Generally pretty informative and well done, apart from:
"the turboprop is the kind of engine that you see on most propeller aircraft"
Which was illustrated by showing a piston-engined aircraft, not a turboprop
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Generally pretty informative and well done, apart from:
"the turboprop is the kind of engine that you see on most propeller aircraft"
Which was illustrated by showing a piston-engined aircraft, not a turboprop
I spotted that, turbo props are on bigger stuff like the Hercules. Now that's one very impressive aircraft even if they lost one recently on fire duty in Australia.
The C-130 has been flying since 1954 and they are still in use all over the world. It's as impressive as the Concorde but in a very different way.
It can even fly inverted - from 50secs in.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 4,266
- Car
- GLB 220D 4Matic P+
GordonTarling
MB Enthusiast
At less than half the speed! There's a price to be paid for everything. London to New York, business meeting and then return to London in under 12 hours is something no other passenger aircraft is able to achieve.
There are some much smaller turboprops too, including single-engined ones. They are fairly standard as military trainers e.g. the Pilatus PC-7/PC-9/PC-21 series, Embraer Tucano + variants, etc. Plus various transport & utility aircraft (Pilatus Turbo Porter and PC-12, Cessna Caravan, Piper Malibu, various cropdusters, etc.).
It was a remarkable aircraft that I remember from its first appearance at Farnborough. We were on a train in Sydney when the news about the Paris crash broke. We along with most others on the train were stunned. After all of the hard work that went into the refurbishment programme, I was quite sad when the rug was finally pulled out from under the programme.
Arguably (?) the most beautiful aircraft made to date (Spifire runs it close I guess). It had some astonishing technology, e.g. Engine intakes designed to take in air at Mach 2 and slow it to subsonic for the compressors in 11-feet. Also, Concorde was able to maintain supersonic flight without needing afterburners. So could push up to Mach 2, throttle back and go into 'super-cruise'. Not many aircraft have been able to do this.
A good friend (in the industry) told me that another reason Concorde went out of service was the withdrawal of the engineering support/helpdesk by the OEM. Reached the point where too many support resources were needed to sign-off/solve daily operational issues. Also I believe that the engines were getting short of flying hours, but can't remember where I got that from.
Arguably (?) the most beautiful aircraft made to date (Spifire runs it close I guess). It had some astonishing technology, e.g. Engine intakes designed to take in air at Mach 2 and slow it to subsonic for the compressors in 11-feet. Also, Concorde was able to maintain supersonic flight without needing afterburners. So could push up to Mach 2, throttle back and go into 'super-cruise'. Not many aircraft have been able to do this.
A good friend (in the industry) told me that another reason Concorde went out of service was the withdrawal of the engineering support/helpdesk by the OEM. Reached the point where too many support resources were needed to sign-off/solve daily operational issues. Also I believe that the engines were getting short of flying hours, but can't remember where I got that from.
Dryce
Hardcore MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- May 17, 2006
- Messages
- 10,957
- Car
- ..
Fuel consumption, range, passenger capacity, comfort cargo capacity, restrictions on overland routes ....
If the money had been invested in the Airbus project - or an equivalent large twin jet programme then it would have likely had a better return both financially and for the UK aerospace economy as a whole.
The Airbus A300 entered service in the mid 70s just before Concorde. The A300 represented the real future.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 12,829
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
In some respects, the Concorde project has parallels to the US moonshot program. Neither were financially successful when considered in isolation, but the leading edge solutions that had to be developed to solve problems in both projects continue to deliver massive benefits - both in the aerospace sector and elsewhere.
If you only ever carry out low risk incremental developments, you never make significant advances.
There are some even smaller ones too - have a look at the STOL characteristics and climb rate of this little beauty:
That Allison 250 nailed on the front gives it a pretty impressive performance.
That's lovely. I only mentioned mainstream production aircraft - there are certainly some very impressive 'specials' out there! Mike Patey's heavily customised turbine Wilga "Draco" springs to mind (currently being rebuilt after a crosswind takeoff cartwheel):
He also built a heavily modified Lancair called "Turbulence" that has clocked 438 mph and >8000 fpm ...
As an aside, Mike's own YouTube channel is well worth a look as he's an absolute perfectionist and always has some amazing projects on the go. He's currently putting a 500 bhp 8-cyl Lycoming (780 CI) into a Carbon Cub
Didn't know about Mike Patey - A PT6 in a Lancair - wow!!
Got to love the American attitude to horsepower. Their view seems to be "if more is good, then a little more is better and too much is just about right".
Got to love the American attitude to horsepower. Their view seems to be "if more is good, then a little more is better and too much is just about right".
He obviously has plenty of money but does 90% + of the design & build work himself, often putting in long overnight stints to fit in with his day job (he runs a family business with his brother making aircraft tugs). I always find his videos very interesting ... he does a lot of DIY composite stuff now as well as more traditional metal fabrication and CNC.
Bellow
Hardcore MB Enthusiast
The composites stuff, is it aluminium skins he uses of other (eg carbon/glass fibre) and does he start with pre-made sheets or does he make from scratch?
(I'm assuming by composites, a honeycomb type inner structure is used.)
He uses carbon fibre (almost exclusively) to make bespoke parts/panels. Here's an example - extended wingtips for Draco that carry extra fuel:
Bellow
Hardcore MB Enthusiast
Thanks.
I skimmed through it and caught the gist of what he was doing. He's thorough. The way he constructed the additional fuel tanks and his attitude to the air filters are spot on.
I wondered if he was using aluminium (or other) honeycomb as filler between two panels. Not least as I've recently realised that instead of only preformed boards being available to buy, the honeycomb can be bought separately and panels made to spec - eg, curved. So, on the look out for anyone doing/having done this. If anyone knows of this....
Sadly , no .Ps.... Concorde won’t fly again.
However, there are possible followers
Boom - Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2008
- Messages
- 45,520
- Location
- London
- Car
- 2022 Hyundai IONIQ 5 RWD / 2016 Suzuki Vitara AWD
When mentioning 'maverick' plane designers... one can't not mention Burt Rutan:
Burt Rutan - Wikipedia
Burt Rutan - Wikipedia
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
