Concorde question
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How was the procedure for re-packing that parachute?
Has it been done to the same strict requirements which apply to pilots/ejection seat paracutes, meaning only specifically trained and licenced personnel could do it?
For how many landings was that parachute good? Was there a life limit or has it been an on-condition item?
Was the Concorde design somehow based on the Caravelle parachute, or a specific new design?
Has it been done to the same strict requirements which apply to pilots/ejection seat paracutes, meaning only specifically trained and licenced personnel could do it?
For how many landings was that parachute good? Was there a life limit or has it been an on-condition item?
Was the Concorde design somehow based on the Caravelle parachute, or a specific new design?
ZeBedie
...Was pilot selection purely on seniority?...
Fortunately, Yes!
It was (almost) exactly the same process as pilot selection for any other aircraft move in BA.
There were two minor differences to the normal BA process that applied once you had been notified of a successful bid and allocated a course date.
Over the years, there were a very small number who were denied a conversion course on technical grounds, one of whom I knew personally.
There were several people who voluntarily withdrew from a course they had been allocated. Often this was after a look-see trip and a chat with crewmembers about the conversion course and life on the fleet. This was not uncommon, and I got my conversion course, at shortish notice, after just such a voluntary withdrawal by a more senior pilot.
Finally, often people are surprised to learn that - for various reasons - most BA pilots never put in a bid for Concorde. The year I got my course, there were around 600 captains in BA senior to me who had declined to bid.
...Was pilot selection purely on seniority?...
Fortunately, Yes!
It was (almost) exactly the same process as pilot selection for any other aircraft move in BA.
- There had to be a vacancy on the type.
- You had to be "unfrozen" and free to bid.
- You had to be senior enough to obtain one of the vacancies.
- You had to pass the conversion course.
There were two minor differences to the normal BA process that applied once you had been notified of a successful bid and allocated a course date.
- Before starting the course, if you changed your mind, you could voluntarily withdraw without penalty and remain on your existing fleet.
- If the Chief Pilot on your existing fleet felt there were clearly defined technical reasons why you would be unlikely to complete the Concorde conversion course successfully, you could be denied the course.
Over the years, there were a very small number who were denied a conversion course on technical grounds, one of whom I knew personally.
There were several people who voluntarily withdrew from a course they had been allocated. Often this was after a look-see trip and a chat with crewmembers about the conversion course and life on the fleet. This was not uncommon, and I got my conversion course, at shortish notice, after just such a voluntary withdrawal by a more senior pilot.
Finally, often people are surprised to learn that - for various reasons - most BA pilots never put in a bid for Concorde. The year I got my course, there were around 600 captains in BA senior to me who had declined to bid.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Bellerophon:
Interesting info - cheers!
As a sort-of tangent, as an aviation-mad nipper I watched and recorded the 1988 BBC Concorde Special, and pretty much wore the VHS tape out. The skipper on that flight was Hutch (who also just-so-happened to be a BBC aviation correspondent on the side). The reason I bring it up was that the FO was Chris Norris, who mentioned that he was just about to be made Captain - and regretfully that meant he'd be leaving the Concorde flight deck, most likely for a subsonic short-haul type (he reckoned it'd be the B757).
As I recall, I think I remember reading that Capt. Norris did end up returning to Concorde as a captain before the type was retired - so I'm guessing that previous experience as FO did count when making the bid. Was that the case?
Interesting info - cheers!
As a sort-of tangent, as an aviation-mad nipper I watched and recorded the 1988 BBC Concorde Special, and pretty much wore the VHS tape out. The skipper on that flight was Hutch (who also just-so-happened to be a BBC aviation correspondent on the side). The reason I bring it up was that the FO was Chris Norris, who mentioned that he was just about to be made Captain - and regretfully that meant he'd be leaving the Concorde flight deck, most likely for a subsonic short-haul type (he reckoned it'd be the B757).
As I recall, I think I remember reading that Capt. Norris did end up returning to Concorde as a captain before the type was retired - so I'm guessing that previous experience as FO did count when making the bid. Was that the case?
DozyWannabe
Chris Norris did indeed return to the Concorde fleet as a Captain, later becoming the last Training Captain to be appointed on the fleet.
He was one of the most able and respected Captains on the fleet, as well as an excellent instructor, and his signature appears in my licence when he was the instructor on my last Concorde simulator check in June 2003.
Once back on Concorde as a Captain, his previous record and experience as a Concorde F/O would undoubtedly have weighed heavily in his favour on selection for the Training Captain appointment (which was a merit-based selection) however it would have had no bearing on his being offered a return to Concorde as a Captain, which, as described above, was a seniority-based selection.
The annual postings and promotions process in BA, whilst sometimes lengthy and tortuous, had the virtue of being highly transparent. Every application, from every pilot, was listed, along with the results and reasons for the results, and this document was available to any pilot who wished to check!
Chris Norris did indeed return to the Concorde fleet as a Captain, later becoming the last Training Captain to be appointed on the fleet.
He was one of the most able and respected Captains on the fleet, as well as an excellent instructor, and his signature appears in my licence when he was the instructor on my last Concorde simulator check in June 2003.
Once back on Concorde as a Captain, his previous record and experience as a Concorde F/O would undoubtedly have weighed heavily in his favour on selection for the Training Captain appointment (which was a merit-based selection) however it would have had no bearing on his being offered a return to Concorde as a Captain, which, as described above, was a seniority-based selection.
The annual postings and promotions process in BA, whilst sometimes lengthy and tortuous, had the virtue of being highly transparent. Every application, from every pilot, was listed, along with the results and reasons for the results, and this document was available to any pilot who wished to check!
Last edited by Bellerophon; 11th Apr 2015 at 11:23. Reason: grammar
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 88
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Volume
Sorry for slight delay; I hadn't a clue and had to ask an old friend who was directly involved in Flight Test. This is his verbatim reply:
I remember the Concorde braking parachute quite well and as I recall the parachute door indicated open during the first flight of 002 although the chute functioned normally on landing.
As I recall the parachute was used quite a bit in the early days even during the 1972 overseas “Sales Tour”. Remember the prototypes were operating well above their max landing weight because of the amount of test equipment on board.
The parachutes were repacked by our own Safety Equipment people who were fully qualified on all the safety Equipment we used on Concorde and on the Canberra.
I don’t recall ever having life problems with the parachutes. I imagine the total number number of deployments would not be that high. I think it would have been an on-condition item.
I can’t see that the Concorde parachute would bear any relation to the Caravelle system. Concorde was a much heavier aircraft with higher landing speeds. I feel sure that Concorde had a specific new design.
Having been on board several times when the chute was used I think the crew liked the initial deceleration which the chute provided . Although I do recall landing at Bombay in very bad weather when the parachute was deployed and immediately jettisoned since it was pulling the aircraft off line.
I think that is about as much as one could hope for after all this time
Sorry for slight delay; I hadn't a clue and had to ask an old friend who was directly involved in Flight Test. This is his verbatim reply:
I remember the Concorde braking parachute quite well and as I recall the parachute door indicated open during the first flight of 002 although the chute functioned normally on landing.
As I recall the parachute was used quite a bit in the early days even during the 1972 overseas “Sales Tour”. Remember the prototypes were operating well above their max landing weight because of the amount of test equipment on board.
The parachutes were repacked by our own Safety Equipment people who were fully qualified on all the safety Equipment we used on Concorde and on the Canberra.
I don’t recall ever having life problems with the parachutes. I imagine the total number number of deployments would not be that high. I think it would have been an on-condition item.
I can’t see that the Concorde parachute would bear any relation to the Caravelle system. Concorde was a much heavier aircraft with higher landing speeds. I feel sure that Concorde had a specific new design.
Having been on board several times when the chute was used I think the crew liked the initial deceleration which the chute provided . Although I do recall landing at Bombay in very bad weather when the parachute was deployed and immediately jettisoned since it was pulling the aircraft off line.
I think that is about as much as one could hope for after all this time
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 652
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maximum low level speed
Can anyone help with this question? What was the highest low level speed reached during testing? I'm assuming generated heat would be the limiting factor?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm betting low altitude limits for Concorde are less about hull temps and possibly more about Vmo (airframe) limitations. (...and surely not thrust!)
Meanwhile, I await the truth as you do Octane, from our resident experts, to whom I offer warm thanks and have the greatest admiration!
Meanwhile, I await the truth as you do Octane, from our resident experts, to whom I offer warm thanks and have the greatest admiration!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've no idea about testing, but in line operations the Vmo peaked at 530kts, having started off rather lower depending on alt and mass. (Normally 380-400). I'm pretty certain there's at least one flt envelope earlier in this thread.
VAPILOT is spot on regarding the reasons for Vmo, of course.
Doesn't answer your 'during flight testing' question, I concede. Sorry!
VAPILOT is spot on regarding the reasons for Vmo, of course.
Doesn't answer your 'during flight testing' question, I concede. Sorry!
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 88
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, you will have to excuse my confusing statement as I am writing from. hospital bed and not at my sharpest!
To be clear, the original question related to maximum speed which I took to be Vd - 455 kts from about FL 60 up to about FL 360
This was the flutter clearance and was usually acheived in a dive. Vmo was thenwhat you got by backing off to give the statutory margins. Not strictly a flutter limit though limited by flutter! Vmo of course could be flown dry
To be clear, the original question related to maximum speed which I took to be Vd - 455 kts from about FL 60 up to about FL 360
This was the flutter clearance and was usually acheived in a dive. Vmo was thenwhat you got by backing off to give the statutory margins. Not strictly a flutter limit though limited by flutter! Vmo of course could be flown dry
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CliveL
You have many loyal followers of this thread, all of whom I am sure wish you a speedy recovery.
As others have said a fascinating thread, much of it due to your input.
Also, thanks for Concorde - what an aeroplane!
You have many loyal followers of this thread, all of whom I am sure wish you a speedy recovery.
As others have said a fascinating thread, much of it due to your input.
Also, thanks for Concorde - what an aeroplane!