PDA

View Full Version : Upsetting Video‚‚ā¨¬¶



MrBlueSky1960
02-04-2006, 07:30 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://www.flightlevel350.com/viewer.php?id=278

MrBlueSky1960
02-04-2006, 07:30 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://www.flightlevel350.com/viewer.php?id=278

Airmail109
02-04-2006, 07:38 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif I only saw concorde once when I was about 10, flying low over twickernham.....it was fantastic

HotelBushranger
02-04-2006, 07:54 AM
Why upsetting? Nevermind, I'm not British.

Nevertheless, it will always be one of the few breakthrough aircraft; one that destroyed one of the barriers pertaining to flight.

Gold_Monkey
02-04-2006, 08:05 AM
Excellent video, too bad she flys nomore.

Bremspropeller
02-04-2006, 08:32 AM
I have the video in much higher quality on my harddisc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I remember seing Concorde back in 1993 when my parents and me were on our way to New York JFK.
When we were approaching our boarding-gate at Heathrow, the earth suddenly started to vibrate (almost like an earthquake). My father and I ran to the nearest window and we saw this beautiful plane dashing by.

What an experience http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Taylortony
02-04-2006, 08:39 AM
Have had the pleasure of being in them on them and around a couple of them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif but never flew in her......such a shame to cut its career short after ONE CRASH..........

If it was a 737 self loading cargo carrier it would have still been flying even, after all of the rudder reversal problems and deaths that that has caused the 737 flies still........ that is criminal

Bremspropeller
02-04-2006, 08:51 AM
It's all about the lobby behind the plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

rnzoli
02-04-2006, 08:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:
Have had the pleasure of being in them on them and around a couple of them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif but never flew in her......such a shame to cut its career short after ONE CRASH..........

If it was a 737 self loading cargo carrier it would have still been flying even, after all of the rudder reversal problems and deaths that that has caused the 737 flies still........ that is criminal </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Due to the small fleet, the Concorde's accumulated flight time was also small, and that single crash made it an aircraft of excellent safety record into a poor one immediately. But this is just the surface - it wasn't worth it to operate.

The B-737 however, even with those 3 rudder reversal incidents (2 crashes + 1 almost), still enjoy a good safety average due to to being the profitable and durable workhorse of the aviation industry. The rudder servo has been re-design and retrofitten on older aircrafts as well.

rnzoli
02-04-2006, 08:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
It's all about the lobby behind the plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There was a huge political lobby behind the Concorde, too. The accountants and investors would have thrown it out much earlier. But in recent years, air travel took a different turn (look at A380 - what's similar to Concorde? nothing), and that brought about the grounding of this beautiful aircraft.

BoCfuss
02-04-2006, 09:04 AM
An engineering marvel, and an financial blunder. To me it is a fantastic aircraft, but, it has elitest written all over it. Its time she is gone, but it is terrible to have her go in such a way.

EPP_Gibbs
02-04-2006, 09:22 AM
My house is under one of London Heathrow Airport's flight paths. Concorde used to fly over twice daily so for me she was a commonplace sight but even still I'd look up, every time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Once we installed double glazing, she was the only aircraft I heard.

I once went and stood on the service road that runs from Hatton Cross station towards Terminal 4. The spot is right at the end of the runway, and we were there because Concorde was about to take off over our heads. As it passed over I swear it was the loudest sound I have ever, or am ever likely, to hear. Astonishng.

Concorde also caught out a man cheating on his wife. He phoned her to tell her he was stuck in a meeting in Birmingham (120 miles away). She replied...."Who are you shagging? Concorde passed over my head a minute ago and I've just heard it pass over yours!!!!"

Fantastic aircraft. I've been on board, and the cockpit is pure Buck Rogers! Shame she had to go, but I think BA had been wanting to decommision her for some time, and the crash just sealed it.

Viper2005_
02-04-2006, 09:40 AM
Concorde was an excellent aeroplane. It would have done very well indeed but for the oil crisis and the US green lobby. Had 2707 made it past the mockup stage I suspect that the green lobby wouldn't have been a problem...

Concorde was our Apollo; it cost less, lasted longer and brought joy to millions of ordinary people who saw Concorde "in the flesh" all over the world. Seeing her die as she did was incredibly sad, especially as I never got to fly in her.

We will go supersonic again, just as we will eventually go back to the moon. It's just a question of waiting for people to get their priorities straight. Hopefully this will happen within my lifetime...

Irrespective of the financial arguments for both manned space exploration and supersonic transportation (both of which are excellent), more importantly both serve to lift the human spirit, which is priceless.

She could and should have been kept flying until 2012, by which time we could, and should, have been able to replace her.

As for elitism, I am an elitist. I intend to be the best I can be at everything I do; I also intend to be appropriately rewarded for my efforts. And why not?

Bremspropeller
02-04-2006, 09:45 AM
No matter IF we get another supersonic plane - it won't be like our beloved Concorde.

It's like your first love. There will be others, but you'll always remember that one.

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 10:00 AM
I remember seeing Concorde at an airshow at Farnborough in 1976. I think it might have been its full first public demonstration. But the future of aviation is in thrifty aircraft like the new Airbus. Innovative, but its demise was assured even before it entered service as it was designed for an age of cheap fuel and exclusivity that has passed away. Now it is a case of packing in as many punters as possible (and the leg room be damned!).

Personally I am still mourning the loss the empire flying boats...

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 10:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No matter IF we get another supersonic plane - it won't be like our beloved Concorde. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not sure there will be the demand for supersonic aircraft unless they can be made to be very fuel economic. These days if you need to be in New York for a business meeting you can use increasingly sophisticated video conferencing systems (not Netmeeting - better stuff than that) and be there in 2 minutes, not 2 hours, and for a fraction of the cost. It's not all a face-to-face meeting can be, but you can do it 20 times over for what a Concorde ticket would cost.

Viper2005_
02-04-2006, 10:38 AM
The Concorde replacement is likely to operate over transpacific routes, where the time savings are greater.

Flying faster will always be more expensive, but the cost increment need not be as great as it was for Concorde. Fuel doesn't make up a very large proportion of direct operating costs; Concorde was expensive to maintain, because apart from anything else the fleet was so small that spares production didn't benefit from economies of scale.

It is now possible to shape the sonic boom with careful design; this may allow supersonic flight over land in the not too distant future.

This would immediately open up vast new markets for an SST.

Economic growth means that in real terms everything is getting cheaper, and more people are able to take the expensive option. I for one would pay good money to avoid sitting in an incredibly boring aluminium tube for 10 hours or more if I've got a long distance to cover.

ploughman
02-04-2006, 10:48 AM
Are military aircraft permitted to go supersonic over land?

LT.INSTG8R
02-04-2006, 10:58 AM
I was working at Pearson IA in Toronto when the Concorde was on its last grand tour it was nice to see it that last time

BoCfuss
02-04-2006, 11:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Are military aircraft permitted to go supersonic over land? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Blackbird did, but it never really existed.

LStarosta
02-04-2006, 12:13 PM
"The aircraft was initially referred to in Britain as "Concord". In 1967 the British Government announced that it would change the spelling to "Concorde" to match the French. This created an uproar but it died down after a government minister stated that the suffixed "e" was for excellence."

LOL!

berg417448
02-04-2006, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Are military aircraft permitted to go supersonic over land? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. We used to get at least one sonic boom per week when the production F-22s were tested over east Tennessee.
They still do it. They just moved the flight corridor a bit to reduce complaints.

Stackhouse25th
02-04-2006, 12:40 PM
concorde isnt all that great...slap some powerful engines on a dart and you have a SST.

Lodovik
02-04-2006, 12:40 PM
Elitist or not, I would have accepted a ticket for a ride if offered http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
OK, maybe it wasn't the most economical AC in the world, but it can't be beat in beauty. Same kind of glamour as in the passenger zeppelins, only more high tech.
I really wish somebody with too much money would build a passenger simulator of the Concorde. A perfect replica of the passenger compartment with the crew in period costumes, champaigne being served, CGI views from the windows, simulated takeoff and landing, the works. I'd pay to spend a moment in that thing, too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ARCHIE_CALVERT
02-04-2006, 01:09 PM
Was‚‚ā¨ônt there some plans for the RAF ( Did I see some drawings of a Concorde in RAF Camo or was it just a dream‚‚ā¨¬¶ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif) to use the Concorde‚‚ā¨ôs as a bomber? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Viper2005_
02-04-2006, 01:20 PM
Concorde couldn't have been made into a bomber easily; its configuration is wrong.

If you want a supersonic bomber look up the Avro 730.

ploughman
02-04-2006, 01:30 PM
Concorde was used to simulate Backfire bomber attacks on NATO fleets in the North Atlantic during the Cold War. It would make high speed sprints and pretty much demonstrated that the Backfire armed with stand-off missilese would represent a serious threat to CBGs etc., in the event of war.

Capt_Haddock
02-04-2006, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
It is now possible to shape the sonic boom with careful design; this may allow supersonic flight over land in the not too distant future.

This would immediately open up vast new markets for an SST. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem of the sonic boom over civilians was just a political excuse from the US government.
While they were forbiding the concorde to fly supersonic over US civilians, the USAF was happily booming all over European civilians from their countless military bases in European soil.

As a child in the 70's I happened to live only a few Km away from a major US airbase and classes were interrupted several times everyday by booming jets (we kids actually loved it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

Had a US company been first with the supersonic airliner, things would have been very different...

http://www.haddock.f2s.com/sig/F19bannerh3.jpg

WTE_Ibis
02-04-2006, 01:44 PM
I too have that video, and she is indeed a beautifull bird especially on landing and takeoff.
In British Airways trials, Concorde was offered as a target to NATO fighters including F-15s, F-16s, F-14s, Mirages, F-104s - but only the Lightning managed to overtake Concorde on a stern intercept. During these trials Concorde was at 57,000 ft and travelling at Mach 2.2."
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

darkhorizon11
02-04-2006, 01:49 PM
The crash was just a coup de gras, noise and air pollution were the real concerns actually. Studies have should that the release of greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere have a much more magnifying effect than the ones released lower to the surface. Thats why the government pulled funding on the American SST. We probably won't see another one until technique allows us to fly around 90-100,000 above the stratosphere and above the ozone layer for the most part.

Either way its still sad she truly was a magnificent aircraft! Growing up in Warwick RI I saw her once when I was little when there was a tennis tourament at Newport. My dad woke me up at about 8am and we stood outside our house (I live at the approach end of the runway). I was only about 6 or 7 and didn't really get the hype as I was tired. Then she flew over, I only got maybe a 3 glimpse, but then I understood. It was one of the defining factors that lead me to become the pilot I am today...

TheGozr
02-04-2006, 01:52 PM
There is a work in progress if i remember correctly to replace the Concorde by join efforts of France and Japan.

Dunkelgrun
02-04-2006, 02:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
I remember seeing Concorde at an airshow at Farnborough in 1976. I think it might have been its full first public demonstration. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was there too. I think that it was the 002 prototype flying that day; the one that is in Yeovilton now.

I also saw Concorde on her last flight over the West Country, the last day they ever flew around here.

Cheers!

berg417448
02-04-2006, 02:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt_Haddock:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
It is now possible to shape the sonic boom with careful design; this may allow supersonic flight over land in the not too distant future.

This would immediately open up vast new markets for an SST. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem of the sonic boom over civilians was just a political excuse from the US government.
While they were forbiding the concorde to fly supersonic over US civilians, the USAF was happily booming all over European civilians from their countless military bases in European soil.

As a child in the 70's I happened to live only a few Km away from a major US airbase and classes were interrupted several times everyday by booming jets (we kids actually loved it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

Had a US company been first with the supersonic airliner, things would have been very different...

http://www.haddock.f2s.com/sig/F19bannerh3.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There may be some truth to what you are saying but the US Senate banned the flights because of massive citizen protests and complaints. I remember it well. Environmentalist opposition to Concorde in the U S was really focused on eliminating plans by US companies to develop their own SST. There were even some groups still protesting it when Concorde made its last flight to New York city!

And don't forget that India and Malaysia also didn't allow supersonic flights of the Concorde over their territories pretty much scewing up efforts to use the aircraft efficiently in Asia.

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 02:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Fuel doesn't make up a very large proportion of direct operating costs; </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to the IATA the fuel costs have risen from 13% of expenses (2003) via 17% (2004) to 23% (2005). Given that most major airlines operate on around a 5% margin, it's a pretty significant change. There was around a 3.7% drop in other operating expenses in 2005, but you can see the pressure airlines are under. BA has done well to turn in a healthy profit for 2005.

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 02:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Was‚‚ā¨ônt there some plans for the RAF ( Did I see some drawings of a Concorde in RAF Camo or was it just a dream‚‚ā¨¬¶ Blink) to use the Concorde‚‚ā¨ôs as a bomber? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think it was the other way round - the Concorde benefitted from research on RAF bomber/strike aircraft, i.e. the TSR2.

ARCHIE_CALVERT
02-04-2006, 03:20 PM
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=111059

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=52969&highlight=CONCORDE

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 03:23 PM
Is that for real, Archie? Or a mock up? If it is for real then it seems I stand corrected!

Oops - should have read the blurb better: "drawing"!

ARCHIE_CALVERT
02-04-2006, 03:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Is that for real, Archie? Or a mock up? If it is for real then it seems I stand corrected! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it's not real just something that was on the plans, but came to nought... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif I knew I had seen something about a Concorde in RAF Camo though, the link explains... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ploughman
02-04-2006, 03:34 PM
Pretty pictures are generally just that, at most they're PR spoilers designed to burn someone elses 'big day' like the sonic cruiser PR blitz on the A-380. Externally mounted weapons, especially something like the Blue Steel, on a Concorde would have totally shagged the plane's performance.

Enforcer572005
02-05-2006, 10:21 AM
i think htis is mistitled...shouldve been insprirational/breathtaking video. This was great. Seeing it wiht the Red Arrows was impressive.....would love to see a longer vid of that event.

What event was that anyway, with a million people in the streets of London?

One came to Atlanta airport (Hartsfield) many yrs ago on a display routine. I was unable to go, but wish I had.

ViKe1121
02-05-2006, 01:16 PM
there is a concorde on the intrepid museum in NYC that u can go in.

EPP_Gibbs
02-05-2006, 01:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stackhouse25th:
concorde isnt all that great...slap some powerful engines on a dart and you have a SST. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A Ferrari isn't that great....Stick a powerful engine in a curvy body, paint it red, and you've got one, easy.

The Rolling stones aren't that great....just write a bunch of hit songs and sell millions of albums, easy.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

ARCHIE_CALVERT
02-05-2006, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Enforcer572005:
i think htis is mistitled...shouldve been insprirational/breathtaking video. This was great. Seeing it wiht the Red Arrows was impressive.....would love to see a longer vid of that event.

What event was that anyway, with a million people in the streets of London?

One came to Atlanta airport (Hartsfield) many yrs ago on a display routine. I was unable to go, but wish I had. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Been trying to find a vid for you, but have'nt had much luck... Here's some sites that show you what you wantedc to know...

http://www.concordesst.com/history/reds/reds.html

http://www.concordesst.com/flypast.html

http://www.nodarkroom.co.uk/videos.htm

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-05-2006, 05:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stackhouse25th:
concorde isnt all that great...slap some powerful engines on a dart and you have a SST. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fishy not gonna bite this time... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-05-2006, 05:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Concorde was used to simulate Backfire bomber attacks on NATO fleets in the North Atlantic during the Cold War. It would make high speed sprints and pretty much demonstrated that the Backfire armed with stand-off missilese would represent a serious threat to CBGs etc., in the event of war. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, in the '80s one proved itself pretty much immune to interception over the north sea, NATO sent their best to try and catch it (F15, F104, Mirage etc) and only the RAF Lightnings could best it...

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-05-2006, 05:56 PM
Magnificent aircraft - beautiful, graceful, immensely fast, HUGELY expensive, controversial and ultimately doomed in no small part by politics, bad luck and sour grapes IMHO.

Just a magical piece of technology in SO MANY ways, though, I think one of my biggest regrets in life will be the fact that I never had the opportunity to fly in it.

And it's such an inspiring aircraft to look at, I think sufferers of long-term depression could by helped by regular viewings of video of Concorde in flight.

Wonder if the airframes could have been used for Secret Squirrel photo-recon/ELINT sniffing type work? Pretty expensive, elaborate and high-profile way of getting a few cameras over a patch of dirt mind you.

Don't be sad that it's gone, be happy that it ever existed in the first place!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Enforcer572005
02-05-2006, 10:57 PM
Thanks Archie...ill check those out. Man when the Brits have a big to-doo, they have a big to-doo......

A friend of mine spent all one summer in england going to every airshow and military museum he could get to......He was impressed. Good video he made. They actually get to fly close enough for the crowd to see them.

WTE_Ibis
02-06-2006, 02:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SnapdLikeAMutha:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Concorde was used to simulate Backfire bomber attacks on NATO fleets in the North Atlantic during the Cold War. It would make high speed sprints and pretty much demonstrated that the Backfire armed with stand-off missilese would represent a serious threat to CBGs etc., in the event of war. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, in the '80s one proved itself pretty much immune to interception over the north sea, NATO sent their best to try and catch it (F15, F104, Mirage etc) and only the RAF Lightnings could best it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
________________________________________________

In British Airways trials, Concorde was offered as a target to NATO fighters including F-15s, F-16s, F-14s, Mirages, F-104s - but only the Lightning managed to overtake Concorde on a stern intercept. During these trials Concorde was at 57,000 ft and travelling at Mach 2.2."

.