Concorde question
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: toofaraway
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Faltahan
I take no credit for this interesting read. Hope it's not copyright.
http://www.svfw.ch/Archiv/ConcordeDev.pdf
My only connection with the bird was as an apprentice to "assist" the gents assembling the cockpit structure. Later on I sat in an office overlooking the fin assembly area, trying to get to grips with its (very particular) performance manual.
http://www.svfw.ch/Archiv/ConcordeDev.pdf
My only connection with the bird was as an apprentice to "assist" the gents assembling the cockpit structure. Later on I sat in an office overlooking the fin assembly area, trying to get to grips with its (very particular) performance manual.
Thread Starter
Departure without noise or boom considerations
Just for theories sake, if there were no noise, speed or boom considerations what would be the optimum profile for Concorde to fly after departure ?
In normal service I understand it had to comply with normal noise abatement departures, speed limits and remain subsonic until far enough from land to prevent the boom being a consideration.
But what if it could accelerate immediately, with no restrictions of any kind ?
I imagine you would stay in afterburner, accelerate to VMO and on to M2 in the climb ? or would airframe heating at lower altitudes prevent this ?
Lastly, was this ever done in testing, or for example leaving Barbados ?
In normal service I understand it had to comply with normal noise abatement departures, speed limits and remain subsonic until far enough from land to prevent the boom being a consideration.
But what if it could accelerate immediately, with no restrictions of any kind ?
I imagine you would stay in afterburner, accelerate to VMO and on to M2 in the climb ? or would airframe heating at lower altitudes prevent this ?
Lastly, was this ever done in testing, or for example leaving Barbados ?
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that, given the Concorde's rather unusual fuel consumption figures, the most efficient climb profile was also the fastest one, since pretty much anything other than the M2.0 cruise-climb was fairly inefficient. From way back in the thread (here) the minimum time to hit M1.0 was about six minutes, and M2.0 came at 9 minutes (although a few posts later someone mentions that these figures may be wrong as the fuel transfer rate wouldn't allow such a fast climb).
Some questions from me, after reading through the thread:
- Someone mentioned that, as a result of Concorde's sustained supercruising across the Atlantic, the twenty-odd Concordes have more supersonic flight hours than all other aircraft combined. Does anyone know what the figures are?
- What was the minimum range for supersonic travel to be worthwhile? Obviously if you were only going a few hundred kilometres it'd make more sense to cruise at 29000ft an M0.95 rather than climbing all the way up to 40000ft+ and M2.0.
- What other aircraft are/were more efficient supersonic than subsonic? The modern supercruising fighter jets (eg. the F-22) are still more efficient at subsonic speeds. The original Tu-144 would certainly have been much more efficient subsonic (since it couldn't supercruise); I'm not sure about the later models. The SR-71 was more efficient at high supersonic speeds than at low supersonic speeds, but I can't find anything about subsonic fuel consumption. And that leaves the XB-70, which is just a big unknown.
Some questions from me, after reading through the thread:
- Someone mentioned that, as a result of Concorde's sustained supercruising across the Atlantic, the twenty-odd Concordes have more supersonic flight hours than all other aircraft combined. Does anyone know what the figures are?
- What was the minimum range for supersonic travel to be worthwhile? Obviously if you were only going a few hundred kilometres it'd make more sense to cruise at 29000ft an M0.95 rather than climbing all the way up to 40000ft+ and M2.0.
- What other aircraft are/were more efficient supersonic than subsonic? The modern supercruising fighter jets (eg. the F-22) are still more efficient at subsonic speeds. The original Tu-144 would certainly have been much more efficient subsonic (since it couldn't supercruise); I'm not sure about the later models. The SR-71 was more efficient at high supersonic speeds than at low supersonic speeds, but I can't find anything about subsonic fuel consumption. And that leaves the XB-70, which is just a big unknown.
Last edited by Slatye; 5th Mar 2013 at 09:50.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FALTAHAN -
I can answer just one of your earlier questions - the one about the turn initiation off 31L.
As Bellerophon noted in a distant earlier post, we 'bugged' 20ft on the rad alt for this departure. As one climbed through 20' the DH light would go out and, subject to the gear being selected up, and V2 being achieved (that normally happened at about the point of lift-off), and a definite positive rate being achieved, the turn was initiated then. In deference to the low level we rolled gently, 6secs to achieve 25 degrees, but it's still a great testament to the handling qualities of this machine that we would initiate this turn - in any weather - at a height I'd be most uncomfortable if doing the same thing in a single-engined tourer.
So - in short - forget QFE; the answer is a height of 20ft.
Hope the PPL is coming along well, keep us posted.
I can answer just one of your earlier questions - the one about the turn initiation off 31L.
As Bellerophon noted in a distant earlier post, we 'bugged' 20ft on the rad alt for this departure. As one climbed through 20' the DH light would go out and, subject to the gear being selected up, and V2 being achieved (that normally happened at about the point of lift-off), and a definite positive rate being achieved, the turn was initiated then. In deference to the low level we rolled gently, 6secs to achieve 25 degrees, but it's still a great testament to the handling qualities of this machine that we would initiate this turn - in any weather - at a height I'd be most uncomfortable if doing the same thing in a single-engined tourer.
So - in short - forget QFE; the answer is a height of 20ft.
Hope the PPL is coming along well, keep us posted.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Lancs, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ FALTAHAN
Like a good book / film I think I'll come to read it from page one before long - who'd have thought missing out the APU would cause such a stir?!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Lancs, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Duck!
I just had my jaw flop open with EXWOK's post about them begining the turn off 31L at 20ft 
and wondered what the typical pitch attitude would have been at that point and troughout the turn?
Many thanks (again) for such a wonderful thread
and wondered what the typical pitch attitude would have been at that point and troughout the turn? Many thanks (again) for such a wonderful thread
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll second that Stilton !
Was lucky enough to catch the Concorde as she came into Schenectady Airport ( now Stratton ANG) on a solid overcast day. We heard her coming long before she popped out of the clouds at about 500 feet, perfectly lined up and ready to land on Runway 4. But she had other ideas, as she went gear up and flew by us at about 100 feet, and then climbed back up into the overcast sky. After circling around the field, the Concorde once again popped out of the clouds at the same exact spot and made a flawless landing.
After a short taxi and shut-down, we were allowed to take a walk-through before the charter flight(s) began. What a day to leave the camera at home...sigh
Recently, while surfing around on You Tube, I came across some footage of the Concorde flying the checkerboard approach into Kai Tak. What a thrill that must have been for the pilots, crew, and passengers.
Does anyone have any more details to share about that particular flight?
Was lucky enough to catch the Concorde as she came into Schenectady Airport ( now Stratton ANG) on a solid overcast day. We heard her coming long before she popped out of the clouds at about 500 feet, perfectly lined up and ready to land on Runway 4. But she had other ideas, as she went gear up and flew by us at about 100 feet, and then climbed back up into the overcast sky. After circling around the field, the Concorde once again popped out of the clouds at the same exact spot and made a flawless landing.
After a short taxi and shut-down, we were allowed to take a walk-through before the charter flight(s) began. What a day to leave the camera at home...sigh
Recently, while surfing around on You Tube, I came across some footage of the Concorde flying the checkerboard approach into Kai Tak. What a thrill that must have been for the pilots, crew, and passengers.
Does anyone have any more details to share about that particular flight?
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NHerby's galaxy
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recently, while surfing around on You Tube, I came across some footage of the Concorde flying the checkerboard approach into Kai Tak. What a thrill that must have been for the pilots, crew, and passengers.
Does anyone have any more details to share about that particular flight?
Does anyone have any more details to share about that particular flight?
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NHerby's galaxy
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the french speaking (or reading) people here, I just found a mine of very interesting informations about Concorde on this website:
Accueil
This site has a database of thousand of concorde flights with the following datas: Date and time of the flight, airframe used, technical and commercial crews, guests, departure/arrival airports and flight type (regular, charter world tour...).
On top of that, many infos and stories around Concorde can also be found there.
I can't resist to translate one of those stories (I'm far from being a native english speaker or a professional translator; so forgive me for the misspellings and other translation mistakes). It is a report about one of the biggest incident that happened to the prototype 001 during the flight tests:
Shock of shockwaves
We were flying with Concorde at Mach 2 since 3 month already on both side of the Channel. The prototype 001 did outstrip 002 which was supposed to be the first to reach Mach 2.
Unfortunately, a technical issue delayed 002 and Brian Trubshaw fairly let André Turcat be the first to reach Mach 2 with the 001 which was ready to go.
The flight tests were progressing fast and we were discovering a part of the atmosphere that military aircrafts hardly reached before. With Concorde, we were able to stay there for hours although limited by the huge fuel consumption of the prototypes.
The Olympus engines did not reached their nominal performance yet and, most of the time, we had to turn on the reheat in supersonic cruise to maintain Mach 2.
The reheat is what we call afterburner on military aircrafts. Fuel is injected between the last compressor stage of the low pressure turbine and the first exhaust nozzle. This increases the thrust for the whole engine and its nozzle.
The 4 reheats, one for each engine, are controlled by the piano switches behind the thrust leavers on the center pedestal between the two pilots. Air was fed into the engines through 4 air intakes, one for each engine, attached 2 by 2 to the 2 engine nacelle, one under each wing. The advantage in terms of drag reduction was obvious.
However, tests in wind tunnel showed that, at supersonic speed, if a problem happens on one engine, there was a great chance for the adjacent engine to be affected as well by the shockwave interference from one air intake to the other despite the presence the dividing wall between the two intakes. So we knew that an engine failure at mach 2 would result in the loss of 2 engines on the same side, resulting in a lateral movement leading to a strong sideslip that would likely impact the 2 remaining engines and transform the aircraft into the fastest glider in the world.
This is why an automatic anti sideslip device was developed and installed on the aircrafts.
The air intakes are very sophisticated. At mach 2, it creates a system of shockwaves that slows down the air from 600 m/sec in front of the aircraft to 200 m/sec in front of the engine while maintaining a very good thermodynamic performance. In supersonic cruise, the engines, operating at full capacity all the time, were sensitive to any perturbation and reacted violently with engine surge: the engine refusing the incoming air.
Stopping suddenly a flow of almost 200kg of air per second traveling at 600m/sec causes a few problems. As a result, a spill door was installed under the air intake and automatically opened in such event.
To control the system of shockwaves and obtain an efficiency of 0,96 in compression in the air intake, 2 articulated ramps, controlled by hydraulic jacks, are installed on the top of the air intakes in front of the engines. Each ramp is roughly the size of a big dining room table, and the 2 ramps, mechanically synchronized, move up or down following the instruction of an highly sophisticated computer that adapts the ramp position according to the mach number, the engine rating and other parameters such as skidding.
At that time, it was the less known part of the aircraft, almost only designed through calculation since no simulator, no wind tunnel, did allow a full scale test of the system.
The control of the system was analog and very complex but it was not easy to tune and we were moving ahead with a lot of caution in our test at mach 2.
On the 26th of January 1971, we were doing a nearly routine flight to measure the effect of a new engine setting supposed to enhance the engine efficiency at mach 2. It was a small increase of the rotation speed of the low pressure turbine increasing the air flow and, as a result, the thrust.
The flight test crews now regularly alternate their participation and their position in the cockpit for the pilots.
Today, Gilbert Defer is on the left side, myself on the right side, Michel Rétif is the flight engineer, Claude Durand is the main flight engineer and Jean Conche is the engine flight engineer. With them is an official representative of the flight test centre, Hubert Guyonnet, seated in the cockpit's jump seat, he is in charge of radio testing.
We took off from Toulouse, accelerated to supersonic speed over the Atlantic near Arcachon continuing up to the north west of Ireland.
Two reheats, the 1 and the 3, are left on because the air temperature does not allow to maintain mach 2 without them.
Everything goes fine. During the previous flight, the crew experienced some strong turbulence, quite rare in the stratosphere and warned us about this. No problem was found on the aircraft.
We are on our way back to Toulouse off the coast of Ireland. Our program includes subsonic tests and we have to decelerate.
Gilbert is piloting the aircraft. Michel and the engineers notify us that everything is normal and ready for the deceleration and the descent.
We are at FL500 at mach 2 with an IAS of 530 kt, the maximum dynamic pressure in normal use.
On Concorde, the right hand seat is the place offering the less possibility to operate the systems. But here, we get busy by helping the others to follow the program and the checklists and by manipulating the secondary commands such as the landing gear, the droop nose, the radio navigation, comms, and some essential engine settings apart from the thrust leavers such as the reheat switches.
The normal procedure consists in stopping the reheat before lowering the throttle.
Gilbert asks me to do it. After, he will slowly reduce the throttle to avoid temporary heckler. Note that he did advise us during the training on the air intake to avoid to move the thrust leaver in case of engine surge.
As a safety measure, I shut down the reheat one by one, checking that everything goes fine for each one. Thus I switch off the reheat 1 with the light shock marking the thrust reduction. Then the 3…
Instantly, we are thrown in a crazy situation.
Deafening noise like a canon firing 300 times a minute next to us. Terrible shake. The cockpit, that looked like a submarine with the metallic and totally opaque visor obviously in the upper position, is shaken at a frequency of 5 oscillation a second and a crazy amplitude of about 4 to 5 G. To the point that we cannot see anymore, our eyes not being able to follow the movements.
Gilbert has a test pilot reaction, we have to get out of the maximum kinetic energy zone as fast as possible and to reduce speed immediately. He then moves the throttle to idle without any useless care.
During that time, I try, we all try to answer the question: what is going on? What is the cause of this and what can we do to stop it?
Suspecting an issue with the engines, I try to read the indicators on the centre control panel through the mist of my disturbed vision and in the middle of a rain of electric indicators falling from the roof. We cannot speak to each other through the intercom.
I vaguely see that the engines 3 and 4 seem to run slower than the 2 others, especially the 4. We have to do something. Gilbert is piloting the plane and is already busy. I have a stupid reaction dictated by the idea that I have to do something to stop that, while I can only reach a few commands that may be linked to the problem.
I first try to increase the thrust on number 4 engine. No effect so I reduce frankly and definitively. I desperately look for something to do from my right hand seat with a terrible feeling of being helpless and useless.
Then everything stops as suddenly as it started. How long did it last, 30 seconds, one minute?
By looking at the flight data records afterward, we saw that it only last… 12 seconds!
However, I have the feeling that I had time to think about tons of things, to do a lot of reasoning, assumption and to have searched and searched and searched…! It looked like my brain suddenly switched to a fastest mod of thinking. But, above all, it's the feeling of failure, the fact that I was not able to do anything and that I did not understand anything that remains stuck in my mind forever.
To comfort me, I have to say that nobody among the crew did understand anything either and was able to do anything, apart from Gilbert.
The aircraft slows down and the engine 3 that seemed to have shut down restart thanks to the auto ignition system. But the 4 is off indeed.
Michel makes a check of his instruments. He also notes that the engine 4 has shut down but the 4 air intakes work normally, which makes us feel better. After discussing together, we start to think that we probably faced some stratospheric turbulence of very high intensity, our experience in this altitude range being quite limited at that time. But nobody really believes in this explanation. Finally, at subsonic speed, mach 0.9, with all instruments looking normal, we try to restart engine 4 since we still have a long way to go to fly back to Toulouse.
Michel launches the process to restart the engine. It restarts, remains at a medium rotation speed and shuts down after 20 seconds, leaving us puzzled and a bit worried despite the fact that the instrument indicators are normal.
Gilbert then decide to give up and won't try to restart this engine anymore and Claude leaves his engineer station to have a look in a device installed on the prototype to inspect the landing gear and the engines when needed: an hypo-scope, a kind of periscope going out through the floor and not through the roof.
After a few seconds, we can hear him on the intercom:
"****! (stuttering) we have lost the intake number 4."
He then describes a wide opening in the air intake, the ramp seems to be missing and he can see some structural damages on the nacelle.
Gilbert reacts rapidly by further reducing the speed to limit even more the dynamic pressure.
But we don't know exactly the extent of the damage. Are the wing and the control surfaces damaged? What about engine 3?
We decide to fly back at a speed of 250 kts at a lower altitude and to divert toward Fairford where our british colleagues and the 002 are based. I inform everybody about the problem on the radio and tell them our intentions. However, I add that if no other problems occur, we will try to reach Toulouse since we still have enough fuel.
Flying off Fairford, since nothing unusual happened, we decide to go on toward Toulouse. All the possible diversion airport on the way have been informed by the flight test centre who follows us on their radar.
At low speed, knowing what happened to us and having nothing else to do but to wait for us, time passes slowly, very slowly and we don't talk much, each one of us thinking and trying to understand what happened. However, we keep watching closely after engine 3.
Personally, I remember the funny story of the poor guy who sees his house collapse when he flushes his toilets. I feel in the same situation.
Gilbert makes a precautionary landing since we don't rely much on engine 3 anymore. But everything goes fine.
At the parking, there is a lot of people waiting for us and, as soon as the engines stop, we can see a big rush toward the nacelles of the right hand side engines.
Gilbert and myself are the first to get off the plane and we are welcomed down the stairs by André Turcat and Jean Franchi who came out from the crowd watching at the right hand side nacelle.
They both behave the same way, with a slow pace attitude, the same look, a mix of disbelief and frustration.
André is the first to speak: "I can't believe we were not on this flight, really unlucky…". Yes, this flight was supposed to be just a routine flight…!
The condition of the nacelle is impressive. We come closer and everybody move aside for us with a look of disbelief and respect as if we were hell survivors.
The ramps of the intake 4, those 2 "dining tables", have completely disappeared leaving a hole where we can see the hydraulic jacks and the stub rod where the ramps were attached.
Indeed, only the ramps were missing, apparently ejected forward which was unbelievable knowing how fast we were flying. The ramp slipped under the nacelle causing some damages on it and on the hood of one of the elevon's servo control. Fortunately, the control did not suffer any damage.
What is left of the rear ramp seems to be blocked down inside the intake in front of the engine and we can see behind it the first blades of the compressor, or what is left of it, not much.
The engine swallowed a huge amount of metal but no vital parts of the aircraft has been damaged, no hydraulic leaks, no fuel leaks. I remembered at that time the stories of some B58 Hustler accident where the loss of an engine at mach 2 almost certainly ended with the complete loss of the aircraft. Our Concorde has only been shaken. This incident strengthened the trust I had in this plane. And I was not unhappy to have experienced this ordeal, especially when I saw the frustration on the face of André Turcat and Jean Franchi.
But we had to understand what happened and how; and also why the ramp's fixing broke.
It didn't take much time to get the answers.
I unintentionally triggered the problem when shutting down the reheat of engine 3. The sudden stop of the fuel flow did of course stop the combustion and the back pressure behind the low pressure turbine. But, probably because of the modification made on the engine before the flight, the stop of the reheat has not been followed by the normal closing movement of the primary nozzle to compensate the pressure drop. So the low pressure turbine ran out of control, dragging down the low pressure compressor which reacts by surging.
Despite the opening of the spill door, the engine surge led to a sudden movement of the shockwaves in the air intake creating a surge in the intake itself. A similar surge happened in the adjacent intake 4 followed by a surge of the corresponding engine. This caused an excessive pressure above the ramps and the fixings of the intake 4 did not hold.
Since it was the first time we experienced a surge in the air intake, we had little knowledge of the stress it would create on the ramps. This led to miscalculation of the strength of the ramps's frames and they did brake.
Another mistake: instead of installing the motion detectors on the ramp itself, to make the production easier, they have been placed on the arms of the hydraulic jacks. This is why Michel Rétif thought that the position of the ramps were correct. The hydraulic jacks did not suffer any damage and were still working normally even if the ramps were missing.
All the data recorded during this event helped us in redesigning the air intakes and the flight test program resumed three month later.
After this, we deliberately created dozen and dozen of air intake surge to fine tune the way to regulate them with digital calculator this time.
From now on, even if it was still very impressive, it was safe and their intensity was not comparable with what we experienced with the missing ramps.
However, a french president may kept a lasting memory of this, much later, during a flight back from Saudi Arabia. This time, I was on the left side, Gilbert on the right and Michel was still in the third seat… But that's another story.
For me, the lasting impression of failing and being helpless during this incident made me wonder what a commercial pilot would have done in this situation. This plane was designed to be handled by standard commercial pilots and not only by the flight test pilots.
At that time, I was interested in taking in charge the management of a training center for the pilots of the future Airbus's clients. This event pushed me that way and I made it clear that I wanted to add the flight training on Concorde in this project. This has been agreed and I did it.
And the Concorde training program now covers the air intake surges and how to deal with them.
Jean PINET
Former test pilot
Member and former president of the Air and Space Academy
Accueil
This site has a database of thousand of concorde flights with the following datas: Date and time of the flight, airframe used, technical and commercial crews, guests, departure/arrival airports and flight type (regular, charter world tour...).
On top of that, many infos and stories around Concorde can also be found there.
I can't resist to translate one of those stories (I'm far from being a native english speaker or a professional translator; so forgive me for the misspellings and other translation mistakes). It is a report about one of the biggest incident that happened to the prototype 001 during the flight tests:
Shock of shockwaves
We were flying with Concorde at Mach 2 since 3 month already on both side of the Channel. The prototype 001 did outstrip 002 which was supposed to be the first to reach Mach 2.
Unfortunately, a technical issue delayed 002 and Brian Trubshaw fairly let André Turcat be the first to reach Mach 2 with the 001 which was ready to go.
The flight tests were progressing fast and we were discovering a part of the atmosphere that military aircrafts hardly reached before. With Concorde, we were able to stay there for hours although limited by the huge fuel consumption of the prototypes.
The Olympus engines did not reached their nominal performance yet and, most of the time, we had to turn on the reheat in supersonic cruise to maintain Mach 2.
The reheat is what we call afterburner on military aircrafts. Fuel is injected between the last compressor stage of the low pressure turbine and the first exhaust nozzle. This increases the thrust for the whole engine and its nozzle.
The 4 reheats, one for each engine, are controlled by the piano switches behind the thrust leavers on the center pedestal between the two pilots. Air was fed into the engines through 4 air intakes, one for each engine, attached 2 by 2 to the 2 engine nacelle, one under each wing. The advantage in terms of drag reduction was obvious.
However, tests in wind tunnel showed that, at supersonic speed, if a problem happens on one engine, there was a great chance for the adjacent engine to be affected as well by the shockwave interference from one air intake to the other despite the presence the dividing wall between the two intakes. So we knew that an engine failure at mach 2 would result in the loss of 2 engines on the same side, resulting in a lateral movement leading to a strong sideslip that would likely impact the 2 remaining engines and transform the aircraft into the fastest glider in the world.
This is why an automatic anti sideslip device was developed and installed on the aircrafts.
The air intakes are very sophisticated. At mach 2, it creates a system of shockwaves that slows down the air from 600 m/sec in front of the aircraft to 200 m/sec in front of the engine while maintaining a very good thermodynamic performance. In supersonic cruise, the engines, operating at full capacity all the time, were sensitive to any perturbation and reacted violently with engine surge: the engine refusing the incoming air.
Stopping suddenly a flow of almost 200kg of air per second traveling at 600m/sec causes a few problems. As a result, a spill door was installed under the air intake and automatically opened in such event.
To control the system of shockwaves and obtain an efficiency of 0,96 in compression in the air intake, 2 articulated ramps, controlled by hydraulic jacks, are installed on the top of the air intakes in front of the engines. Each ramp is roughly the size of a big dining room table, and the 2 ramps, mechanically synchronized, move up or down following the instruction of an highly sophisticated computer that adapts the ramp position according to the mach number, the engine rating and other parameters such as skidding.
At that time, it was the less known part of the aircraft, almost only designed through calculation since no simulator, no wind tunnel, did allow a full scale test of the system.
The control of the system was analog and very complex but it was not easy to tune and we were moving ahead with a lot of caution in our test at mach 2.
On the 26th of January 1971, we were doing a nearly routine flight to measure the effect of a new engine setting supposed to enhance the engine efficiency at mach 2. It was a small increase of the rotation speed of the low pressure turbine increasing the air flow and, as a result, the thrust.
The flight test crews now regularly alternate their participation and their position in the cockpit for the pilots.
Today, Gilbert Defer is on the left side, myself on the right side, Michel Rétif is the flight engineer, Claude Durand is the main flight engineer and Jean Conche is the engine flight engineer. With them is an official representative of the flight test centre, Hubert Guyonnet, seated in the cockpit's jump seat, he is in charge of radio testing.
We took off from Toulouse, accelerated to supersonic speed over the Atlantic near Arcachon continuing up to the north west of Ireland.
Two reheats, the 1 and the 3, are left on because the air temperature does not allow to maintain mach 2 without them.
Everything goes fine. During the previous flight, the crew experienced some strong turbulence, quite rare in the stratosphere and warned us about this. No problem was found on the aircraft.
We are on our way back to Toulouse off the coast of Ireland. Our program includes subsonic tests and we have to decelerate.
Gilbert is piloting the aircraft. Michel and the engineers notify us that everything is normal and ready for the deceleration and the descent.
We are at FL500 at mach 2 with an IAS of 530 kt, the maximum dynamic pressure in normal use.
On Concorde, the right hand seat is the place offering the less possibility to operate the systems. But here, we get busy by helping the others to follow the program and the checklists and by manipulating the secondary commands such as the landing gear, the droop nose, the radio navigation, comms, and some essential engine settings apart from the thrust leavers such as the reheat switches.
The normal procedure consists in stopping the reheat before lowering the throttle.
Gilbert asks me to do it. After, he will slowly reduce the throttle to avoid temporary heckler. Note that he did advise us during the training on the air intake to avoid to move the thrust leaver in case of engine surge.
As a safety measure, I shut down the reheat one by one, checking that everything goes fine for each one. Thus I switch off the reheat 1 with the light shock marking the thrust reduction. Then the 3…
Instantly, we are thrown in a crazy situation.
Deafening noise like a canon firing 300 times a minute next to us. Terrible shake. The cockpit, that looked like a submarine with the metallic and totally opaque visor obviously in the upper position, is shaken at a frequency of 5 oscillation a second and a crazy amplitude of about 4 to 5 G. To the point that we cannot see anymore, our eyes not being able to follow the movements.
Gilbert has a test pilot reaction, we have to get out of the maximum kinetic energy zone as fast as possible and to reduce speed immediately. He then moves the throttle to idle without any useless care.
During that time, I try, we all try to answer the question: what is going on? What is the cause of this and what can we do to stop it?
Suspecting an issue with the engines, I try to read the indicators on the centre control panel through the mist of my disturbed vision and in the middle of a rain of electric indicators falling from the roof. We cannot speak to each other through the intercom.
I vaguely see that the engines 3 and 4 seem to run slower than the 2 others, especially the 4. We have to do something. Gilbert is piloting the plane and is already busy. I have a stupid reaction dictated by the idea that I have to do something to stop that, while I can only reach a few commands that may be linked to the problem.
I first try to increase the thrust on number 4 engine. No effect so I reduce frankly and definitively. I desperately look for something to do from my right hand seat with a terrible feeling of being helpless and useless.
Then everything stops as suddenly as it started. How long did it last, 30 seconds, one minute?
By looking at the flight data records afterward, we saw that it only last… 12 seconds!
However, I have the feeling that I had time to think about tons of things, to do a lot of reasoning, assumption and to have searched and searched and searched…! It looked like my brain suddenly switched to a fastest mod of thinking. But, above all, it's the feeling of failure, the fact that I was not able to do anything and that I did not understand anything that remains stuck in my mind forever.
To comfort me, I have to say that nobody among the crew did understand anything either and was able to do anything, apart from Gilbert.
The aircraft slows down and the engine 3 that seemed to have shut down restart thanks to the auto ignition system. But the 4 is off indeed.
Michel makes a check of his instruments. He also notes that the engine 4 has shut down but the 4 air intakes work normally, which makes us feel better. After discussing together, we start to think that we probably faced some stratospheric turbulence of very high intensity, our experience in this altitude range being quite limited at that time. But nobody really believes in this explanation. Finally, at subsonic speed, mach 0.9, with all instruments looking normal, we try to restart engine 4 since we still have a long way to go to fly back to Toulouse.
Michel launches the process to restart the engine. It restarts, remains at a medium rotation speed and shuts down after 20 seconds, leaving us puzzled and a bit worried despite the fact that the instrument indicators are normal.
Gilbert then decide to give up and won't try to restart this engine anymore and Claude leaves his engineer station to have a look in a device installed on the prototype to inspect the landing gear and the engines when needed: an hypo-scope, a kind of periscope going out through the floor and not through the roof.
After a few seconds, we can hear him on the intercom:
"****! (stuttering) we have lost the intake number 4."
He then describes a wide opening in the air intake, the ramp seems to be missing and he can see some structural damages on the nacelle.
Gilbert reacts rapidly by further reducing the speed to limit even more the dynamic pressure.
But we don't know exactly the extent of the damage. Are the wing and the control surfaces damaged? What about engine 3?
We decide to fly back at a speed of 250 kts at a lower altitude and to divert toward Fairford where our british colleagues and the 002 are based. I inform everybody about the problem on the radio and tell them our intentions. However, I add that if no other problems occur, we will try to reach Toulouse since we still have enough fuel.
Flying off Fairford, since nothing unusual happened, we decide to go on toward Toulouse. All the possible diversion airport on the way have been informed by the flight test centre who follows us on their radar.
At low speed, knowing what happened to us and having nothing else to do but to wait for us, time passes slowly, very slowly and we don't talk much, each one of us thinking and trying to understand what happened. However, we keep watching closely after engine 3.
Personally, I remember the funny story of the poor guy who sees his house collapse when he flushes his toilets. I feel in the same situation.
Gilbert makes a precautionary landing since we don't rely much on engine 3 anymore. But everything goes fine.
At the parking, there is a lot of people waiting for us and, as soon as the engines stop, we can see a big rush toward the nacelles of the right hand side engines.
Gilbert and myself are the first to get off the plane and we are welcomed down the stairs by André Turcat and Jean Franchi who came out from the crowd watching at the right hand side nacelle.
They both behave the same way, with a slow pace attitude, the same look, a mix of disbelief and frustration.
André is the first to speak: "I can't believe we were not on this flight, really unlucky…". Yes, this flight was supposed to be just a routine flight…!
The condition of the nacelle is impressive. We come closer and everybody move aside for us with a look of disbelief and respect as if we were hell survivors.
The ramps of the intake 4, those 2 "dining tables", have completely disappeared leaving a hole where we can see the hydraulic jacks and the stub rod where the ramps were attached.
Indeed, only the ramps were missing, apparently ejected forward which was unbelievable knowing how fast we were flying. The ramp slipped under the nacelle causing some damages on it and on the hood of one of the elevon's servo control. Fortunately, the control did not suffer any damage.
What is left of the rear ramp seems to be blocked down inside the intake in front of the engine and we can see behind it the first blades of the compressor, or what is left of it, not much.
The engine swallowed a huge amount of metal but no vital parts of the aircraft has been damaged, no hydraulic leaks, no fuel leaks. I remembered at that time the stories of some B58 Hustler accident where the loss of an engine at mach 2 almost certainly ended with the complete loss of the aircraft. Our Concorde has only been shaken. This incident strengthened the trust I had in this plane. And I was not unhappy to have experienced this ordeal, especially when I saw the frustration on the face of André Turcat and Jean Franchi.
But we had to understand what happened and how; and also why the ramp's fixing broke.
It didn't take much time to get the answers.
I unintentionally triggered the problem when shutting down the reheat of engine 3. The sudden stop of the fuel flow did of course stop the combustion and the back pressure behind the low pressure turbine. But, probably because of the modification made on the engine before the flight, the stop of the reheat has not been followed by the normal closing movement of the primary nozzle to compensate the pressure drop. So the low pressure turbine ran out of control, dragging down the low pressure compressor which reacts by surging.
Despite the opening of the spill door, the engine surge led to a sudden movement of the shockwaves in the air intake creating a surge in the intake itself. A similar surge happened in the adjacent intake 4 followed by a surge of the corresponding engine. This caused an excessive pressure above the ramps and the fixings of the intake 4 did not hold.
Since it was the first time we experienced a surge in the air intake, we had little knowledge of the stress it would create on the ramps. This led to miscalculation of the strength of the ramps's frames and they did brake.
Another mistake: instead of installing the motion detectors on the ramp itself, to make the production easier, they have been placed on the arms of the hydraulic jacks. This is why Michel Rétif thought that the position of the ramps were correct. The hydraulic jacks did not suffer any damage and were still working normally even if the ramps were missing.
All the data recorded during this event helped us in redesigning the air intakes and the flight test program resumed three month later.
After this, we deliberately created dozen and dozen of air intake surge to fine tune the way to regulate them with digital calculator this time.
From now on, even if it was still very impressive, it was safe and their intensity was not comparable with what we experienced with the missing ramps.
However, a french president may kept a lasting memory of this, much later, during a flight back from Saudi Arabia. This time, I was on the left side, Gilbert on the right and Michel was still in the third seat… But that's another story.
For me, the lasting impression of failing and being helpless during this incident made me wonder what a commercial pilot would have done in this situation. This plane was designed to be handled by standard commercial pilots and not only by the flight test pilots.
At that time, I was interested in taking in charge the management of a training center for the pilots of the future Airbus's clients. This event pushed me that way and I made it clear that I wanted to add the flight training on Concorde in this project. This has been agreed and I did it.
And the Concorde training program now covers the air intake surges and how to deal with them.
Jean PINET
Former test pilot
Member and former president of the Air and Space Academy
Last edited by NHerby; 9th May 2013 at 16:24.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ontario
Age: 74
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNECMA reheat
I've always seen it mentioned as SNECMA reheat until the other day..
The ORIGINAL design for the reheat was done by SNECMA, but due to them getting into all sorts of trouble with the fuel injection system and flame stabilisation, Rolls-Royce baled them out, and it became a Rolls-Royce/ SNECMA design.
ref heritageconcorde.com
Does anyone have any details on the 'joint' development alluded to above?
Thanks.
The ORIGINAL design for the reheat was done by SNECMA, but due to them getting into all sorts of trouble with the fuel injection system and flame stabilisation, Rolls-Royce baled them out, and it became a Rolls-Royce/ SNECMA design.
ref heritageconcorde.com
Does anyone have any details on the 'joint' development alluded to above?
Thanks.
Last edited by peter kent; 10th Oct 2013 at 00:14.
Rolling Thunder,
There were quite a lot of Concorde flights to Kai Tak over the years. The first was Air France which was a checker board approach (got out of bed on a damp Sunday morn to watch it arrive). At one time BA had a deal with Cunard where you could fly Concorde to HKG and return on the QE2 or vv so there were regular arrivals in the summer for 2 or 3 years. Normally Concorde was required to take off on 13 presumably for noise reasons. The BA/Cunard flights usually departed around noon. On one occasion I saw a BA Concorde taxiing to the end of 31, so phoned home to tell my wife to go up on the roof as we lived close to the flight path but she was out so missed out on a great sight and a great noise! There may have been other 31 take offs but that was the only one I witnessed.
There were quite a lot of Concorde flights to Kai Tak over the years. The first was Air France which was a checker board approach (got out of bed on a damp Sunday morn to watch it arrive). At one time BA had a deal with Cunard where you could fly Concorde to HKG and return on the QE2 or vv so there were regular arrivals in the summer for 2 or 3 years. Normally Concorde was required to take off on 13 presumably for noise reasons. The BA/Cunard flights usually departed around noon. On one occasion I saw a BA Concorde taxiing to the end of 31, so phoned home to tell my wife to go up on the roof as we lived close to the flight path but she was out so missed out on a great sight and a great noise! There may have been other 31 take offs but that was the only one I witnessed.
CV880;
I was doing Kennedy turns out of Toronto on the DC9 when fortunate enough to not only walk across the ramp (remember those days?), and be welcomed on board Concorde for a short tour of the aircraft but when our turn to taxi/takeoff came, we were next behind Concorde, on 31. The noise was unearthly; we could not speak to be heard. We sat in our DC9, awestruck at the magnificence that was unfolding before us, two very lucky airmen fortunate to watch this wonderful airplane, the sound of the afterburners "filling the windshield", take off and do the left climbing departure. The silence in the cockpit which followed was momentarily deafening!, the meaning of witnessing this airplane slowly coming into awareness. It was the late 70's and I was a young aviator wet behind the ears just starting with my airline; there was nothing merely 'technical' about what we had heard and felt in the belly - one encounters and sees many things in such a career, but the effect of that moment has never been topped.
I was doing Kennedy turns out of Toronto on the DC9 when fortunate enough to not only walk across the ramp (remember those days?), and be welcomed on board Concorde for a short tour of the aircraft but when our turn to taxi/takeoff came, we were next behind Concorde, on 31. The noise was unearthly; we could not speak to be heard. We sat in our DC9, awestruck at the magnificence that was unfolding before us, two very lucky airmen fortunate to watch this wonderful airplane, the sound of the afterburners "filling the windshield", take off and do the left climbing departure. The silence in the cockpit which followed was momentarily deafening!, the meaning of witnessing this airplane slowly coming into awareness. It was the late 70's and I was a young aviator wet behind the ears just starting with my airline; there was nothing merely 'technical' about what we had heard and felt in the belly - one encounters and sees many things in such a career, but the effect of that moment has never been topped.
Last edited by PJ2; 11th Oct 2013 at 06:05.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You say it better than I PJ2. Was fortunate to be at the Oshkosh show when the aircraft was in attendance and giving flights to those who could afford the price. The big memory was standing at the barrier on the runways edge (insanely close it seemed to the runway) and happened to be standing at the point of rotation. A memory not to be forgotten, nor the noise and visceral vibrations within the body.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@flyboyike - if you haven't read it already, I can heartily recommend post #875 on this thread.
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/42398...ml#post6129540
To my eternal regret, I never had a chance to get close to the old girl in her "lifetime", but I'll never forget the day she overflew my Mum's house at what can't have been more than a couple of thousand feet on her way back from Farnborough.
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/42398...ml#post6129540
To my eternal regret, I never had a chance to get close to the old girl in her "lifetime", but I'll never forget the day she overflew my Mum's house at what can't have been more than a couple of thousand feet on her way back from Farnborough.
flyboyike - "31L", yes, thank you for the clarification!
Another 'feature' of the experience, (and those who have seen this phenomenal sight will recall), was the color of the exhaust - a slight 'greenish' tinge to the usual brown-black tint of turbojet exhaust; - it just added to that sense of the 'exotic' of what one was seeing and watching.
There wasn't a single part of our little airplane that wasn't 'in sympathy' with Concorde when the afterburners lit... the only thing I can imagine that takes one's breath as rapidly and involuntarily as that did, is the launch of a Saturn V, or the launch of the Shuttle, even from a distance.
Another 'feature' of the experience, (and those who have seen this phenomenal sight will recall), was the color of the exhaust - a slight 'greenish' tinge to the usual brown-black tint of turbojet exhaust; - it just added to that sense of the 'exotic' of what one was seeing and watching.
There wasn't a single part of our little airplane that wasn't 'in sympathy' with Concorde when the afterburners lit... the only thing I can imagine that takes one's breath as rapidly and involuntarily as that did, is the launch of a Saturn V, or the launch of the Shuttle, even from a distance.