Originally Posted by
Lyman
Hi Lyman,
This link made me understand why we were in disagreement a bit earlier, on a specific point: We simply didn't look at the same picture.
Originally Posted by
AlphaZuluRomeo
Originally Posted by
Lyman
The runway pictures that show carbon deposition are aerial, long distance, no?
Honestly?
No. That's not what I see.
The pic in the provided link (i.e. Heritage) is indeed aerial & long distance. This pic is from BEA's first interim report (dated December 15, 2000), and was re-published in the final report, as Dozy said just abobe, in § 2.1.3.
But it's not the pic I was thinking about
:
Please, do not get stuck on the one page of Heritage Concorde, and refer yourself to BEA's richer final report, §
1.12.1.8 Tyre tracks, you'll find some other pics, that are neither aerial, nor long distance, nor blurry.
And as Clive said:
Originally Posted by
CliveL
I recommend looking carefully at that Fig 24 because although you can see the obvious cyclic imprint of the flapping remnants of the tyre if you run a ruler over the line of imprints there is no evidence of lateral oscillations whatsoever that I can see.
... I would like to insist on the fact that the 2 parallel tracks seen on Fig 24 are indeed from the flapping remnants of
one tyre only (the #2 tyre). And show no wobble of any kind.
Originally Posted by
Feathers McGraw
Anyone know why BEA did not translate Appendix 6 mentioned up-thread?
No, sorry. But if you're struggling to understand some specific part with Google Trad or such a tool, feel free to ask for a free translation (keep it short, please
).