Concorde at Brooklands ( Weybridge ) Museum
21 August 2006, 01:58 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concorde at Brooklands ( Weybridge ) Museum
Just got back from taking my 7 year old daughter to see Concorde.
Really good exhibit, and a credit to all those volunteers who gave up their time to make it happen.
One fascinatiing fact. The 20 Concordes that actually flew racked up more supersonic hours than all the military jets that have flown since 1948.
Really good exhibit, and a credit to all those volunteers who gave up their time to make it happen.
One fascinatiing fact. The 20 Concordes that actually flew racked up more supersonic hours than all the military jets that have flown since 1948.
21 August 2006, 02:09 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't been to Brooklands for years. I don't think i've even seen the Wellington since it's been complete. I've seen the signs everywhere saying that the Concorde exhibition is now open (I work 1 minute up the road) and that's tempted me to go back again. Maybe one day!
21 August 2006, 07:58 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Were they only grounded for commercial flights or can they still fly in special circumstances because I could swear I saw one landing into Edinburgh Airport this evening!
21 August 2006, 09:03 PM
#7
Pontificating
No flights i'm affraid, all grounded, I doubt they will ever fly again as they will need an air worthiness certificate, and im sure Flight man can advise, I believe its way too expensive to gain the cert + some other red tape i've forgotten about !
Trending Topics
21 August 2006, 09:09 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It wasnt grounded, BA made the decision to pull Concorde service in the face of decling passengers and rising costs.
Virgin tried to buy the planes and fly them for the remainder of their air licence but BA refused to sell to the competition, rather prefering to give them to museums, Shame.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe...rde/index.html
Virgin tried to buy the planes and fly them for the remainder of their air licence but BA refused to sell to the competition, rather prefering to give them to museums, Shame.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe...rde/index.html
Last edited by Jaybird-UK; 21 August 2006 at 09:12 PM.
21 August 2006, 09:14 PM
#9
I think it is the FAA that designates Concorde and the Vulcan as a 'Very Complex Aircraft', airworthiness is a big deal for any aircraft, especially stuff like that, the minute it stops getting its proper maintenance and gets mothballed its pretty much end of, barring miracles.
God job really, wouldnt want just anyone deciding on whether a Concorde is safe to fly.
God job really, wouldnt want just anyone deciding on whether a Concorde is safe to fly.
21 August 2006, 09:54 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Saxo Boy
Were they only grounded for commercial flights or can they still fly in special circumstances because I could swear I saw one landing into Edinburgh Airport this evening!
....or both....
22 August 2006, 07:31 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesnt the ticket apply to commercial flights? As long as it has no passengers it can fly in displays? Or have I got that wrong?
22 August 2006, 08:03 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, i got a question that i thought i'd sneak in here rather than starting a new thread. On the point about supersonic flight;
If Concorde flew at say 1300mph, and the speed of sound is roughly half that.
So if Concorde arrived in NY after about three hours, does that mean that the sound of its engines is still "somewhere" in the sky for another three hours playing catch-up? How does it work, in simple words please.
If Concorde flew at say 1300mph, and the speed of sound is roughly half that.
So if Concorde arrived in NY after about three hours, does that mean that the sound of its engines is still "somewhere" in the sky for another three hours playing catch-up? How does it work, in simple words please.
22 August 2006, 08:12 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Never do names esp. Joey, spaz or Mong
Posts: 39,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22 August 2006, 08:18 AM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightMan
One fascinatiing fact. The 20 Concordes that actually flew racked up more supersonic hours than all the military jets that have flown since 1948.
22 August 2006, 08:59 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To try and answer a couple of questions.
As much as I'd love to see Concorde back in the air, I don't beieve it will ever happen.
It really is such a complex aircraft, engineers qualified to get her back in the air will be few and far between, if someone tries to do it. And Airbus wont make spares.
I don't believe the CAA, who are the most beauracratic of Govt depts, would ever grant a licence. The licence applies to displays as well as commercial flights.
The aircraft now on display around the world are so far from the airworthy article, it isnt true. The Brooklands Concorde has a "false" nose cone, and "tail-fin". The originals were lost!
TelBoy, Leslie is your man for military stuff, but the thing is most mil jets can only run supersonic for a few minutes, before runing out of fuel. Concorde did it for hours at a time. Thats how it flew the most supersonic hours.
When you think that fast jet pilots need flight suits, parachutes, oxygen etc, and Concorde pax wore t-shirts, and drank champagne in the same environment, it reiterates what an amazing achievement it was. The computers that controlled the ramps within the engine bay ( these moved to create shockwaves to slow the air down from 1300mph to 500mph in 11 feet) are still so secret and effective, they were removed from all the aircraft before being sent to their final resting places. ie The Yanks didn't get their hands on them!
As much as I'd love to see Concorde back in the air, I don't beieve it will ever happen.
It really is such a complex aircraft, engineers qualified to get her back in the air will be few and far between, if someone tries to do it. And Airbus wont make spares.I don't believe the CAA, who are the most beauracratic of Govt depts, would ever grant a licence. The licence applies to displays as well as commercial flights.
The aircraft now on display around the world are so far from the airworthy article, it isnt true. The Brooklands Concorde has a "false" nose cone, and "tail-fin". The originals were lost!
TelBoy, Leslie is your man for military stuff, but the thing is most mil jets can only run supersonic for a few minutes, before runing out of fuel. Concorde did it for hours at a time. Thats how it flew the most supersonic hours.
When you think that fast jet pilots need flight suits, parachutes, oxygen etc, and Concorde pax wore t-shirts, and drank champagne in the same environment, it reiterates what an amazing achievement it was. The computers that controlled the ramps within the engine bay ( these moved to create shockwaves to slow the air down from 1300mph to 500mph in 11 feet) are still so secret and effective, they were removed from all the aircraft before being sent to their final resting places. ie The Yanks didn't get their hands on them!
22 August 2006, 09:03 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantastic aircraft, no doubt. Take all the flat Earth tree huggers up in one, that would dispel their zany notions. Big ball below you, black above you. Awesome.
22 August 2006, 09:13 AM
#21
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightMan
To try and answer a couple of questions.
As much as I'd love to see Concorde back in the air, I don't beieve it will ever happen. It really is such a complex aircraft, engineers qualified to get her back in the air will be few and far between, if someone tries to do it. And Airbus wont make spares.
I don't believe the CAA, who are the most beauracratic of Govt depts, would ever grant a licence. The licence applies to displays as well as commercial flights.
The aircraft now on display around the world are so far from the airworthy article, it isnt true. The Brooklands Concorde has a "false" nose cone, and "tail-fin". The originals were lost!
TelBoy, Leslie is your man for military stuff, but the thing is most mil jets can only run supersonic for a few minutes, before runing out of fuel. Concorde did it for hours at a time. Thats how it flew the most supersonic hours.
When you think that fast jet pilots need flight suits, parachutes, oxygen etc, and Concorde pax wore t-shirts, and drank champagne in the same environment, it reiterates what an amazing achievement it was. The computers that controlled the ramps within the engine bay ( these moved to create shockwaves to slow the air down from 1300mph to 500mph in 11 feet) are still so secret and effective, they were removed from all the aircraft before being sent to their final resting places. ie The Yanks didn't get their hands on them!
As much as I'd love to see Concorde back in the air, I don't beieve it will ever happen.
It really is such a complex aircraft, engineers qualified to get her back in the air will be few and far between, if someone tries to do it. And Airbus wont make spares.I don't believe the CAA, who are the most beauracratic of Govt depts, would ever grant a licence. The licence applies to displays as well as commercial flights.
The aircraft now on display around the world are so far from the airworthy article, it isnt true. The Brooklands Concorde has a "false" nose cone, and "tail-fin". The originals were lost!
TelBoy, Leslie is your man for military stuff, but the thing is most mil jets can only run supersonic for a few minutes, before runing out of fuel. Concorde did it for hours at a time. Thats how it flew the most supersonic hours.
When you think that fast jet pilots need flight suits, parachutes, oxygen etc, and Concorde pax wore t-shirts, and drank champagne in the same environment, it reiterates what an amazing achievement it was. The computers that controlled the ramps within the engine bay ( these moved to create shockwaves to slow the air down from 1300mph to 500mph in 11 feet) are still so secret and effective, they were removed from all the aircraft before being sent to their final resting places. ie The Yanks didn't get their hands on them!
Can you imagine Britain trying to do something similar today - we can't event build a football stadium on time
22 August 2006, 09:28 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jasey
Add to that when the thing was designed and built and it really shows just how far we have "declined".
Can you imagine Britain trying to do something similar today - we can't event build a football stadium on time
Can you imagine Britain trying to do something similar today - we can't event build a football stadium on time
All we're supplying is the labour to sell burgers.
22 August 2006, 10:17 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Military aircraft do fly supersonically regularly but as was said for relatively short periods since it does burn up the fuel rapidly. The Tornado is very impressive at low level with its acceleration to supersonic flight but the fuel consumption is horrific.
The Brooklands museum is well worth a visit, as a matter of interest I was amazed to see the Varsity there that I have flown a good few hours in my early RAF career.
Les
The Brooklands museum is well worth a visit, as a matter of interest I was amazed to see the Varsity there that I have flown a good few hours in my early RAF career.
Les
22 August 2006, 06:49 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Les, can you eplain how Concorde could fly at mach 2 without reheat, ( I know it needed reheat to get there ) while supersonic military jets can't do the same? I've never worked that one out!
Cheers!
Cheers!
23 August 2006, 11:17 AM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flightman.
I imagine thet the reheat was used purely to accelerate the aircraft up to supersonic cruise speed quickly and that the dry engine power was sufficient to maintain the speed. Slower acceleration by using the engines in dry power could actually use more fuel in the end. The engines were very powerful as well.
Les
I imagine thet the reheat was used purely to accelerate the aircraft up to supersonic cruise speed quickly and that the dry engine power was sufficient to maintain the speed. Slower acceleration by using the engines in dry power could actually use more fuel in the end. The engines were very powerful as well.
Les
23 August 2006, 11:24 AM
#26
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Flightman.
I imagine thet the reheat was used purely to accelerate the aircraft up to supersonic cruise speed quickly and that the dry engine power was sufficient to maintain the speed. Slower acceleration by using the engines in dry power could actually use more fuel in the end. The engines were very powerful as well.
Les
I imagine thet the reheat was used purely to accelerate the aircraft up to supersonic cruise speed quickly and that the dry engine power was sufficient to maintain the speed. Slower acceleration by using the engines in dry power could actually use more fuel in the end. The engines were very powerful as well.
Les
Thanks for the explaination!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Andy Porter
ScoobyNet General
9
11 September 2002 05:43 PM
Trout...
Southern (England)
24
31 July 2001 09:29 AM