• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

BAC/Sud Aviation Concorde - Development, Variants, Projects

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,628
Reaction score
230
According to Key Publishing (I just hate this forum, so don't ask me why I browse there!) there had been studies for an improved concorde.
- No reheat
- another stage compressor on the engines
- 25% more range
- leading edge slats
- more fuel
Of course, this went to nothing because of the economic failure of the concorde.
I really want to know more about that, but I have doubts on the engines (The olympus was pushed to its limits, and on this case they get ride off the afterburner? :eek: ? bizarre!)
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,602
Reaction score
1,071
Reheat on the Olympus was only partial, and not used during cruise. With some increase in dry thrust, it could be removed.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,628
Reaction score
230
With the improved range (up to 5000 miles or 8000 kms) could Lufthansa (or Swissair, or other "central-europe" based airlines) used the Concorde from Germany, flying at subsonic speed over France?
 

elmayerle

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
14
TsrJoe said:
what areas were filled with the movable leading edges? the whole le. or just a portion?
I'd guesstimate that the straight section of leading edge wss the main portion that was moveable. Trying to do that on the rest just starts getting messy to deal with aerodynamically.
 

PMN1

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
678
Reaction score
19
http://www.concordesst.com/concordeb.html

Does anyone have any other information on a proposed Concorde B that would have removed the need for afterburners?
 

elmayerle

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
14
In all honesty, I'd love to see a detailed comparison between that upgraded Olympus and a dry P&W JTF16 (their losing SST engine). Without the need to go Mach 3, they might well have been able to meet the Concorde B's requirements in a dry condition. Since this engine would already be a turbofan, it might contribute to further noise reductions.
 

PMN1

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
678
Reaction score
19
Elmayerle has mentioned on my repost of Concorde B

'In all honesty, I'd love to see a detailed comparison between that upgraded Olympus and a dry P&W JTF16 (their losing SST engine). Without the need to go Mach 3, they might well have been able to meet the Concorde B's requirements in a dry condition. Since this engine would already be a turbofan, it might contribute to further noise reductions.'

This would be interesting, we could have a scenario of a US engine manufacturer supporting a foreign aircraft - not so strange now but back then.....
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,801
Reaction score
251
Concorde B topics megred. Enjoy.
 

Rafael

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
128
Reaction score
2
Yeah, I know I'm an ignorant, but since I read here that the Concorde B's engines would not have reheat, ¿would it then be possible to design such an airliner around the new crop of super-cruising engines, working without after-burning to achieve supersonic speeds?

Rafa
 

elmayerle

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
14
PMN1 said:
Elmayerle has mentioned on my repost of Concorde B

'In all honesty, I'd love to see a detailed comparison between that upgraded Olympus and a dry P&W JTF16 (their losing SST engine). Without the need to go Mach 3, they might well have been able to meet the Concorde B's requirements in a dry condition. Since this engine would already be a turbofan, it might contribute to further noise reductions.'

This would be interesting, we could have a scenario of a US engine manufacturer supporting a foreign aircraft - not so strange now but back then.....
Well, at the time UTC had a minor share in SNECMA, so they could've supplied the data that way, much as JTF10/TF30 data was supplied earlier.
 

Just call me Ray

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
680
Reaction score
0
hesham said:
Hi,

the BAC 223 SST aircraft are well known aircraft which later
become the Concorde.
Not entirely. The best features of the BAC 223 were combined with the French Super Caravelle to create Concorde - basically the wings of the 223 with the fuselage of the Caravelle (increased in diameter)
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
561
Reaction score
16
Preliminary aerodynamic models of Concorde showing differing wing/body designs from fully blended to historical. Text reads;

Wind Tunnel Models. These seven wind tunnel models demonstrate stages in the development of Concorde's ogee wing plan. A variety of forms were assessed to find the most efficient plan for this supersonic passenger aircraft.

The big model in front is a drop model, dropped from an aircraft and allowed to glide to earth to observe the aerodynamics.

Pictures are from Fleet Air Arm Museum, Yeovilton





More pictures
http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c84/AviationImages/FAA%20Museum/
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
195
Super Caravelle

"do you have the X-220 Super Caravelle projects ?"

In "Concorde" by Pierre Sparaco, Docavia several early studies of the so-called
Super Carvelle could be found, illustrating the way from a type, that really showed
the Caravell relations, over delat canards to the final formula, which became the
Concorde.

(from Aviation Week 18/1961 and the above mentioned book)
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,119
Reaction score
1,025
Re: Super Caravelle

Thank you my dear Jemiba,

and can I ask about if the X-230 and X-240 were also airliner projects or not ?.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,119
Reaction score
1,025
Hi,

also from Flightglobal;
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201705.html
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,119
Reaction score
1,025
Hi,

I spoke before about the BAC-223 and the projects which
led to Concorde,here;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4043.0/highlight,concorde.html

and from google,some early Concorde designs;

http://books.google.com.eg/books?id=E-5ga8mAhPYC&pg=PA14&dq=SNCASO+CONCORDE&hl=ar&ei=PPwhTOWyFZKhsQb1jOTlBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=true
 

Attachments

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,013
Reaction score
199
Jemiba said:
Topics merged.
Hesham, please just add posts, if there already is an appropriate topic, instead of
creating a new one. ;)
On the other hand, the search engine still acts up at times, so creating duplicate topics is all too easy.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,258
Reaction score
100
about the W and M wingform
were there feasible and how fast would the craft fly ?
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,749
Reaction score
13
Michel Van, see here :-


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,13319.msg131516.html#msg131516


cheers,
Robin.
 

dannydale

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
212
Reaction score
2
The RAE SST thing looks like a Skylon with 1950s aerodynamics. ;D
 

Delta Force

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
Michel Van said:
about the W and M wingform
were there feasible and how fast would the craft fly ?
I remember seeing this picture before and I recall the caption stating that the wing is actually on the same plane. It's simply a swept wing with an embedded engine, it's not a gull wing.
 

Skyraider3D

Aviation Artist
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
377
Reaction score
20
Website
www.aviationart.aero
GTX said:
Wind Tunnel model of one of the early designs.
I photographed that windtunnel model just a few weeks ago. It's on display at the Farnborough Air Sciences Trust (FAST), a small, free entry museum next to the Farnborough airport runway.

There were various other models as well, some Concorde related, others appeared to be ground attack designs (including a nice and large Jaguar model). The M-wing was definitely the wildest one! Sadly it appears to have lost its tail fin. These models only recently went on show: http://www.airsciences.org.uk/fast_news_2013.html
Well worth a visit if you're in the neighbourhood!!
 

Attachments

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,692
Reaction score
48
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Re: Super Caravelle

See here for model of Super Caravelle - similar, if not identical to the delta version shown above. Also see here for some description including of proposed engines.
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
528
Reaction score
215
Website
galgot.com
Found two images of the Super-Caravelle model :





and a plan showing the differences of the two projects Super-Caravelle / Type 223 :
 

CNH

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
259
Reaction score
31
Outstanding technically.

Economically, a disaster.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,242
Reaction score
94
CNH said:
Economically, a disaster.
What is your definition of a disaster? An aircraft type that is used on regular schedules for 28 years hardly seems a candidate for this word to me...

Granted, it was not a high commercial success and probably cost more money than it made, but that's because the market wasn't ready for it (and also presumably the fact that the U.S., unable to develop their own competitor, banned supersonic airliners flying above American cities, certainly didn't help).

To me, a "disaster" is a type that shows a high accident rate early in its service life, or whose operational career is very short. The Concorde was a highly reliable aircraft with a long career, so to me it's not being fair on it to call it that.
 

CNH

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
259
Reaction score
31
£1 billion at 1960s prices for 16 aircraft?

Yes, an economic disaster.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,976
Reaction score
354
I fogot to tell you that she is little noisy especially supersonic cruise and landing.
When she wants to decrease speed at landing, she must increase the power. Concorde high angle of attack condition is draggy.
Generally people don't like this noise, nevertheless I love these exciting sound very much. ;D
 

Richard N

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
325
Reaction score
21
Skyblazer said:
CNH said:
Economically, a disaster.
What is your definition of a disaster? An aircraft type that is used on regular schedules for 28 years hardly seems a candidate for this word to me...

Granted, it was not a high commercial success and probably cost more money than it made, but that's because the market wasn't ready for it (and also presumably the fact that the U.S., unable to develop their own competitor, banned supersonic airliners flying above American cities, certainly didn't help).

So, was Concorde allowed to fly supersonic over French cities or Europe?

There is a big difference between saying the US was unable to develop an SST and the US being unwilling to use taxpayer money to subsidize SST operations that were not economically viable. Should the taxes of people who could never afford an SST ticket be used to subsidize the supersonic flights of the wealthy if the SST operators could not run profitably?
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
528
Reaction score
215
Website
galgot.com
Lol...


Anyway, fact is, it was a beautiful aircraft.
Funny , I remember reading that when they merged the two projects , they took the wing of the Type 223 and the fuselage of the Super-caravelle. Now seeing that plan above , i see the inverse for the Concorde.
 
Top