View Full Version : Concorde vs F3
Navaleye
3rd Sep 2003, 00:17
I went to a lecture from a former Concorde pilot very recently. He showed a very interesting (and short) home video of a group of F3s in full burner trying to formate on a Concorde. The F3s were goimg backwards so quickly the film only lasted 10 seconds or so.
spekesoftly
3rd Sep 2003, 05:03
I believe that RAF VC10s could also "show a clean pair of heels" to Javelins!!
Min Decent Ht
3rd Sep 2003, 06:27
It was probably the clip of "the RAF's brand new fighter, the Tornado F2" taken at the Farnboro airshow in the 80s. Concorde came in for its fly past and 2 F2s 'intercepted' it, almost head on, then turned around and chased it. Their mighty Skyslugs were painted black for some reason.
I would have thought the F3 would have faster acceleration at low level than Concorde; and above 30k.......... perhaps not.
tonybliar
3rd Sep 2003, 06:35
So what is the point of this thread - should we have bought Concorde instead of the F3 or what?
Maybe the performance of the interceptor is only relevant where it is necessary to fly close to or with the target. Modern weapons, radar and data systems enable lower performance aircraft to successfully engage higher performance aircraft.
Nevertheless, it is a lot easier to do the job if you have a performance advantage as we used to have in the days when the fighter was specified to have superior performance to the bomber. Now it seems we have to rely on technology and pure skill to get the job done.
Carbide Finger
3rd Sep 2003, 07:05
Concorde accelerates out of the Accel point from around 550 kts (G/S) and doesn't get to over a 1000 kts until it crosses the FIR boundary (around 200 nm). I'm sure a Tornado can do it quicker!
Eagle 270
3rd Sep 2003, 08:21
Isnt that due to passenger comfort though? Wouldnt want to G lock Elton John now would we.
The Nr Fairy
3rd Sep 2003, 13:32
Eagle :
I don't know, shutting him up for a while seems useful to me.
How come the military have never, except for the SR71, had aircraft which can sustain M2+ on a regular basis without afterburning ? Is it an operational requirements thing, or lack of money ?
Operational need.
The hypersonic bomber died with the XB-71 Valkyrie and the development of effective long range SAM by the Russians. It didn't matter if you were going to fly at M2, 3 or 4 - the SAM would get you.
For FJs it comes down to the environment in which they're going to fight. Analysis shows that the vast majority of their life is subsonic with a small proportion up to M1.3, and a miniscule amount beyond. So that's what the design is optimised for.
BEagle
3rd Sep 2003, 15:07
The B-70 was indeed an amazing device. It flew around forty years ago, but by then was little more than a research vehicle. Here in the UK we were eagerly waiting for the TSR2....
How different nowadays:(
We could make the job of intercepting even a subsonic airliner quite difficult for a F3 even in a VC10, if a visident was needed under exercise RoE. Particularly if you turned off the Mode C and changed height to make the job harder for the Fighter Confusers. Listen in to the intercept frequency, work out which side they were displaced on, get out of the contrail levels then turn very gently turn to confuse heading assessment and to thwart their stern conversion turn geometry, then turn it into a tailchase away from their base knowing the effect that prolonged flight with AB would have on a clean wing F3...... ;)
NoseGunner
3rd Sep 2003, 15:25
Fortunately, these days we are well drilled in VC10s doing a slow turn towards, managing a 180 pass. Its called a tanker join!;)
Navaleye
4th Sep 2003, 19:15
This Concorde jockey also mentioned that in early testing from a Scottish base, they got to FL30 in less than 2 minutes. How does that compare to FJ types?
3,000ft in 2 minutes? I suppose the F3 might beat it. :p
Navaleye
4th Sep 2003, 21:52
Too much vodka last night. Should read 30,000ft
Wasn't there a Lightning pilot who in the mid '80's simulated a Red Top shot from a stern conversion intercept on a Concorde doing M2.2 at FL550 or FL600?
Is that difficult to do?:confused:
RRAAMJET
5th Sep 2003, 07:13
Do believe that was back in the mid-70's...
I heard the story as follows:
Conc on trials. A/c stopped in mid-east ( Beirut?), trouble broke out all-of-a-sudden and crew scrambled Conc into the air heading West, without filing complete flt.plan.
The Lightning was airborne at night off Cyprus and got a heads-up from the Fighter Controllers to go head on to fast approaching un-identified M2 aircraft (Syrian, Egyptian...??). Unable to get a head-on Red-top lock the Lightning turns but is unable to catch up with rapidly disappearing four blue lights....they don't confirm what it is until apology next day from crew of Concorde.
Now, I heard that story about 2 decades ago, my memory's really hazy - anyone shed any light on it? I think the rumour was that Dave Wooldridge was the Lightning driver...:confused: :suspect:
aviate1138
5th Sep 2003, 18:07
" The B-70 was indeed an amazing device. It flew around forty years ago, but by then was little more than a research vehicle. Here in the UK we were eagerly waiting for the TSR2...."
A colleague, Clay Lacy, was the LearJet camera pilot for the General Electric photo shoot including the B-70 Valkyrie, that turned into tragedy. Nasa pilot Joe Walker flying an F-104 Starfighter, got too close to the B-70 wing and to the formations horror the drooped wingtip vortices rolled the fighter and smashed or took the two fins off. The B-70 flew on but inevitably spun with absolutely no fin or rudder control. Pilots were probably trapped by excessive g-forces.
Ah! The TSR2. Would still be in service wouldn't it? There would have been a number of variants. Another Labour governmant cock-up as well as total ignorance of aviation matters by Lord Louis Mountbatten.
Clay Lacy and I were doing some other filming from a Lear Jet, years later, when he had to drop me off at Van Nuys while he carried on with my film crew to shoot something to which a Brit could not be party. It was the first in-flight photos of the Stealth F-117a. Very hush-hush at the time.
B J
Al White successfully ejected, Major Cross was killed. I seem to recall his death was attributed to a failure of the complex seat mechanism, designed to enclose and protect the pilot during high speed egress. Collision (http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/XB-70_crash_site.htm)
BEagle
6th Sep 2003, 01:51
aviate 1138 and ORAC are both correct. The XB-70 crash did kill Maj Cross after Joe Walker's F-104 collided with it during a totally unnecessary photo shoot. And 'Lordy' Mountbottom indeed helped Wislon's lot to kill off the TSR2. As I once had the pleasure of telling him at Broadlands. :
Mountbottom: "In the RAF, eh, what do you fly?"
BEagle: "The Buccaneer"
Mountbottom: "Ah - a good aeroplane. The Royal Navy was very proud of it"
BEagle: "But we've only got it because the TSR2, vastly better in all respects, was killed off by political stupidity and we're stuck with old naval bombers instead!"
Mountbottom: "Hmm, must go. People to meet......"
aviate1138
6th Sep 2003, 16:16
BEagle quoted.......
" And 'Lordy' Mountbottom indeed helped Wislon's lot to kill off the TSR2. As I once had the pleasure of telling him at Broadlands.........."
Great story!
Did you manage to ask him why he partitioned, in the worst possible way, India as well? Even his naval exploits were suspect I gather. Closet queen too, I am told. Maybe the Indian handover screw-up happened because his wife was bonking Nehru at the time! What a record!
Historical archives are wonderful means to see how we tippy-toed through the Cold War period.
B J
I seem to remember that Al White was lucky to survive as the clamshells of his escape system trapped his elbow and therefore couldn't close fully.
Some good info here http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-70.htm albeit with no mention of the escape system.
Escape system description (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b5/b5-65.htm). The last seconds (http://www.qnet.com/~danlig/B70pagex.htm)
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b5/xb70ec.jpg