below\x85
G-BOAA
G-BOAB
G-BOAC
G-BOAD
G-BOAE
G-BOAF
G-BOAG
Concorde 216 G-BOAF was the last Concorde built anywhere in the world, and of course the very last one to fly in November 2003. During her final flight she flew back to her birthplace, to Filton to form a major part of a new planned Bristol aviation museum. The plan was to house the whole of the Bristol Aviation Collection, known as the BAC, in one building, a centre to celebrate Bristol\x92s incredible aviation history, and let\x92s not forget that Bristol led the world.
But like so many things in this fast changing world, ideas and directions soon change and as in this case not for the better.
Heritage Concorde has heard of one idea that it wishes to push forward with anyone who would be willing to work alongside the group. With next years closure of Filton airfield, one incredible heritage building stands at risk of being ripped down and lost forever, the Brabazon Hangar. So why not use this building as the centre of the history of Bristol aviation and space industry, and in memory of the man who started it all, Sir George White. It\x92s large enough to form one of the most incredible museums in the world; it would be able to house the whole BAC collection with Concorde 216 at the centre, where she was built.
This idea needs to be looked into and not dismissed so easily by the people leading the effort for the new museum. Heritage Concorde will start to develop this idea further.

Any ideas, any offer of help or advice???
Steve de Sausmarez

hissinsid;

The answer is that they were remarkably similar in handling, I guess this is a function of the flight control system. Certainly the 747-100s and 200s I flew before Conc had a definite change of 'feel' from hull to hull. (The 777s don't).

They all had certain other 'foibles', although none were of any note operationally. I believe that AF's habit of generating ADS master warnings at M1 has been prevously covered, as has AG's 'French' DC system. There were certainly some hulls you'd rather have than others on the LHR-BGI sector, although I think I flew them all there at some point or another.

As for Filton - it's always sad to see an airfield close, but especially so when there's so much history attached. It would be great to see the runway remain active, but the costs are pretty steep and the value of the land rather high. I wish all thise involved the very best of luck and hope you succeed in at least turning the hangar into something which recognises its own history and gives it a real purpose for the future.

This is obviously a really emotional topic, we can only hope that good sense prevails and the AAH is preserved, along of course with our beautiful G-BOAF. (When I worked at Filton many moons ago it was the largest single span building in Europe, not sure if that is the case now or not).
It would be really nice if the SOUTH of the UK had a non-derilict 'proper' Concorde on display to the public, and good old Alpha Fox would be the ideal example, displayed inside the building where she was born).
There was so much activity in that hangar over the years, wouldn't it also be great if examples of as many as possible of the aircraft that were built, part built or modified there could be displayed too. Let's all keep our fingers crossed.

Best regards
Dude