Brit312,

Thanks for that 'add-on'.
And yes, makes perfect sense.

M2Dude, ChristiaanJ & Brit312. Thankyou for your informed explanations much appreciated. It took a little while trawling through pics on Google images to locate this intruiging tab. It does not appear on most pics, was it a late modification?

Mrs Philflies despairs of the energy wasted looking for this obscure feature! oh well.

Anyway, with the risk of looking daft, is it not by the No 1 EGT? (M2..said No 4 which is maybe why it took me so long to find)

Regards

It's on the captain's side - no. 1.

Apologies if this (or something like this) has been posted before.. Lots of pages are taking lots of time to get through!!

How it's done....

:ok:

Humble aplogies to all, of course its mounted by the #1 EGT gauge (ANOTHER senior moment on my part). The RCICS, Reheat Capabilty Indication Control Sub-system (Oh OK then, I just made that up :*) was fiitted in the very early days of Concorde operation. It looked at first sight a belated April Folls joke, but as was said (much) earlier prior to this amazing piece of technology the #3 INS CDU waypoint thumbwheel was used as the reheat GO/NO-GO indicator.
And NB2A, no apologies needed from you sir. A great link to the video starring Dave Rowland and Roger Bricknell (sorry Les).

Best regards to all
Dude :O

BN2A
 

Many thanks for those three clips, that's a half hour out of my life I don't begrudge or regret one bit. :) I'm just so glad the crew were all British and were speaking in the completely clear and unhurried, relaxed yet alert tones of people who know what they are doing. I could understand virtually every word.

Dave Rowland's explanations were very clear and made such a lot of sense when they were happening as part of the sequence. Flying Concorde must have been so, so satisfying? Every flight must have been a small triumph and to think you guys got paid for it!

And yet again Dude, I simply marvel at the amazing systems that made the aeroplane do what it did - and not a digital circuit (except the later engine/intake control processors?) in the place. Truly amazing. Thanks again guys.

Roger.

Roger, they're clips from a far longer video (available both as VHS- 2 tapes- or on DVD) from a firm called IITV.
I'm not even sure about the copyright issues of the UTube clips....
But I can assure you the full video is worth watching (and owning...).
Starts off with a full walk-around at LHR, and a lot more 'stuff'.

CJ

Video
 

Christaan

That video company is ITVV - Intelligent Television and Video. DVD copies are still around on Ebay. 300 minutes of pure delight.

Sorry for the typo.
I've got the two VHS tapes rather than the DVDs.

But "pure delight".... yes.
If you're a Concorde 'enthusiast', get your hands on a copy. You won't regret it.

CJ

A comment was made to me a very long time ago that BA/AF were looking at upgrading her avionic systems [before retirement].

Is this true? What extent of upgrades would occur if they had gone through with it?

Interesting... but unlikely.

The first question : why? The old analogue systems still worked well.

Second question : who? There were only 14 aircraft in service... who would paid the immense bill for redesign and recertification?

A third question : we know one of the major factors in the 'end of service' decisions were related to the rapidly increasing maintenance costs (as billed by Airbus). A complete upgrade of the avionics (digital, glass cockpit, etc.) would not necessarily have resulted in less maintenance costs.... it would still have been for only 14 aircraft.

In the end, the only real and 'visible' avionics upgrade was the installation of TCAS, and that was only because it was made mandatory.

CJ

In actual fact BA looked very seriously in the mid 1980s at a limited glass cockpit, where the primary flight and engine instruments would be replaced by and EFIS/EICAS setup, ala Boeing 757. Studies were quite advanced, the main cited advantage was 'reduced cost of ownership.' It seems that the reason it never went any further was, now here's the irony, 'increased training costs. (You have to remember that the 757 was the only glass cockpit BA had at the time, with nothing much else on the horizon).
There would certainly needed to be other upgrades avionics wise, in the fullness of time, but the glass cockpit was not really top of the list. Glaring requirements were improved navigational accuracy, as well as EGPWS together with predictive and reactive windshear protection. (Although to really get the most out of this an EFIS type system is crucial). We (BA) were already looking at both EGPWS and the replacement of the DELCO Carousel 1VAC INS. The Litton 92 had been suggested early on, as it was the only laser INS available with a GPS card fitted, but it is possible that given time an IRS with separate MMR interface would have been used. (This of course now requires an FMC, with a potentially rather involved VNAV profile). As far as EGPWS (and GPS navigation), the main problem was going to be 'where to put the darned GPS antenna' up there on the fuselage crown, but this was being looked at right up to 2003. Providing there was an adequate way of displaying the warnings, predictive windshear protection would have been a breeze, as the Bendix RDR4B radar system (itself retrofitted in the mid 1990s) had the PWS capability merely disabled on Concorde). As Concorde was a highly profitable enterprise for BA during the vast majority of her service life, it is my view that natural avionics updates, such as those described, would have found their way onto Concorde given enough time. (EGPWS, GPS NAV as well as PWS protection would almost certainly have been on board by now).

Best regards
Dude :O

Stretchy bit
 

When we are doing the cockpit section of our tours at Manchester on Alpha Charlie we always show guests where the expansion gap is. The other day one of the guides had someone who had been involved in Concorde and he seemed to remember that the expansion was visible somewhere else.
Is this true ?

Thanks Dude for the info... something I didn't know either.
Wasn't there also an issue with RVSM (reduced vertical separation minima)?

CJ

Actually NO CJ. The old steam powered:} analog electro-mechanical Air Data Computers met RVSM minima quite comfortably when trials were carried out, and that amazed the hell out of most of us. (But a Penny & Giles DADC was still being looked at in the early to mid 90s as a potential ADC replacement).
As far as the expansion joint question goes John, there were several expansion joints all over the aeroplane but I don't recall personally being able to see evidence of thermal expansion anywhere else than the aft flight engineers panel. Perhaps someone else here may know something?.

Best regards
Dude :O

Thanks Dude,

It amazes the hell out of me, too.
Steam-powered clockwork describes it quite well.....

I was equally amazed that the ADCs on Sierra Delta still work (as described elsewhere).

CJ

Hi all Concorde gurus,

Could somebody shed a light to me on how the de-air system work on Concorde and none of the subsonic commercial aircraft have it? Also, if possible,I would like to know that among 32+ fuel pumps,excluded EDP, in the Concorde which one is the most powerful.

Thanks for yours reply. :8

We cannot let this thread be consined to the annuls of forgotten history

There must still be a million questions that you always wanted to ask about this wonderfull plane

So here is mine

On Wikipedia they tell us there were 20 Concordes built, 14 production and 6 pre production

Also Wiki tell us there were 67 olympus 593 engines built

Forgive me but this does not seem possible, not enough engines were built to satisfy 'new' engines for 'new' planes on the production line


Does this mean that the 6 pre production a/c donateded some engines to production aircraft so some BA and AF planes flew, even from new, with 'used' engines??

Many thanks

All questions still welcome!

Not quite....

There were two prototypes, 001 and 002 (the ones with the odd porthole visors).
There were two preproduction aircraft: 01, the British one, with a full 'look-through' visor' and 02, the French one, the first one that looked like the production model, with both a 'full' visor, and the 'pointy' tail.
Then there were two 'near-production' aircraft, that were used for certification, route-proving, and suchlike, but that never entered airline service (201 and 202, now best known as 'F-WTSB' and "Delta-Golf").

And yes, then there were 14 production aircraft, that in the end all made it into service with BA and AF.

This is still a slight puzzle.....
The '67' figure probably refers only to the version of the 593 engnes for the production aircraft (4x14=56, plus spares), and not to the earlier versions used for development/testing, for the prototypes, the preprods and the cerification aircraft.

AFAIK, all the production aircraft flew with 'new' engines.

Funnily enough, there's a current discussion on a French Concorde forum on the same subject, trying to figure out not only exactly how many engines were built, but also the "where are they now?".

It would be a nice item to add to the "Concorde Story". We may have to appeal to the RR Historical Trust to open their archives, and tell us exactly how many Olympus 593's were built, and what they can tell us about their history.

CJ

Were there not 21 airframes built? The ones ChristiaanJ lists above, plus the one used for heat and stress cycling in the 'rig'?