April 22, 2011, 16:31:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6406530
CliveL
, correct me where I'm wrong.
* Most deltas develop some vortex lift, and there were several deltas flying long before Concorde, so the phenomenon was not unknown.
Shaping the wing, and in particular the leading edge, optimised the effect on Concorde.
* The ogee (slender delta) wing was original proposed by NASA (possibly still NACA at the time) as best suited for a supersonic transport. The information was in the public domain by the time the "BAC223" and "Super Caravelle" were first revealed (they later "merged" into the Concorde design).
The Tu-144 design used the same information, which is a major reason for its resemblance to Concorde, rather than espionage...
How much the full advantages of the 'vortex lift' were understood at the time, is still an open question, IIRC.
I'll have to look for the original NASA TN (Tech Note)... it may be on the web somewhere.
* I would think the Handley Page HP115 slender-delta low-speed test aircraft must have contributed some details about vortex lift.
Sorry, I can't find my own photos of the beast.
It's now in the Fleet Air Arm Museum at Yeovilton (UK), together with Concorde 002 and the BAC-221.
It still has the "smoke tube" on the left wing leading edge, that was used to visualise the vortex over the wing (not yet fitted when the photo above was taken).
CJ
* Most deltas develop some vortex lift, and there were several deltas flying long before Concorde, so the phenomenon was not unknown.
Shaping the wing, and in particular the leading edge, optimised the effect on Concorde.
* The ogee (slender delta) wing was original proposed by NASA (possibly still NACA at the time) as best suited for a supersonic transport. The information was in the public domain by the time the "BAC223" and "Super Caravelle" were first revealed (they later "merged" into the Concorde design).
The Tu-144 design used the same information, which is a major reason for its resemblance to Concorde, rather than espionage...
How much the full advantages of the 'vortex lift' were understood at the time, is still an open question, IIRC.
I'll have to look for the original NASA TN (Tech Note)... it may be on the web somewhere.
* I would think the Handley Page HP115 slender-delta low-speed test aircraft must have contributed some details about vortex lift.
Sorry, I can't find my own photos of the beast.
It's now in the Fleet Air Arm Museum at Yeovilton (UK), together with Concorde 002 and the BAC-221.
It still has the "smoke tube" on the left wing leading edge, that was used to visualise the vortex over the wing (not yet fitted when the photo above was taken).
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Tu-144 Vortex
April 23, 2011, 21:19:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6408621
May I ask you guys another question relating to the book I mentioned earlier, in the same book it shows a Concorde with a Airbus sidestick control. I wondered if anymore information is known on this modification I suspect t must have been quite an systems integration exercise.
I haven't seen any of the detailed (block) diagrams, so I'm not sure at all how the sidestick was "hooked into" the AFCS.
Don't forget Concorde already used "electrical flying control signalling" (aka "Fly-By-Wire")., so system integration would have been easier than on some other aircraft.
For those unfamiliar with the story... F-WTSB, very late in its career, was used for some flight trials with a sidestick controller fitted to the left-hand position (the right-hand seat controls still being the normal ones,and with the right-hand seat occupied by a 'safety' pilot).
The flight test data were later "fed" into the A-320 programme.
How much of the "rate" control and other A-320 control logic was already implemented in the test system is unknown, AFAIK ....
Would be interesting to know some more about it, I agree!
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AFCS (Automtic Flight Control System) Airbus F-WTSB Sidestick
April 25, 2011, 16:26:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6411563
Do you (or does anybody ele) have a schematic of the Vulcan system?
It should be on my CD of the Vulcan manual, but unfortunately my CD drive is on strike.....
MFgeo , I think we're talking Europe here... the Avro Arrow was Canadian,so I would think it unlikely the flight test results would have been available to Airbus.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Airbus
April 27, 2011, 14:47:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6415354
Thanks,
johnjosh43
.
Not a hundred percent legible (lack of resolution), but I'll try to decipher it.
I agree, no trace of any electrical signalling ("FBW").
CJ
Not a hundred percent legible (lack of resolution), but I'll try to decipher it.
I agree, no trace of any electrical signalling ("FBW").
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): FBW (Fly By Wire)
May 10, 2011, 20:49:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6443001
Google was right....
G-BOAB has been moved around LHR repeatedly, and she was indeed parked for some time inside the old "detuner" (engine run-up silencer), which is what that recent "what's this then" post and picture are all about.
It's a pity, really.... All the other British Concordes have found a "home" one way or another (except G-BOAF, maybe,, but let's not go into that for the moment), and G-BOAB is slowly becoming the "forgotten" Concorde.
CJ
G-BOAB has been moved around LHR repeatedly, and she was indeed parked for some time inside the old "detuner" (engine run-up silencer), which is what that recent "what's this then" post and picture are all about.
It's a pity, really.... All the other British Concordes have found a "home" one way or another (except G-BOAF, maybe,, but let's not go into that for the moment), and G-BOAB is slowly becoming the "forgotten" Concorde.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): G-BOAB G-BOAF LHR
May 13, 2011, 16:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6448640
Quax .95
Looking at the pic of G-BOAB in the detuner brings me to the question how they performed the run-up. No brakes, just chocks?
What makes you think they would not have any brakes?? When performing any engine runs always set the brakes & chock the wheels.
Just think back to the A340 that was written off in France when the brakes were released & the aircraft jumped the chocks.
tristar 500
Looking at the pic of G-BOAB in the detuner brings me to the question how they performed the run-up. No brakes, just chocks?
What makes you think they would not have any brakes?? When performing any engine runs always set the brakes & chock the wheels.
Just think back to the A340 that was written off in France when the brakes were released & the aircraft jumped the chocks.
tristar 500
The question is less odd than it seems....
With full take-off power plus reheat, Concorde could not be held on brakes alone (hence the various procedures at take-off).
Maybe somebody has the full story.... in the light of chocks being less than perfect....
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Afterburner/Re-heat Braking G-BOAB
May 22, 2011, 21:31:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6467090
Photoshop, most of it, I would say.
Still, well done.
CJ
Still, well done.
CJ
Subjects: None
May 23, 2011, 20:27:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6469032
Landroger
,
What triggered my remark was merely that I don't think there's any record of a BA and AF Concorde flying in formation near to the LearJet....
But yes, we would all want to have taken photos like that.
And all of us still hope that there is a video somewhere, somehow, of one of Jean Franchi's barrel rolls.....
CJ
What triggered my remark was merely that I don't think there's any record of a BA and AF Concorde flying in formation near to the LearJet....
But yes, we would all want to have taken photos like that.
And all of us still hope that there is a video somewhere, somehow, of one of Jean Franchi's barrel rolls.....
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Air France British Airways
August 14, 2011, 17:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6640113
Hi
Steve
,
"Any ideas, any offer of help or advice???"
I live too far away to join in the battle, as you know.
But I was thinking of Duxford... which has kept its runway, allowing airshows, fly-ins, etc. (Been there, done that.)
So maybe the runway should stay.... ?
Rather than enclose the Brab hangar in another batch of "little boxes on the hillside" ?
CJ
"Any ideas, any offer of help or advice???"
I live too far away to join in the battle, as you know.
But I was thinking of Duxford... which has kept its runway, allowing airshows, fly-ins, etc. (Been there, done that.)
So maybe the runway should stay.... ?
Rather than enclose the Brab hangar in another batch of "little boxes on the hillside" ?
CJ
Subjects: None
August 18, 2011, 17:21:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6647929
And, as you may have seen earlier in this thread, the notion of a Concorde with an APU wasn't all that far-fetched, especially for an El-Al Concorde.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): APU (Auxiliary Power Unit) By the Rivers of Babylon
September 17, 2011, 16:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6704349
Philflies
,
M2dude is right, and IIRC there is already a description of this much earlier in the thread.
The background of the 3/4 tab is, that
... on most aircraft you can - at the start of the take-off - 'run up the engines against the brakes', check they all deliver full power, and release the brakes only then.
... on Concorde it was impossible to 'hold the aircraft on the brakes' while going to full t/o thrust including the reheat (not so much because of insufficient brakes as insufficient 'footprint' of the wheels, IMHO).
... so, full t/o thrust (including reheat) didn't occur until the aircraft had already started the take-off roll.
If, at that point, one of the four reheats didn't light (which did happen at times), you did not have an awful lot of time to decide on whether you could continue 'on three' or had to reject the take-off.
Rather than having to check your pre-flight take-off calculations in a sheaf of papers or rely on your memory of the briefing, that little Heath Robinson "3/4 tab" gadget told you instantly whether to RTO NOW, or whether you could continue the take-off.
Sorry to repeat an old story, but Philflies asked the question, and not everybody has read the entire thread.....
M2dude is right, and IIRC there is already a description of this much earlier in the thread.
The background of the 3/4 tab is, that
... on most aircraft you can - at the start of the take-off - 'run up the engines against the brakes', check they all deliver full power, and release the brakes only then.
... on Concorde it was impossible to 'hold the aircraft on the brakes' while going to full t/o thrust including the reheat (not so much because of insufficient brakes as insufficient 'footprint' of the wheels, IMHO).
... so, full t/o thrust (including reheat) didn't occur until the aircraft had already started the take-off roll.
If, at that point, one of the four reheats didn't light (which did happen at times), you did not have an awful lot of time to decide on whether you could continue 'on three' or had to reject the take-off.
Rather than having to check your pre-flight take-off calculations in a sheaf of papers or rely on your memory of the briefing, that little Heath Robinson "3/4 tab" gadget told you instantly whether to RTO NOW, or whether you could continue the take-off.
Sorry to repeat an old story, but Philflies asked the question, and not everybody has read the entire thread.....
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Afterburner/Re-heat Braking
September 17, 2011, 20:36:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6704563
Brit312,
Thanks for that 'add-on'.
And yes, makes perfect sense.
Thanks for that 'add-on'.
And yes, makes perfect sense.
Subjects: None
October 10, 2011, 23:33:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6744131
I'm not even sure about the copyright issues of the UTube clips....
But I can assure you the full video is worth watching (and owning...).
Starts off with a full walk-around at LHR, and a lot more 'stuff'.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): LHR
October 30, 2011, 21:45:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6780273
I've got the two VHS tapes rather than the DVDs.
But "pure delight".... yes.
If you're a Concorde 'enthusiast', get your hands on a copy. You won't regret it.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Intelligent Television and Video
November 01, 2011, 21:00:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6784201
The first question : why? The old analogue systems still worked well.
Second question : who? There were only 14 aircraft in service... who would paid the immense bill for redesign and recertification?
A third question : we know one of the major factors in the 'end of service' decisions were related to the rapidly increasing maintenance costs (as billed by Airbus). A complete upgrade of the avionics (digital, glass cockpit, etc.) would not necessarily have resulted in less maintenance costs.... it would still have been for only 14 aircraft.
In the end, the only real and 'visible' avionics upgrade was the installation of TCAS, and that was only because it was made mandatory.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Airbus
November 02, 2011, 16:39:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6785821
Thanks Dude for the info... something I didn't know either.
Wasn't there also an issue with RVSM (reduced vertical separation minima)?
CJ
Wasn't there also an issue with RVSM (reduced vertical separation minima)?
CJ
Subjects: None
November 03, 2011, 16:24:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6787696
Thanks Dude,
It amazes the hell out of me, too.
Steam-powered clockwork describes it quite well.....
I was equally amazed that the ADCs on Sierra Delta still work (as described elsewhere).
CJ
It amazes the hell out of me, too.
Steam-powered clockwork describes it quite well.....
I was equally amazed that the ADCs on Sierra Delta still work (as described elsewhere).
CJ
Subjects: None
November 16, 2011, 23:00:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6811291
So here is mine
On Wikipedia they tell us there were 20 Concordes built, 14 production and 6 pre production
On Wikipedia they tell us there were 20 Concordes built, 14 production and 6 pre production
There were two prototypes , 001 and 002 (the ones with the odd porthole visors).
There were two preproduction aircraft: 01, the British one, with a full 'look-through' visor' and 02, the French one, the first one that looked like the production model, with both a 'full' visor, and the 'pointy' tail.
Then there were two 'near-production' aircraft, that were used for certification, route-proving, and suchlike, but that never entered airline service (201 and 202, now best known as 'F-WTSB' and "Delta-Golf").
And yes, then there were 14 production aircraft, that in the end all made it into service with BA and AF.
Also Wiki tell us there were 67 olympus 593 engines built
Forgive me but this does not seem possible, not enough engines were built to satisfy 'new' engines for 'new' planes on the production line.
Forgive me but this does not seem possible, not enough engines were built to satisfy 'new' engines for 'new' planes on the production line.
The '67' figure probably refers only to the version of the 593 engnes for the production aircraft (4x14=56, plus spares), and not to the earlier versions used for development/testing, for the prototypes, the preprods and the cerification aircraft.
Does this mean that the 6 pre production a/c donateded some engines to production aircraft so some BA and AF planes flew, even from new, with 'used' engines??
Funnily enough, there's a current discussion on a French Concorde forum on the same subject, trying to figure out not only exactly how many engines were built, but also the "where are they now?".
It would be a nice item to add to the "Concorde Story". We may have to appeal to the RR Historical Trust to open their archives, and tell us exactly how many Olympus 593's were built, and what they can tell us about their history.
CJ
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Air France British Airways F-WTSB Olympus 593 Rolls Royce Visor
November 17, 2011, 20:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6813071
There were 22 airframes built, even if only 20 of them flew.
There was one in Toulouse, used for static (structural) tests, and vibration tests, and suchlike, and the one at Farnborough, used for heat and stress cycling.
Neither of them survived. It seems a few sections of '0001' still exist somewhere at Toulouse, and a few sections of '0002' are still on display at the Brooklands (UK) museum.
I have no idea whether either actually had space models of the engines in place, or simply representative ballast weights.
CJ
(I made up the '0001' and '0002' designations.... maybe somebody here can still remember what those 'static' airframes were referred to formally at the time?).
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Brooklands Toulouse
November 20, 2011, 22:29:00 GMT
permalink Post: 6818172
Roger
,
Slightly O/T, but one does wonder about the Science Museum.
I've been a few times, many years ago....
They had a fascinating exhibit about radar, including its early history (and after all a lot of radar technology was invented in the UK). Then, about the last time I went, I found the entire historical exhibit had simply disappeared.
So, I expect the measly Concorde exhibit you saw will soon disappear too.....
Re your photos, download them to a site such as "photobucket",then post the links. PM me if that doesn't work.
CJ
Slightly O/T, but one does wonder about the Science Museum.
I've been a few times, many years ago....
They had a fascinating exhibit about radar, including its early history (and after all a lot of radar technology was invented in the UK). Then, about the last time I went, I found the entire historical exhibit had simply disappeared.
So, I expect the measly Concorde exhibit you saw will soon disappear too.....
Re your photos, download them to a site such as "photobucket",then post the links. PM me if that doesn't work.
CJ
Subjects: None