PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Concorde question
View Single Post
Old 18th Oct 2013, 18:12
  #1733 (permalink)  
CliveL
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 88
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dozy

Even when Concorde entered production, the most complex digital displays available to aviation were of the 7-segment LED type (as used in the Apollo Guidance Computer), and they were both wildly expensive and of limited use.
Yeah, well when we put a digital computer to generate the AICS laws that was NEW man!



Ergonomically speaking, both engineers and pilots of the era write of Concorde's flight deck being the best possible balance of form and function available at the time - sure it looks cluttered to the modern eye,
Again, no digital multifunction displays on offer in those days

It's worth bearing in mind that even those not particularly well-disposed to Airbus will grudgingly admit that the flight deck ergonomics on those types are extremely good - and a lot of the lessons learned were from cramming all that information into Concorde's limited space.
Errrr no, I don't think so. Concorde's flight deck was done at Filton and we had no involvement in the Airbus designs in that area.


I have to thank EXWOK for explaining the windows - but I'll add the more prosaic reason that you don't need a particularly large window to see the curvature of the Earth in all its splendour - which is for the most part all you'd be seeing during the flight!
Exwok's remark is not quite right IIRC. Certainly the window size was dictated by pressurisation failure, but one couldn't maintain cabin pressure with two windows failed - the design case was to get to a breathable altitude before you killed too many passengers! Also, there is very little to see when you have a delta wing under you.

While Concorde herself never recouped the development money granted by the governments of the UK and France, the infrastructure and R&D her development put in place paved the way for the Airbus project
Ummm - most participants reckoned that the Concorde infrastructure showed the way not to do it, and besides the early Airbuses were developed in parallel with the later stages of Concorde development. You have a point where R&D is concerned though - several technologies developed for Concorde found their way onto the subsonic fleet, not the least being the probability approach to system certification.
CliveL is offline