Concorde Documentary

Thank you for sharing.
I wish they would use them, as I would love to travel from London/Paris to NY once and I bet I'm not alone with that dream. My uncle flew from Paris and said it took more time to get through the airport's than the flight itself. I've walk'd through that sit's next to Intrepid, surprisingly small plane from inside.

 

The Tu-144 was better


(just kidding)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRr_rlDOIdQ]Supersonic Tu-144 - Hard landing - YouTube[/ame]

 

Watched most of the first video link today. Wonderful stuff! Thanks so much for posting!

 

That aircraft is simply amazing. I have always had a bit of a fasination with it. It was just a beautiful thing to see, and hear. Amazing what engineers can do, when given the opportunity.

 

The Concorde had afterburners (they called it "reheat").

 

Concorde certainly had after-burners which they used, heavily, on takeoff..... We had an office more or less at the end of a runway at LHR years back and we'd have to stop telephone conversations, let alone water cooler talk as it rattled pretty much everything on departure. It really was one *loud* (yet beautiful) bird!

I'm not sure (& haven't yet watched the doco's above) but don't believe it needed the after-burners once it got up to cruising altitude - Just give it some welly and Mach 2 popped right on up.

I always wanted to fly it, and indeed had more than enough BA miles at one time to do it. Trouble was after your Gub'mint (?) banned it overflying the US (never did quite understand why, other than sour grapes ) I'd have to go SFO -> JFK, switch terminals there and on to LHR - Screw that! I just went first class all the way instead.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I saw a documentary on the Smithsonian channel not long ago; truly amazing airplane and amazing the emotions felt towards the entire program by aircrew, passengers and employees alike. Had I been in the position too, I would have taken a flight to London, just to say I'd done it.

Side note: What's with the U.S. flag, NASA, Boeing, etc symbols on the side of that TU? Did we acquire it after the cancellation of the program?

 

Please don't classify me as some sort of engineering expert. I did work in Boeing Supersonic program and worked with engineering in the design phase setting up training programs. I spent a great amount of time learning about the airplane and the problems Boeing was facing. The Concord team limited the performance of their design by sticking to aluminum material thus limiting the Mach number at which it could cruise. It was doomed to commercial failure because of its small size and higher seat/mile cost plus higher direct operating cost. That airplane never made a dime of operational revenue for the operators.
Fuel transfer and heat control was known by Lockheed and Boeing and that is why titanium was chosen as the airframe material for our transport. Now, in retrospect, the Boeing swing wing version of the airplane never achieved finalization because they couldn't get the pivot bearing to hold up in the lab tests (load/heat simulation) and there were some unsolvable low speed air flow problems. The Boeing design segued to the delta wing design that Lockheed had proposed in the competition. Material technology and aerodynamics were being solved when the program was cancelled. The sonic boom over the U.S. was still a potential killer of supersonic operation in the U.S. wether it was the Concord or any other supersonic transport. I have a copy of the general arrangement drawing of one of the last dash numbers of the B3707 design. That would have been an IMPRESSIVE airplane to see. I have several VIP sets of boxed program reviews and sales pitches that are interesting .

 

Like the Blackbird... used a cone instead of a ramp.

The Russians tried to buy the engineering for the ramps... were having trouble with their SST.

 

The Boeing SST had translating cones or spikes in the inlets that positioned the shock wave to feed the engines at high Mach. I recall that the wall in the engineering space had a full size outline drawing of the engine nacelle and spike with the spike in different positions and an outline of the air flow in various positions. This was in 1966 or 67. One of the rather simple but perplexing design problems that I encountered was the replacement of the vertical fin leading edge " arrow". That described the shape of the piece with the skins nested in the spaces behind the barb of the arrow point. The leading edge was sharp enough to cut the unwary and subject to damage by birds and such. If damaged, how would you remove it when it is trapped by the skins. That was just one of the simply practical problems with which engineering was grappling. One engineer said, too, that we are getting answers to questions that we haven't asked yet.

 

Bob, if you ever take any pictures of that stuff, I would love to see them!

 

Reminds me of the only time I flew on Concorde from JFK to LHR (I got a smoking deal on a round trip upgrade). The flight was only part of the experience. I showed up to the lounge 90 minutes early so I could really get my money's worth. Full breakfast, 40 or more different styles of lounge chairs to try out, plenty of booze.

When it was time to board, instead of the standard "BA announces flight Blah-blah-blah with service to Heathrow now boarding rows 25-30 at gate 8, and anyone with priority is welcome to board at any time blah blah blah", it was simply stated:

"Ladies and gentleman, Concorde is now ready for boarding. We ask that you have your boarding cards ready". And that was all that needed saying. We got in line, rookies like me bumped their heads on the door on the way in, and we tore out of NYC like a rocket ship. At Mach 1 everyone had their cameras out.

In hindsight, it was amazing how normal everything was, as if flying Mach 2 was no big deal. The fuselage was quite warm to the touch, and it wasn't especially comfortable, but it was a great ride nonetheless. I'm sorry I'll probably never get anther chance, unless Branson can get something going.

 

I'll have to dig it up sometime. The drawing is an 11 zone print(121") so I would have to get a reduction. The VIP stuff is pretty thick and many pages. Also there is a route duration calculator wheel that is quite interesting. I retained a titanium slat leading edge rib that was one of the first NC machining tests that looks a bit rough but also interesting. If you're in the Portland area I visit my son down there so maybe we could meet.

 

Are you sure it wasn't "Speedbird 2 is now ready for boarding"?

IIRC, it was Speedbird 1 (or 3) outgoing to JFK & 2 (or 4) inbound......

Anyway, as a Brit, I can say pretty much everyone loved and supported that plane. It may not have made any money, but neither does the Royal family.

Then 'you guys' outlawed it even flying supersonic over your territory! Let alone going thru the barrier..... My understanding was she went to Mach 2 out over the Pacific (out of LAX) before doing a u-turn back over land. The LAX <-> LHR route did make money briefly...... And nobody's windows were going to get broken, especially when she's at 50k feet...... Sour grapes!

Cheers,
Ian

 

I do remember it was BA 002 on the itinerary, and I just thought it was funny that whomever was workng the PA that day figured that anyone who was getting on the plane obviously knew where they were going, and therefore really needn't be bothered with such trivialities as a flight number and destination. Very chic!

 

Indeed!

"Nobody can do it quite like the Brits!"

Was it a dedicated Concorde lounge at JFK? LHR (T4) had (dunno if it still does, this is years back) a huge first class/Concorde lounge just inside security; Concorde pax boarded directly while everyone else still had the schlepp to the gates....... I was in there one time and they were waiting for a transfer guy from the Middle East; Initially, called by name in the lounge then soon after terminal wide - They were *pissed* and very, very close to starting offloading all the bags when he came cruising in without a care in the world! As the girls told him in no uncertain terms, folk pay a *lot* of money to get there quickly and this ******* held everyone up while he went shopping! They told me, dunno if true, the guy was blacklisted from it for life......

Cheers,
Ian

 

I mistakenly referred to the Boeing SST as a 3707. That is the P.O. box number of the company. The SST was a 2707. A senile driven transposition. I won't make any mor misteakes .

 

When did this occur???? I'm not aware of any LAX-LHR Concorde service (ever), especially given Concorde never had that kind of range. Nor do I recall any LAX-JFK-LHR service using Concorde either. It would also make no sense to accelerate to Mach 2 and do a u-turn back over land subsonically - tremendous waste of fuel.

Braniff operated (subsonically) Concorde between DFW and IAD that continued on to Paris or London (and the DFW - IAD service was flown subsonically). Didn't last long, and no Concorde was every painted in Braniff colors.

 

NASA et al paid for the Tu144 to be restored to flying condition to conduct supersonic testing on it. It's the same airplane that was for sale on Ebay a number of years ago for cheap less the engines (apparently the same ones use on some military bomber that can't leave the country).

Funny enough I emailed the guy about the Tu144 he was selling a few months back. The people that kept the planes running and knew them inside and out are getting old and are retiring and no more are keeping them up. It's going to rust away wherever it is and most likely will never be sold let alone fly again.

 

You may be correct!..... Maybe it's "projections" of making money on that route that I recall. (VIP trips?) I do seem to remember she could have got that range if allowed by your Gub'mint!......

Again, I could very well be mistaken (rose tinteds + old age!), but as originally designed, with no US sour grapes, I do recall she could have gone LAX -> LHR in one go. IIRC, "your" carriers (Boeing? Couldn't get theirs in the air! ) nixed the whole idea; No going supersonic over the USA (WTF!) The initial response was "OK, we'll go to Mach 2 (& 50Kft) over the big pond and then simply overfly you". Boeing (or whoever?) then managed to convince the "powers" that even flying over at > M2 would cause folks houses to spontaneously explode, their cellars to collapse and GT's bunker to get re-activated.

But again, I could be wrong.

Cheers,
Ian

 

It would be close from LAX to LHR (5,437 statute miles). Longest range for a passenger Concorde was 4,565 statute miles non-stop.

The Concorde did fly to Brazil through Africa or something iirc with 1 stop.