Speaking of the Thud... somewhere in RAFG in the seventies, Spam on squadron exchange relates...
Running South in the weeds out of N. Vietnam, he hears "Thud crossing the xxxx river, what's your indicated?" Replies "I'm doing a cool thousand..." "OK I'm passing you on the right..." and it did. |
As a 'champagne rider' I had a trip up to the cockpit (remember those days?). I was interested in the IAS as we were doing M2.02 at the time at FL600. I fully expected the old girl to have a fairly low Vne but was surprised to see that it was redlined at 530kts. I was quite impressed.
Replies "I'm doing a cool thousand..." "OK I'm passing you on the right..." and it did. |
LJ - Of course we were at high altitude. It would have been criminal to spill the Dom.
|
MJ Thanks. I see the classification is retired. Was the 3km course limited by a "not above" height? OAP Data sheet for Sageburner - Fai Record File Data sheet for one of the Meteor record runs done in 1945 - Fai Record File Both of those were done at sub 200 feet and are the same record class as the F-104. If memory serves until the late 1953 the absolute airspeed record had to be done at low level. thus the reason that the Hunter and Swift were able to break the record just before the rules were changed (the Hunter and Swift got the same record as Sageburner as well as the absolute airspeed record). |
Beags, don't ruin a good story :) But I'm sure I saw that on the Carosel... And the tail wind was enormous
|
There was this incident:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eoTqLnL0WI And there was the older Unpleasantness at White Sands in Dec. 64 when the FAA, which was trying to diversify into building the US SST, invited media to its specially built "boomtown" to experience B-58 and F-104 booms and be convinced that the dreaded boom was no big deal. The planned tests went well, but then someone had the bright idea of bringing a -104 past for a photo op at 500 feet. Being a -104 it came in a tidge hot and... “A heavy ruby-glass ashtray flew off a desk and sprayed shards over the floor. Outside, both panes of a mock-up storefront were smashed, a glass window in a trailer caved in, and 16 out of 90 panes in a small greenhouse were shattered.” (That was Time's report.) 38 psf will do that... |
is it true that the FE had a dial on his panel that allowed him to adjust the displayed Mach in the pax cabin on up to 2.0 for the passengers who paid for this....on days when ambient conditions prevented getting to Mach 2 |
Rigchick-RB199.
Yes, more dry power would have been good, trouble is, the sfc is/was v.important at low altitude.:8 However, at 700+KIAS in any Tornado, I think you will find that the core engine is just an APU, almost all the thrust is from the pressure recovery in the inlet coupled with the afterburner. :ok: However, the (almost) unbelievable thing is that Concorde (BS OLYMPUS 593) cruised at Mach 2.0 IN DRY POWER!:ok::ok: OAP |
It did indeed, although I have to say that the most impressive thing about any Concord flight (pedant mode/it's Concord, not Concorde/pedant mode off) was the reverse thrust on landing which was like hitting a brick wall. The rest of the flight was much like any other pax jet other than the fact you could see the curvy contours of the planet at altitude. And you were well lubricated with quality shampoo.
|
Sorry thing, your pedant mode is U/S. You can call it what you wish but, the contractual name was Concorde.:oh:
OAP |
Concorde naming issue
From Concorde FAQ:
"at the roll-out of the first Concorde prototype at Toulouse in December, 1967, Tony Benn, MP, then British Minister of Technology, finally resolved what he described as the only disagreement with France that had occurred during the years of co-operation on the project. He had decided, he said, that the British "Concorde" should from now on also be written with an "e."" |
Apologies to all, Lincoln and OAP are quite right. I knew it was spelled the 'wrong' way but got the wrong way wrong. If you follow me.
|
No snags thingy, probably caused by too much shampoo, you lucky... ...:D
OAP |
Certainly too much shampoo at the moment as a cursory glance at Google would have set me straight before committing fingers to laptop. There's no fool like an old fool :)
|
Now if you're talking dry power super-cruise then the old F3 could do that as well - it had to be one of the new ones, without pylons and you needed to be at about 5,000ft if I recall correctly.
Don't get me wrong, you needed a crack of burner to get 'super' but then if you had a slippery jet then it could sustain 1.05M-1.1M. Not as impressive as Concorde, but impressive all the same. LJ |
Apparently the white painted 2 seat Meteor in one of the Wonder Woman episodes could do it on one engine. Hmmn... Lynda Carter.
|
Originally Posted by Leon Jabachjabicz
(Post 8828002)
BEags
Yes, BB was indeed rumoured to have been involved as you say. :ok:ť Sadly, for the Zoom Merchant it wasn't such a happy ending as he was in a significant position of responsibility at the time... I'm guessing that the champagne riders were nowhere near Mother Earth when they got their 1000mph tick. :ok: LJ Lessons to be learnt, not all aircrew have moral fortitude on a Friday night... Which turned out to be quite ironic actually, as life often shows. |
Originally Posted by Bevo
I'm not sure where SAC is getting their data
MIIITARY SPECIFICATION CHARTS; STANDARD AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS AND PERFORMANCE, PILOTED AIRCRAFT This specification was approved by the Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force for use of procurement services of the respective Departments. SAC = STANDARD AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS Simply put, the SAC is the official US government statement of the flight characteristics of the aircraft, and is an official document of the respective services. The SAC documents I linked above carry the following ID numbers: F-8E SAC: NAVAIR 00-110AF8-5 F-14A SAC: NAVAIR 00-110AF14-2 F-14D SAC: NAVAIR 00-110AF14-2 All bear the comment "PUBLISHED BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMANDER OF THE NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND" F-15C SAC: AFG 2, Vol 1, Addn 61 And carries the comment "BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE" |
IIRC the secret to Concorde was a modest static engine pressure ratio. At cruising speed the OPR of the inlet/engine/exhaust system was high and it was very efficient without blowing up or melting the engine's hot end. The downside was that it was horrible at subsonic speed.
Concorde still holds the record for unrefuelled supersonic range, and by quite a big margin. Unless there is something we don't know about.... |
ExAdvert:
Me: "F*@k" Nav: "You have control" Me: "I doubt it" :D |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.