Area Rule Page: 1 of 1

CliveL
January 06, 2011, 19:02:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6163302

Quote:

Originally Posted by M2Dude

, it was just a shame that's all, that the Type 28 never fully lived up to its promise and potential.

One little unique point about 102; she flew with a different intake control system to any other Concorde, being an 'improved' Ultra Electronics analog system. (Although the intake itself was aerodynamically the same as the later aircraft). Never really understood why our French friends chose this particular path with this aircraft. (Perhaps CliveL can shed some light on this??)

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

Subjects AICU (Air Intake Control Computer) Area Rule Filton Intakes

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
January 30, 2011, 14:45:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6212658

The 'blind' window is where the wardrobes are - no seats there. Also just about visible in that picture is the 'area ruling' of the rear fuselage where the fin starts - the fuselage is noticeably 'waisted' there.

Glad you enjoyed the event at 204, Dude. I have a lovely painting on my wall of G-BOAC on the roll-out on her last ever landing at EGCC 31st October 2003. It was signed all around the border by all the Concorde crews present that evening that I could cajole into signing, then I got it framed!

Subjects Area Rule G-BOAC

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

CliveL
January 30, 2011, 19:07:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6213080

Quote:

Also just about visible in that picture is the 'area ruling' of the rear fuselage where the fin starts - the fuselage is noticeably 'waisted' there.

Sorry SSD, but there ain't no waisting on the fuselage, although the area ruling in that area is quite good. Did you mean where the fuselage starts to taper?

Dude - I DID say the pressure was peculiarly sensitive to angle, but I didn't remember those additional corrections. Amazing what memories this thread throws up

Subjects Area Rule

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Mr.Vortex
January 30, 2011, 19:57:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6213159

That's picture is interesting.!!

I was wondering that by making more swept angle like in Concorde, is it gonna
help in area rule? Like cross section area gradually increase.
Also, IIRC the concorde body seems to get narrower as we go to it tail. Does
this design were suppose to help in Area rule?

Best regards

Last edited by Mr.Vortex; 30th January 2011 at 20:08 .

Subjects Area Rule

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
January 30, 2011, 20:24:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6213206

CliveL said "Sorry SSD, but there ain't no waisting on the fuselage, although the area ruling in that area is quite good. Did you mean where the fuselage starts to taper?"
--------------------------------------------------------

Nope. I meant the waisting of the fuselage where the fin starts. Stand on the steps by the front door where Dude's wife took that picture, and you'll see that the cabin roof is 'waisted in' noticably where the fin is mounted (not the sides of the fuselage which remain parallel - the roof, which is bowed inwards and downwards to reduce the fuselage cross section co-incident with the fin's extension above the fuselage). I see it several times a week on OAC.

You can see it on this picture too, though it's not as obvious as when you look back from the door.

Mr Vortex - Yes, the gradual taper of the nose and of the tail help with area rule. As does the wing leading edge being brought as far forward as possible where it joins the fuselage, so the cross-sectional area increases as gradually as possible, nose to tail, at the wing root.

Last edited by Shaggy Sheep Driver; 31st January 2011 at 00:06 .

Subjects Area Rule Vortex

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

CliveL January 06, 2011, 19:02:00 GMT permalink Post: 6163302	Quote: Originally Posted by M2Dude , it was just a shame that's all, that the Type 28 never fully lived up to its promise and potential. One little unique point about 102; she flew with a different intake control system to any other Concorde, being an 'improved' Ultra Electronics analog system. (Although the intake itself was aerodynamically the same as the later aircraft). Never really understood why our French friends chose this particular path with this aircraft. (Perhaps CliveL can shed some light on this??) 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 Subjects AICU (Air Intake Control Computer) Area Rule Filton Intakes Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Shaggy Sheep Driver January 30, 2011, 14:45:00 GMT permalink Post: 6212658	The 'blind' window is where the wardrobes are - no seats there. Also just about visible in that picture is the 'area ruling' of the rear fuselage where the fin starts - the fuselage is noticeably 'waisted' there. Glad you enjoyed the event at 204, Dude. I have a lovely painting on my wall of G-BOAC on the roll-out on her last ever landing at EGCC 31st October 2003. It was signed all around the border by all the Concorde crews present that evening that I could cajole into signing, then I got it framed! Subjects Area Rule G-BOAC Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
CliveL January 30, 2011, 19:07:00 GMT permalink Post: 6213080	Quote: Also just about visible in that picture is the 'area ruling' of the rear fuselage where the fin starts - the fuselage is noticeably 'waisted' there. Sorry SSD, but there ain't no waisting on the fuselage, although the area ruling in that area is quite good. Did you mean where the fuselage starts to taper? Dude - I DID say the pressure was peculiarly sensitive to angle, but I didn't remember those additional corrections. Amazing what memories this thread throws up Subjects Area Rule Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Mr.Vortex January 30, 2011, 19:57:00 GMT permalink Post: 6213159	That's picture is interesting.!! I was wondering that by making more swept angle like in Concorde, is it gonna help in area rule? Like cross section area gradually increase. Also, IIRC the concorde body seems to get narrower as we go to it tail. Does this design were suppose to help in Area rule? Best regards Last edited by Mr.Vortex; 30th January 2011 at 20:08 . Subjects Area Rule Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Shaggy Sheep Driver January 30, 2011, 20:24:00 GMT permalink Post: 6213206	CliveL said "Sorry SSD, but there ain't no waisting on the fuselage, although the area ruling in that area is quite good. Did you mean where the fuselage starts to taper?" -------------------------------------------------------- Nope. I meant the waisting of the fuselage where the fin starts. Stand on the steps by the front door where Dude's wife took that picture, and you'll see that the cabin roof is 'waisted in' noticably where the fin is mounted (not the sides of the fuselage which remain parallel - the roof, which is bowed inwards and downwards to reduce the fuselage cross section co-incident with the fin's extension above the fuselage). I see it several times a week on OAC. You can see it on this picture too, though it's not as obvious as when you look back from the door. Mr Vortex - Yes, the gradual taper of the nose and of the tail help with area rule. As does the wing leading edge being brought as far forward as possible where it joins the fuselage, so the cross-sectional area increases as gradually as possible, nose to tail, at the wing root. Last edited by Shaggy Sheep Driver; 31st January 2011 at 00:06 . Subjects Area Rule Vortex Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "Area Rule" [Posts: 5 Page: 1 of 1]¶