Page Links: First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last Index Page
| stilton
October 28, 2010, 05:07:00 GMT permalink Post: 6022090 |
Forgive me if this has been covered before but did the Concorde have bleed air wing or fin Anti-Icing ?
What about the engines Or was this deemed unecessary ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Bleed Air |
| stilton
November 05, 2010, 22:31:00 GMT permalink Post: 6042205 |
Sincerely, this thread just gets more interesting.
Was any consideration given to the fitting of a Head up display ? With such a manually flown Aircraft it would seem to be a natural for such an aid. I realise the technology was in it's infancy at the gestation of the Concorde project but was there ever a proposal or even testing of such a device ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): HUD (Head Up Display) |
| stilton
November 06, 2010, 03:59:00 GMT permalink Post: 6042600 |
Thanks Christiaan.
Yes I think the Mercure had a HUD if i'm not mistaken. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): HUD (Head Up Display) |
| stilton
June 21, 2011, 06:53:00 GMT permalink Post: 6526397 |
Never get tired of this thread !
Very interesting about the sidestick, was the installation and testing purely for research / experimentation purposes or was it seriously contemplated for use in production Aircraft ? If so, why was it decided against ?! Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Sidestick |
| stilton
June 22, 2011, 03:33:00 GMT permalink Post: 6528391 |
Did the Sidestick controller have the same authority as the Conventional Control yoke or were there 'hard limits' a la Airbus 320 and on ?
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Airbus Sidestick |
| stilton
August 02, 2011, 01:26:00 GMT permalink Post: 6613291 |
I second that M2Dude and thank you for correcting this m*ron
Interesting how this 'accident waiting to happen' enjoyed a thirty year plus accident free record with BA. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Air France 4590 British Airways |
| stilton
April 28, 2012, 20:29:00 GMT permalink Post: 7161124 |
For some reason I seem to remember a picture of a Concorde Cockpit with four INS sets side by side, was this ever the case or just my imagination ?
Also, were the INS installed specially developed for Concorde or were they the same as fitted in the B747 for example. Finally was GPS updating to the INS position ever developed and installed ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): INS (Inertial Navigation System) |
| stilton
May 04, 2012, 06:12:00 GMT permalink Post: 7170430 |
All modern jet transports still use INS, it's output is used for more than just navigation, e.g. Attitude indicator, vertical speed input and others.
GPS (and other sources) merely update and refine the INS position. I am sure Concorde would have done the same. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): INS (Inertial Navigation System) |
| stilton
May 18, 2012, 05:43:00 GMT permalink Post: 7196374 |
Agreed and well said, my point was and is that an Inertial source, whatever form that may take is still an invaluable input even these days.
The previous poster had insinuated that a GPS installation in the Concorde would have completely replaced the existing INS fit. Not that simple. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): INS (Inertial Navigation System) |
| stilton
May 19, 2012, 01:59:00 GMT permalink Post: 7198130 |
No apology necessary whatsoever, you brought a more accurate and refined aspect to the conversation.
Despite the advent of GPS , in my humble opinion having three independent inertial sources on board that function perfectly well without any updating from any source is invaluable. Subjects: None |
| stilton
August 27, 2012, 06:29:00 GMT permalink Post: 7380818 |
Just finished the Haynes 'Concorde workshop manual'
This is a collaboration between a retired Concorde Captain and Flight Engineer. The one excerpt that really caught my eye was the reference to the method of construction and differences between the British and French built Aircraft. 'The French fuselage was designed to safe life principles while the British was designed to fail safe. From window line to window line across the top of the fuselage Bristol used three skin panels overlapping at 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock while Toulouse used two, overlapping at 12 o'clock' This revelation was a big surprise to me, for a production run of 14 airframes two different construction methods were employed apparently, amazing. I had always thought the airframes were virtually identical. Anyone have any further insight on this ? Last edited by stilton; 27th August 2012 at 06:30 . Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Captains Haynes guide to Concorde Toulouse |
| stilton
September 02, 2012, 06:09:00 GMT permalink Post: 7391500 |
Clive,
While not disputing what you are saying about the construction why was the French method described as 'safe life' and the British 'fail safe ? ' It sounds significantly different. Subjects: None |
| stilton
September 02, 2012, 10:39:00 GMT permalink Post: 7391843 |
I realize it's all academic now Clive but the two philosophies do sound significantly different.
Just for the sake of argument if the two fleets were still operating surely BA's would be approved for a longer life with the fail safe method of construction ? Subjects: None |
| stilton
March 02, 2013, 19:32:00 GMT permalink Post: 7722782 |
Departure without noise or boom considerations
Just for theories sake, if there were no noise, speed or boom considerations what would be the optimum profile for Concorde to fly after departure ?
In normal service I understand it had to comply with normal noise abatement departures, speed limits and remain subsonic until far enough from land to prevent the boom being a consideration. But what if it could accelerate immediately, with no restrictions of any kind ? I imagine you would stay in afterburner, accelerate to VMO and on to M2 in the climb ? or would airframe heating at lower altitudes prevent this ? Lastly, was this ever done in testing, or for example leaving Barbados ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Afterburner/Re-heat Barbados Noise Abatement Sonic Boom |
| stilton
March 04, 2013, 16:13:00 GMT permalink Post: 7725715 |
It has been a fantastic and extremely enjoyable thread.
Subjects: None |
| stilton
March 13, 2015, 06:45:00 GMT permalink Post: 8899839 |
Concorde depressurization procedure
Curious to know what drills were followed with a rapid depressurization at it's normal cruising levels between FL500-600.
Was it possible to go to idle power prior to starting a descent, and with no spoilers would reverse have been used to achieve a higher rate ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Depressurisation |
| stilton
March 13, 2015, 21:01:00 GMT permalink Post: 8900775 |
Thanks Exwk, is it accurate that FL600 was the Concorde's regulated ceiling due to the time required to descend in the event of a depressurization or were there other factors involved ?
It sounds like you could get down pretty quickly when needed. I believe it was capable of higher altitudes and sometimes reached FL600 in cruise, I forget the highest achieved during flight test although that is probably in this thread ! Incidentally what was the envelope for using reverse ? Your description of it's operation makes it sound less than practical ? Why was that ? Best wishes. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Depressurisation |
| stilton
March 20, 2015, 04:22:00 GMT permalink Post: 8908680 |
Did LHR-BGI always tech stop in SNN ?
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): LHR-BGI Route |
| stilton
April 08, 2015, 23:35:00 GMT permalink Post: 8937379 |
Great information Exwk.
Didn't the early prototypes have a braking parachute ? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Braking Parachute |
| stilton
July 16, 2016, 03:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 9441431 |
Anyone able to tell us what the cabin altitude was at FL600 ?
Subjects: None |