Yup, I lived in Bristol in the 80's. On a nice summer's day with the wind in the right direction if we were out in the garden we could hear a faint "buboom" followed by the sight of Concorde overhead on the way in to Heathrow.

Secondary boom
 

Interesting to see references to the secondary boom here. I lived in Crowborough, East Sussex, close to MAY VOR location, in 70s and 80s, at about 600ft elevation facing southwest. Often at about 2100hr on a quiet evening we would hear a faint boom from the AF Concorde coming up the Channel and turning towards Paris. Local dogs would sometimes bark just before we heard the sound!

Secondary boom
 

Ah yes, living in Minehead throughout the entire Concorde operational era, I fondly remember those evening "babooms", usually preceded by the clattering calls of startled pheasants (no, not peasants :) or dogs) in the woods behind us who seemed to get a second or so advance warning, presumably at a frequency range above mine.

There was also a definite difference in the intensity of those secondary booms between summer and winter, with the latter being slightly louder and more reliable than the summer ones.

What a beautiful sight it was too in a clear blue sky, with that gleaming white shape spearheading the contrails that would gradually knot up and disperse as it headed up the Bristol Channel and disappeared towards Bristol. Twice a day in the evenings and another in the afternoon when the Washington flights were operated.

Happy days, much missed!! :{

Thanks for the information guys - very helpful. Were the INS co-ordinates fixed or did they vary flight by flight please?

FraserConcordeFan

... How exactly would you get the INS into memory mode so you could input the two digit code to activate the route section...

Concorde did have a facility to input a flight plan route segment into the INS and this facility was used on most flights. To explain this very briefly, let’s take a typical LHR-JFK flight as an example:

• Press the amber REMOTE button on each INS CDU
• Load the first waypoint (#1), usually Woodley, manually into an INS
• Key WAYPOINT CHANGE and enter and insert “0 to 1” on each CDU.
• Select DSTRK/STS and HOLD
• Key WAYPOINT CHANGE
• Key the DME catalogue number (from the flight log, usually 90 on a LHR-JFK sector) and insert
• Key WAYPOINT CHANGE
• Key the Route Segment number (from the flight log, usually 10 on a LHR-JFK sector) and insert
• Cancel HOLD

Then the usual checking routine of:

• Checking the lats and longs of the loaded waypoint lats with those given on the flight log
• Checking the INS distances between waypoints with those given on the flight log
• Checking the lats, longs and frequencies of the DMEs against the database guide

Return the displays back to WAYPOINT, cancel REMOTE, select AUTO and check the INS alignment.

Remember, with only nine waypoints available in the INS, this procedure would have to be repeated in flight, sometimes more than once. Takes much longer to write about than it did to do!


tomahawk pa38

... I'm just curious about what eastbound routings were into Heathrow...

The usual Eastbound routing on a JFK-LHR flight would be via track SN to 15°W then on SL3 to BARIX to MATIM to PITEM to NIGIT and then OCK.


... and where the decel point was....

Let me just check we are talking about the same thing! The Decel Point was the point at the end of the cruise/climb, where we first throttled back and started to decelerate from M2.00 and then descend from, say, around FL 560.

The decel point was calculated in order that we would be just under M1.00 at the designated Speed Control Point, and so the Decel Point was obviously further back than the Speed Control Point.

The usual route was up the Bristol Channel, a bit to the South of our outbound route, crossing the Devon coast just to the North of Barnstaple, routing to a waypoint called MATIM, which is around 51°N 004°W.

In winter, on a JFK-LHR flight via SL3, the Speed Control Point was 110nm before MATIM, and we were required to be subsonic at this point. Typically, we would be just under M1.00, and around FL410, when we crossed the speed control point, having started down from FL 560 around 105nm earlier.

The decel point was of no real relevance to those living on and around the coast of Devon and Somerset, but the Speed Control Point was. The position and time at which we decelerated through M1.00 and became subsonic were always recorded on the flight log, along with the altitude and spot wind, in case of any future claims of boom damage due to a misjudged decel.

Best Regards to all

Bellerophon

Dedicated to the memory of André Édouard Turcat (1921 -2016)

Thank you , sir!

I wish I hadn't "assumed" so much based on the AF chart. :\

Concorde Question
 

Does anybody have an idea of who the supplier and part number for the Concorde Hydraulic Engine Driven Pumps?

I found some great information for the Concorde systems on the heritage website for the RAT and other systems,

Heritage Concorde

I appreciate any help you can provide,

40 years in service today
 

A very belated reply.
 

I'm not really sure why I stopped coming here, it is one of, if not the most interesting thread on any of the forums I visit - by miles. However, I got back into it a few days ago and realised I was over a hundred pages behind. I have been slowly catching up, but I'm still nearly fifty pages behind.

My first question is; what has become of the Brabazon Hangar/ BAe Filton/ G-BOAF situation? Wikipedia just say its all been sold - the airfield at least - but not what the dispositions of all those valuable items, particularly Alpha Foxtrot.

Second, just to show I really am reading myself back up to date, I noticed something ChristaanJ said that has some resonance with me.

Wow! Yes I have CJ! I only know one other person who has - fascinating book and I know exactly what you mean. Thee are several other books in the same vein; 21st Century Jet - about the conception and birth of the Boeing 777 and Wide Body, the equally fascinating story of the beloved and iconic Boeing 747.

You probably don't remember, but I used to be a "scanner engineer" - I finally retired in July last year - but I was involved in the very early days of what are now common place diagnostic machines. At some point in the early nineties, I realised two things. I could write a bit - not incomprehensibly at any rate - and all the people who made the early scanners, did the development work and worked on them in the field before me, were either retired or passed away. I asked the management at the time if I could have a bit of time, perhaps a half day every week, to do the research and do a 'Tracy Kidder' for the EMIScanner. No answer came the stern reply and it never got done. Now I don't think it can be, so it never will.

I would love to write 'The Soul of a New Machine' for Concorde, but A) I'm probably too old now and B) I was never part of it, so I probably can't put the passion in to it, certainly not the knowledge, that she deserves.

If anyone on here who was part of it who wants to put pen to paper (Oh come on! Who doesn't use a Word Processor - which dates me on its own!) but it doesn't seem to come out right, perhaps we ought to meet?

Few of my close friends are engineers or scientists and although they all agree that Concorde was (and is) a lovely looking thing, they simply don't understand why it is that engineers get passionate and dewy eyed about her. They cannot comprehend the difficulties of flying at Mach 1+, let alone Mach 2 for three hours in a pretty frock and thus, the ability to do so just seems 'normal'. The book is there to write; the book of the people, by the people, for the people.

Tiny Items
 

Hi Dear Guys,


Amazing thread on an amazing aircraft! Red through all the posts. What an immense amount of knowledge/experience on this bird! Your valuable inputs triggerd my curiousity to the extent that I have started to study Concorde manuals trying to understand systems and operating details. Not an easy job! I think a more detailed Traning Manual would help me greatly.
Here is my question:
Going through the FM exterior inspection chapter I have run into tiny details what are really hard to find even on close-up external photos. Just to name a few: "nose gear free fall dump valve vent", "engine oil tank vent" or "hydraulic-driven fuel transfer pump drain". Was there a "pictorial" external inspection guide available on the Concorde for crew training (similar to Boeing or Airbus training aids)? If yes, could somehow, somebody send me a copy of that?


Appreciate your help.

Concorde Experience
 

4May1978 - As the Chief Mechanic of a corporate flight department I attended the annual HS 125 Operations and Maintenance Seminar in Washington, DC. In honor of the sale of the xxx'th 125 all 125 operators were asked to fly in their aircraft for a group photo. The Chief Pilots that did were to get a ride on Concorde. Well, the turnout was less than expected and I was lucky enough to be asked to go on the flight. On that day we were given a talk and then Q and A by Captain Brian Walpole. Interesting stuff to all of us technical types.

That afternoon we went to KIAD to board the incredible machine. All previous posts on this thread describe my feelings as well on the entire flight experience. We flew over Nova Scotia, a bit at Mach 2 and back to KIAD. Capt. Walpole was on the PA from engine start, throughout the flight, to shut down, describing every movement going on up front.

Unforgettable experience for all of us, topped off by the seamless cabin service, smoked salmon, etc., etc. Finally, cognac and, I couldn't believe it, a choice of cigars. Not a one of fired one up then but what a wonderful, old world touch on this state of the art aircraft.

Tonight with a Manhattan and a cigar, I want to express my appreciation and say how humbled I am by the experience, willingness to share and the deep love of Concorde and aviation shown by the experts and other posters here.

Apologies if this isn't entirely relevant to the thread, but here's some videos of Concorde I have. First is the tour at Manchester Airport:



And a take off from inside Concorde from Birmingham:

Hello all, great thread!
I was just reading a few of my Concorde things and I have seen mention of several other manuals used by the crews other than the flying manual, like the performance manual, cruise control manual and navigation manual.
I believe (perhaps wrongly!) that the performance manual contained the take-off data for weight, V speeds, noise time, TLA etc and I'm guessing the cruise manual had all the tables for cruise performances. Am I correct in my guess work?
What kind of info was in the navigation manual as I think airfield charts were separate?

Any info would be great!

Some years ago I travelled to France to crew for my Dad who was bringing his small sailboat back across the channel to the UK.

About halfway across, Dad had gone below and I was sailing along in the middle of nowhere, with nothing anywhere near us.

Suddenly, I heard a very loud "ba boom" and thought, hmmm, I wonder what that was?

Dad came running up the steps from below saying "what have we hit, what have we hit" (thanks for your confidence in me Dad). Nothing I said, very offended. We both looked around seeing nothing and eventually I looked up to see the beautiful sight of a Concorde miles above us flying Westwards in a clear blue sky.

I guess the " ba boom " was the two shock waves of the nose and the leading edge sweeping past us.


Terrific sight. Terrific machine.

Most people are familiar with the space race between the US and the Soviets, but there was a very interesting race between the US, Europe and the Soviet Union to build a supersonic passenger aircraft. Europe built the successful Concorde, the US had the unsuccessful Boeing SST, and the Soviets had the unsuccessful Tu-144.

Somewhere there is a taped phone conversation of President Kennedy raising heck with someone over the fact that the US does not have a supersonic passenger aircraft program to compete with Concorde.

Hands on
 

As so many have already said: what a wonderful thread. Please please keep it going.

Given the high quality of expertise and experience here, please accept my apologies for any ill informed inaccuracies. I never flew in Concorde, but I did 'fly' her thanks to the late John Cook.

In the late 1970s I was in the RAF section of the school CCF with his son Richard (tragically later killed in the Mull of Kintyre accident) and John (one of the first BA Concorde pilots) arranged for a minibus load of us to go to Filton on what I wish I'd realised at the time was an exceptionally privileged visit. Passage of time blurs the memory, but it still sticks in my mind as an extraordinary day.

The first 'Concorde' we saw was the full scale marketing mock up, essentially the left side of an external Concorde attached to a hanger wall, with a full interior cabin. I still remember being surprised how small it was - the windows especially - and the mix of different seats and trims inside, presumably to show options to potential buyers.

Next stop was the simulator and - in the analogue days of the 70's - the enormous, detailed 3D model of Heathrow and what looked like the surrounding 10 miles, mounted vertically on a wall. A huge gantry on rails ran back and forth, up and down, so a camera with tiny periscope lens could take off, fly around and land as per the simulated flight, with the resulting pictures projected for the pilots in the sim. The size of the thing - and the attention to detail of the model - was incredible. Off to one side was a large rectangular shallow dish painted light blue. It's sides were raised - like a saucer - and edged with fluffed cotton wool. We were told that once the flight in the sim reached a certain height, it would 'go into cloud' (fade to white) while the camera trundled across to the blue dish. The flight would then 'emerge' from the 'cloud' and the camera went round and round in circles, giving a very plausible impression of high altitude flight until it was time to reverse the procedure and descend, back to 'Heathrow'.

Incredibly, they let us fly the sim, two at a time up front, for a few minutes each. It was simply too much to take in and was over far, far, far too soon. But I can claim a (very poor) approach to Heathrow before the instructors called us off - apparently a crash landing didn't do the camera any favours as the lens would plough into the model. I can see why they were nervous.

(Is this the sim cockpit - without the model I presume - that is now at Brooklands, by the way?)

Final stop was a gantry overlooking one of the hangers where a solitary Concorde nestled amongst (what fuzzy memory recalls as) three VC10s being converted to tankers for the RAF. The Concorde seemed tiny by comparison, but also startling in that it was still largely in green primer, access panels were open and inspection hatches missing and vulnerable areas were covered in what looked like flattened cardboard boxes for protection. Presumably this was one of the 'unsold' numbers before BA took it on (?). Nose down, it looked very sad.

We weren't. I suspect we were insufferable for weeks afterwards.

What I'd give for a time machine to revisit that afternoon...

For those of you who never got to take a ride on Concorde, there is a start-up out of Colorado called Boom Technology that is working on a 40 passenger commercial supersonic aircraft. The company is still quite small, but it seems legit. Their technical staff has significant industry experience, and they are supported by Richard Branson and Virgin Galactic who will provide manufacturing/test capabilities.

Boom Technology says they will fly a demonstration aircraft by end of 2017.

My apologies if it's been covered...., I'm curious as to why the #3 engine would have a limiter to 88% for takeoff?

Thank you!

The answer is buried somewhere in the last 2000 posts! Something to do with the direction of the swirl of the air entering the engine causing a problem, until the speed of the aircraft overcomes it.

Indeed, and searching google for Concorde 88% PPRUNE: will find it. (I just checked)

That last colon is important; it limits search to the website of the name preceding it. I usually find this technique more accurate than websites' own search engines as well as the results more easily assimilated.

Have fun.