Posts about: "Cabin Crew" [Posts: 64 Page: 3 of 4]¶

Landlady ,
I know this will sadden you... but better forewarned than discovering it on the day, no?

When they set up the Barbados 'Concorde Experience' on G-BOAE, they decided it would work far better if people could move one way, from the back to the front, rather than continuously getting in each others way.
Now, the two little service doors in the rear galley are not really suited as entrances for the public.
You should know!
Hence the decision was made to remove the rear galley (which they undoubtely kept in storage somewhere, if not actually on display) and to have people enter through the rear baggage hold door, through the baggage hold, and from there into the rear cabin.
(Much the same was done on Delta Golf, the Concorde now at the Brooklands, Weybridge museum.)

So, the only galley tops will be those in the forward galley. Snif....

CJ

Welcome back Landlady

Here's a question for you - how often did they surprise shuttle pax with Concorde as a replacement?

...and for the rest of you, roughly how much in terms of fuel would a shuttle flight in Concorde cost BA versus say a B737 or A320?

(i.e. it was obviously done for PR sakes as much as anything, but was it really costly?)

All due respect but this is the CONCORDE thread and it would be really nice if it could stay as such. If you wish to debate wing technology of other aeroplanes then please I would suggest a new thread be started on that subject. I daresay it would also make for an interesting discussion.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

LandLady said in a post many moons ago that there was a pool of some 240 "Concorde Ambassadors" (sorry but CC and FAs don't sound right for this aeroplane) for Her. What was the numbers of Captains, First Officers and the all important Flight Engineers (sucking up to M2 with that one )

Does anyone know how long did it take to fly from NZ (AKL if I remember correctly) to SYD (very early 90s I think). It is about the same distance at John O Groats to Lands End so I am guessing the 20 to 25 minute mark and how did the 2mt piece of rudder parting company with the fuselage at Mach 2.04 over the Tasman Sea affect or effect the handling characteristics? I remember the papers saying it was hardly a noticable event but I suspect the BA publicity department had a hand with that information.

I looked at the photos posted by a thoughtful member in an earlier post and wonder how former crew felt looking at them. The photos give the impression that you could kick the tyres and light the fires and they would be once again gracing the skies. Obviously they are unairworthy BUT the photos project a different image.

Final one for this post. If She was still flying, do you still think that BA (sorry but going to ignore AF on this one) would have sufficient patronage to keep Her as a going and profitable concern?

I would say that the SR-71, and the Tu-144, are in a way honorary members of the Concorde family, so I don't mind if they fly into the discussion every now and then.

The full list of names (up to 2002) for both BA and AF can be found in "The Concorde Story" by Chris Orlebar. For BA, a quick count shows about 170 names. That book also mentions, that the maximum number of crews qualified at any one time was 28, in 1980, and that the average was about 20 crews.

Photos can lie.... or rather, they are rarely close-up enough to show clearly where corrosion has set in.

As an example, F-BVFC at Toulouse, which was the last one to remain at least taxyable, now has some patches of corrosion starting to show, when you know where to look. Not to mention the nasty smell of damp and mould in the cockpit which bodes no good for what's going on underneath the floor.

And even F-BTSD, kept "live" to some extent at Le Bourget, leaks some hydraulic fluid (like all Concordes did on the ground), so it's easy to imagine the dried-out hydraulic and fuel seals on the other museum aircraft.




And yes, that's kitty litter...
The composite material of the floor and the hydraulic fluid don't agree too well.

I'll leave M2dude to answer that one.

CJ

Can I just throw a comment in ?

In about 1992/1993 [not sure of the date now] I was lucky enough to exchange my JED->LHR BA Economy ticket for a Concorde Ticket for 400 notes.

All I can really remember about the flight is the noise, acceleration and comfort [not to mention the stunningly good on-board service Landlady]. I got a quick cockpit visit and have a treasured photo of me crouching between the pilots.

I know it's a long shot but did anyone here crew on one of the flights to Jeddah ?

Oh, I forgot the "two shoves in the back" presumably from inboard/outboard application of reheat to go through the sound barrier.

Thanks for a wonderfully informative thread - it's so heartening to see so many people who haven't forgotten this aircraft.

May I just chip in with what a wonderfull read, and to think this thread started with a simple?? question about the non existant APU 3 months ago!!

ps Landlady where are you?? we need another recollection please from the cabin to break up the technical stuff we may not fully understand but still find totally enthralling in a typical understated British way

ChristianJ and M2dude et al many thanks

Just finally getting around to reading 'Not much of an engineer' - What a fabulous read. Simply cannot put it down. At least I have 4 days ahead to finish it. Amazing! But is it just me and the fact that I am getting older ???? I know the mind tends to romanticise the past but as I read it, it tugs at the heart to see what we had then and where we are now. Maybe I am out of the picture nowadays and things are not as bleak as they may appear. In the book, Sir Stan mentions how he was disappointed when seeing the changes in University life compared to his years. The respect, the discipline, the uniforms !\x85a different era. Whenever I visit the ol\x92 country nowadays, I feel the same way. Its as if the spark has simply been snuffed out. Its hard to listen to some of the views and ideas and biases and negativity that seem to be the norm nowadays. I simply don\x92t feel that same sense of pride, or dedication or hope that seemed to envelope the country in the 60\x92s ( although I was just a nipper in the 60's I loved Concorde ! )\x85. In terms of aviation, it is truly amazing what was achieved by these brilliant engineers / scientists. For such a small country, wow\x85just look back and see what was achieved. Someone please tell me I have been away too long and it is not as bad as it appears \x85.! But alas, I feel it will take something much greater to arouse that British passion once more\x85then again, maybe the world really is a different place nowadays\x85and maybe 50 years from now, people will look back at the early part of 21st century with awe and say how things were so different \x91then\x92\x85 Sorry if I am blabbering here, but reading the autobiographies of such amazing gentlemen like Sir Stan does indeed arouse that sense of pride and passion that acted as a catalyst for such perfection and advancement\x85.
Reading this particular thread has been wonderful. I used to frequent PPRuNE many moons ago with great enthusiasm until the ego\x92s of many turned it into a \x91professional\x92 Vs \x91SLF\x92 forum\x85 Ask a question that maybe wasn\x92t up to the \x91standards\x92 of many of the posters and bam!! You were crucified. I still see it now, even when the forum is titled \x91Rumours\x85.and news\x92 - Frightening to think some of these folk could be piloting my plane one day !!! so coming to this thread and seeing the open arms of folk who obviously have a great deal of knowledge and who welcome the rest of us who are newbies ( but with a great deal of enthusiasm ! ) is really appreciated. Wish I could meet more folk like yourselves. Maybe then my pessimism would dwindle in favour of optimism!!!

I so wish I had the ability to connect all the remaining people who worked on Concorde in some way - whether they were engineers, flight crew, cabin crew, designers, tea makers...! Whatever their role with Concorde was - they were all part of the dream - wherever they are now - surely in todays world it cant be that difficult ??? You know, as every year passes, we will lose more or more ties to this icon. And those great stories and experiences that many may cherish ( and would love to share ) will be lost to the rest of us. One day we shall wake up and realise they are all gone. All we will have are memories ( and a few autobiographies ) of these great folk.

Best wishes to you all. Amazing that Concorde still connects many folk across many continents still, and she isn\x92t even in the skies any more..

Truly remarkable.

Regards,

d

Well, here are my back-of-envelope calcs, with approximate figures, so everyone can check. (After all this IS Tech Log.)

'Centrifugal acceleration' = v\xb2 / r
Speed of sound 300 m/sec, aircraft speed Mach 2 = 600 m/sec, v\xb2 = 360 000
Earth radius 6000 km = 6 000 000 m
Accel 360 000 / 6 000 000 m/sec\xb2 = 0.06 m/sec\xb2
Gravity: 1 g = 10 m/sec\xb2
So the weight loss is 0.06/10 = 0.006 = 0.6 %
So a Concorde 'en route' at 300 000 lbs would actually weigh 1800 lbs less due to this effect.

But there's another effect.....
You're flying at 18 000 m (60 000 ft), so you're 18 km further from the centre of the earth than on the ground, and gravity decreases as the square of the distance.
Again with approximate figures:
You're 6018/6000 = 1.003 further away. Ratio squared = 1.006 (or rather 1/1.006=0.994).
And there goes another 0.6 %!

Since the two effects are not related, that's 1.2 % 'weight loss'.

Obviously, the INS (inertial navigation system) 'knew' all of this... it even knew the earth isn't round.

But it might be interesting to know where else this came into play.
One example : in theory the aircraft did weigh 1.2 % less, so the lift was 1.2 % less and the drag was 1.2 % less, so the fuel consumption was less too, so did Concorde have another 50-odd miles range thrown in 'free' by flying higher and faster than it's low-down subsonic brethren?

Even a passenger weighing 165 lbs would already have lost 2 lbs, just by flying on Concorde.
But of course, that's where Landlady comes in... "champagne, caviar, anyone?"

CJ

Wow.....

What a thread! It has consumed many, many hours of my time, and a few groans from the missus (not that aeroplane thing again! ) but it has been so worth it. The level of passion, technical detail and knowledge is both breathtaking and astounding, and would make a thoroughly bloody good book IMO!

Now, from a purely hypothetical POV:

How much would it cost, do you think, that IF EADS really wanted to, using a combination of all the knowhow gained through L'Oiseau Blanc and their current lineup could they produce a 'Concorde NG'? Most importantly, would there be a market for such a beast (at the right price)?

Use something like the A321 fuselage tooling and common flightdeck as a starting point. The Pratt & Whitney PW5000 looks like it could be a mighty fine off the shelf modern Olympus 593 replacement.

There's a start, now thoughts please!! (Please don't just tell me to F**k off and stop being so stupid )

BTW, M2Dude, ChristiaanJ, Exwok, Bellerophon, Brit 312, Landlady et al: Keep up the good work - You have restored my faith in the aviation world! Not everybody involved at the top level is an arrogant a***hole, it seems. Thank you sincerely.

Tom

Great thread, its taken some time to read through
The anecdotes from landlady , m2dude and the others are great

My main recollections are after coming back from Detroit to LHR, sitting on the National Express bus at dusk as Concorde took off from the runway parallel to the road, the whole bus shaking and watching the 4 engines glowing blue as she took off - brilliant. Sadly after that the next experience was passing 4 of them parked up after the AF disaster

As an Engineer I love things that push the envelope and limits - Concorde is one of those
Having just returned from Chicago on a 767, as capable as it is, I know what I would prefer to be riding in

I sadly doubt that we will see these flying again but I really would like to see effort in the next supersonic airliner rather than A380's and the like

Christian, is this the video you are refering to? YouTube - PHY NYC Concorde breaks sound barrier (double bang)

Post #879 http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/42398...ml#post6129540 - Just guessing now, but Bellerophon were you a Concorde Pilot by any chance.

I read your vivid description and realised that I must have been peeling onions at the same time. Thank you for that sensational work of art, drawing us a picture of that take off while at the same time making it sound like it was no harder than taking a breath, though I have no doubts this was an extremely complex and demanding proceedure that required a level of crew synergy unknown of at that time. Again, my THANKS for that precious insight into your world.

This in no way excludes all the other contributors to one of the two best threads on this Forum. All you guys made and were part of a very special piece of history and now like the famous "Few" will never be forgotten partly as a result of this thread.

I do hope Landlady posts back with pieces that didn't make it into her book.

Wow, what a great thread! I started reading it yesterday and am up to page 19 so far! I flew on the wonderful white bird once, in 1999, a Manchester - round the bay at Mach 2 - Paris flight in G-BOAD. And the wonderful thing was I did the entire flight, push back at Manchester to parking at Paris, in the jump seat! What a fabulous experience - thank you Roger!

Here's a picture I took as the aircraft turne left towards the French coast:



One memory is climbing through 50,000 feet over South Wales before turning down the Bristol Channel. It was glorious August day and I had a great view forward past the captain and particularly out of the left window. The speed over the ground at Mach 0.95 seemed noticably faster than a subsonic jet, and that view was breathtaking! The Bristol Channel was edged in golden yellow beaches, and I could see right across south west England to the English Channel. In my headset the controller called another aircraft; "Speedbird 123 if you look up now you will see you are about to be overflown by Concorde". I leaned towards my side window and there was Speedbird 123, a tiny scurrying beetle miles below us. From this height the fair-weather cu looked as if they were on the ground - like small white splodges from some celestial artist's paint brush.

We cruised at Mach 2 and 60,000' over the Bay for a while and the pax came forward to view the flightdeck. I was amazed how patient was the supernumery captain who was answering the same questions over and over again was (the flight crew were too busy to chat).

The approach to CDG looked far steeper than other airliner approaches I had witnessed from the flight deck; more like one of my glide approaches in the Chipmunk! But it wasn't, of course, as we were following the 3 degree glideslope. I guess it was an illusion brought about by the steep pitch angle.

I remember the captain resting his hands on the throttles as they shuttled back and forth under autothrottle control, the smooth touchdown, the 'landing' of the nosewheel followed by full forward stick, and thinking "we'll never make that turn off". Then on came the powerful reverse and the brakes, I was thrust foreward in my harness, the speed disappeared, and we made the turnoff easily!

Oh, and that stange bouncy ride in the flight deck on the ground as the long nose forward of the nosewheel flexed over every joint in the taxyway. So bad at times it was difficult to take a photograph!

What an experience!

I have a question which I hope hasn't been answered in the pages (20 to this one) that I've yet to read.

From an earlier post I understand that the anti-skid used a rotational reference from the unbraked nosewheels to compare to the rotation of the mains, and that with gear down in the air a substiute nose-wheel referance is supplied which, because the mains are not yet rotating, allows the anti-skid to keep the brakes off.

But what happens when the mains touch down with the nosewheels still high in the air? What (if anything) inhibits wheel braking until the nosewhels are on the ground (and therefore rotating)?

Also, this thread started with a question about the lack of an APU. When Concorde was parked could the aircon and cabin lighting be powered by external electrical power, or did the cabin aircon without engine power require an external 'aircon unit' to be connected? Or was aircon simply not available without at least one engine running?

And one for Landlady or any other CC. If a table top was set up between the cabins during service, how did the 'front' crew service the first 2 rows of the rear cabin?

Being 'up front' for my entire flight, I missed out on the cabin service. But superb though I'm sure that was, under the circumstances it's not something I regret!

Hello again, chaps and chapesses, and a belated HNY to all.

I was prompted to post again by a fellow forumite..... I haven't really been in the mood to write after I fell over on the ice (well, that's my story and I'm sticking to it...) damaging a few bones, and then caught 'flu (woman 'flu, not man 'flu,) so I'm hoping that after a shaky start, 2011 will brighten up a bit now!

This is the year I will retire ..... I really don't know how I feel about that....but if anyone knows a kindly book publisher, perhaps it's time I thought about how to subsidise the pension, and keep Mr LL (or the Landlord, as he likes to be known), in gin and golf balls.

In reply to Shaggy's question with regard to the table top which was put into place after take-off at D2R, it didn't divide the cabins .... it was put accross the actual doorway to make an extra work-space during service. (Rather like a side-board in your dining room. Posh or what!) The fwd crew would take everything that could be needed during service from the front to the mid...wine, fizz, ice, lemon, water, etc., which would help the cabin crew (as opposed to the galley crew) to quickly replenish anything they needed without having to return to the galleys and more importantly, disturb the smooth running of the service...trolleys may be in the cabin and no-one wants to ask the crew on the trolleys to get more wine/water/whatever when they were busy. Of course, you could never second-guess what would be needed, and most probably someone would ask for a drink which you wouldn't have at the mid, but the things we needed all the time were there. The table top remained in place until the seat-belt sign came on for landing, and it was really handy. (Probably designed by a woman!) It was also a place for a couple of pax to stand and have a drink and a chat after the meal service was completed, if they fancied stretching their legs or were waiting for the loo.

Dude, your pic of pushback in IAD is fabulous! Just look what we were missing by being on-board!

With warm regards,
LL x

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

Don't worry Dude, its the 'prattle' we're here for! And I echo your greetings to Landlady.

Thank goodness that dreadful paint job never flew - somebody might have been tempted to have a proper go at shooting her down!! (Not that they could catch her. )

Roger.

Please please please let me be a SLFConcordeBore - 1 post, then I\x92ll shut up.

2 items that I had on my \x93Do before I die\x94 list were \x93Sail into New York on QE2\x94 (sadly, didn\x92t happen, now obviously won\x92t), and \x93Fly on Concorde\x94.

Part of the enthusiasm for Concorde came from a friend in the Middle East, who worked for Airwork, who did contract maintenance for your air force. He was based in Saudi Arabia IIRC, working on Lightnings. As an expat in Saudi (good pay + no tax = high disposable), when he had some leave available at one point he took Concorde from Bahrein - London - Bahrein. Loved every moment.

He told the lovely story of his first day back after his hols, when a Lightning pilot came in in his G-suit, saying \x93I\x92ve just done Mach 2\x94 (you know where this is going...) to which Slim was able to reply \x93I did that yesterday - and I was drinking champagne at the time\x94. What an astonishing aeroplane Concorde was.

I got to fly Concorde courtesy of BA - they called one day and asked if I\x92d like to fly Concorde LHR - JFK - LHR, out one day, back the next, put up overnight at the Waldorf Astoria - all courtesy of BA. After the \x93is this a practical joke?\x94, and \x93what\x92s the catch?\x94, it transpired that they did invite people from time to time for this type of trip, and somehow my name came out of the hat.

A truly memorable trip - the acceleration, the hot windows, the fantastic service (and excellent food & wine), trip to cockpit, and the \x93Concorde grin\x94. Memorable guests on the way out were Paul & Linda McCartney, with children and minder. I seem to recall that the takeoff from JFK was even more spectacular than the one from LHR. It just seemed to jump out of the blocks and keep going.

Also notable were how much of a private club it was - the crew were welcoming passengers to New York, and saying to various passengers things like \x93I didn\x92t see you last week\x94, with the passenger replying \x91Oh no, I couldn\x92t make it last week, but I\x92ll see you again next week\x94 etc.

Thanks to everyone, ChristiaanJ, M2dude, Bellerophon, EXWOK, Brit123, landlady and stilton and all the others for a wonderful thread about a wonderful plane.

flying lid
What a fascinating story. I'd not heard about these tests before I have to admit, but the results would be quite typical of the tough old lump that was the OLY593.
As far as the engine bay doors go, well they were tough as old boots and weighed a ton (literally ) but had no integral oil tanks or anything. (Although in airline service the Olympus being a leaky old girl you could happily have an oil bath IN the doors once you opened them for access. (It was messy stuff too and it just LOVED to decorate white shirts ). The engine bay doors you mention in Yeovilton of course belong to prototype 002 and may well have some flight test gear attached. (Popping down there to take some photos in a few weeks, so I'll have another look too).

artee
You are most welcome here, and your story is anything BUT a bore. Passenger reactions to flying on our lady are always great to read. The likes of Bellerophon, EXWOK, NW1 and of course landlady would always go out of their way to make every passenger feel special. (And as you found out in the pre 9-11 days passengers were also invited up for flight deck visits after the meal service was finished).

Best regards
Dude

Hi guys,
I have been asked by someone who knows John if anyone on here remembers him.

Thanks,

Landlady xzxx

The engine starting sequence was also in airline operation 3-4-2-1. At the gate the altered sequence was 3-2 prior the pushback and 4-1 after due to safety reasons for ground crew and for noise restrictions at some airport stands.

Brit312 explained in post #140:

I must admit that I am no expert (not yet ), but it seems both sequences follow the logic to feed the blue hydraulic by engine#3 first, then one of the two yellow systems (2 or 4) and the green hydraulic (engines 1&2) which supplies power to some more services than the blue (droop nose and visor, landing gear, main wheel brakes with anti-skid and nosewheel steering).

Well, I hope, this was not a stupid answer before I took a chance for a nonstupid question - but I am so exited about this thread and just want a little bit to give back!

Thanks for the probably best thing ever I have found in the internet. Thank you M2dude, Brit312, ChristiaanJ, Exwok, Bellerophon, Landlady et al.!

I must say a very interesting and worthwhile read, it is so excellent that the general oiks like I have the opportunity to pose some questions - for the participation of those in the know I applaud you . My first memory of her is when I was 8 from the top of the Queens building (IIRC) watching her taxy and take off, I have visited her many times at RNAS Yeovilton but alas did not have the funds in 2003 to make one of the final flights.

I have some questions if I may, they are very general and aimed at getting some more fascinating discussion going - I am only a student ppl so cant go into the nitty gritty so hope to prompt some memories.

1) I adore the lady in many ways but I would imagine she was far from perfect with the challenges that had to be overcome. I would imagine the positives way out weighed any negatives. So what were the downsides for the Capt/FO/FE that were most discussed - was anything done to alleviate these is design/Pre-Production and what if any gripes made it through to production.

2) For each of you (I would imagine they would be different based upon your skill set) what were the biggest challenges you personally had to overcome when switching to/designing our iconic aircraft.

Finally some more anecdote's from LandLady and Concorde Trivia from M2 would be good.

Many thx