9 hours ago, neeray said:

I read an interesting article about supersonic jets recently. They are something like a foot longer at supersonic speeds than not at ... . That's quite a s-t-r-e-t-c-h.

Wasn't there a story about the Concorde pilot who stashed his cap between the back of his seat and the bulkhead when they were at full chat. When they landed, and the airplane had shrunk, it was wedged solid. He had to wait until they were supersonic on the way back to get it out! 

I would think most people would settle for a seat that is actually comfortable for more than 25 minutes after you have been sitting in it. 

Watched Concord many times, what noisy and dirty aircraft, even boarded a 747 parked next to one at CDG, noticed how small it was.

 

But would love to see supersonic flights again.

20 hours ago, connda said:

I was happy with Bangkok to LA direct in 14 hours.  Add a layover or two and it's two days.

Nice tail wind. I did the Thai Air LAX-BKK non-stop in 18 hours. Plus another 24 hours when the one daily flight got cancelled for mechanical reasons. 

On 1/30/2019 at 1:39 PM, overherebc said:

Stories about Concorde include one about the stretchy carpet used to compensate for that friction induced heat and expansion.

Have a look at the intake design that had flaps to reduce the air intake at full speed. Without that system the engines at full speed ram effect would have caused flame out.

All calculated using real brains and slide rules.

Yes the fully computer controlled intake ramps were a first in aviation and classed as classified tech/design originally. Of course Concorde was also the first commercial aircraft to have carbon brakes with ABS, powered flight control systems, thrust by wire, CoG control/balance via fuel contents, and quite a few other things that were subsequently incorporated into all later aircraft. The experience and tech gained building Concorde was what allowed Airbus to design and build their first plane the A300.

 

Edit - One little known fact is that the speed/altitude records for Concorde were achieved quite early in the testing program by one of the prototypes with less developed body/wings and less powerful engines, the British one that's now at IWM Duxford, from memory it achieved M2.23 at around 75,000ft. Near the end of service after a tech stop at Cardiff the crew who went to pick it up to ferry it back to LHR realised that a full production aircraft with no passengers or freight and only carrying the minimum supersonic fuel load had never been errrr 'tested' with an opportunity to accelerate straight from runway out to sea without having to cruise subsonic over land first initially. They only had SOP for one type of take-off/acceleration profile, full reheated power from take-off until about 4000ft then dry power until about M0.95 then full reheated power until M2.0. So sadly they couldn't just point it at the sky and leave it on full power after take-off. Even so, they managed Zero to Mach2 in 12 minutes.

Do not worry folks....the "Big Joke" of transport, Elon Musk, will get yer mega fast jets back on the runway....by year 2090 perhaps !?!!

I believe this is the fastest recorded Concorde true ground speed in service, at least where the pilot took a quick pic anyway.....1205 knots / 1387 mph / 2232 kmh.

 

 

 

Whatever the debate on its size, age and practicality, Concorde was a beautiful plane, and an amazing feat of technology, and the world took a step backwards when it was prematurely retired.  We're so used to seeing technology being replaced by something better, but in this case it was replaced by nothing.  We had supersonic transport in the 20th century, where is it in the 21st?  It's a crime that there are none flying at all today, not even at air shows. 

 

 

On 1/30/2019 at 3:03 AM, Proboscis said:

The reason Concorde crashed was because of debris on the ground ruptured a fuel tank. Could have happened to any aircraft.

No. The court case showed that multiple contributing factors;

- Inadequate speed at  rotation

- Overweight aircraft

- Pilot error

- Maintenance

 

 New york to Bangkok, Do it twice in economy, Usually takes 21 -24 hrs including layovers. No problem, eat,read  watch a movie, Have a few drinks, sleep, wake up, eat watch another movie,read,  have some more drinks, sleep more, wake up, almost there.

I don't mind it.the the day gives me a chance to decompress and get on Thailand frame of mind.