Concorde to fly again...?

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
User avatar
iaint
UKAR Staff
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:09 pm
Location: Leics

Concorde to fly again...?

Post by iaint »

Yep, it's time to crack open that old chestnut again, could we see a Concorde grace the skies again?
Spotted this article on Twitter.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/travel/83904/concorde-flights-planned-to-resume-and-aircraft-proposed-for-display-in-london.html

It seems a group are determined to get one into the air again, and also get another into Central London as a tourist attraction...
What do we think, another pipe dream?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/iainthomson84/

End of Message, End of Broadcast

FGR2
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 15 Sep 2008, 11:12 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by FGR2 »

Yep, another pipe dream.

Where would they get the spares from?

How would you go about re-certifying it as an airliner to carry passengers?

I very much doubt £120 million would cover it.

User avatar
planenuttoo
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon 17 Aug 2015, 8:24 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by planenuttoo »

Would be virtually impossible as the computers that control the air intakes were required to be destroyed as part of the decommissioning, except one that lurks in France.

AB is still at Heathrow and is the object of the desire to place a Concorde in Central London near to the Flying Eye.

CAA have suggested after the Vulcan, there will be no similar projects permitted.

frank
Posts: 1096
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:16 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by frank »

Agree Concorde is a pipe dream but why would CAA suggest that after Vulcan there would be no similar projects. I thought that Vulcan was a text book example of how it should be done. Would this be influenced by the Shoreham accident.

Alanko
Posts: 568
Joined: Fri 24 Jul 2015, 11:24 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Alanko »

Surely with today's tech you could replicate the functionality of those computers on a £50 Raspberry Pi module?

Out of curiosity, why were they destroyed? I don't see Concorde flying again, but it is a nice idea.

FGR2
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 15 Sep 2008, 11:12 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by FGR2 »

I don't know whether they were destroyed, but I believe they were removed.

The was a rumour (may be a load of rubbish) that they were protected by the OSA or something similar at the time.

User avatar
Thumper
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 3431
Joined: Mon 13 Jul 2009, 5:46 pm
Location: Sherborne, Dorset

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Thumper »

I thought it had been a good 6 months since the last 'bring back Concorde' article! As for purchasing the Concorde at Le Bourget, isn't this one still featured heavily in the biennial airshow as it's tugged out past the crowd? Pretty sure I have seen a video somewhere of that happening, can't see Le Bourget letting go of it either unless a crazy sum is offered.

Any articles referencing the hint that no similar projects to Vulcan will happen again?

Alanko
Posts: 568
Joined: Fri 24 Jul 2015, 11:24 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Alanko »

East Fortune could sell theirs and get some more interesting aircraft with the money....

Stagger2
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2011, 8:46 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Stagger2 »

As the 'Concorde Return to Airworthiness Project' (CRAP for short!) is started, they will simultaneously prepare 6 x Pigs to flyby also!! :yahoo: :wink:

User avatar
planenuttoo
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon 17 Aug 2015, 8:24 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by planenuttoo »

frank wrote: after Vulcan there would be no similar projects. I thought that Vulcan was a text book example of how it should be done. Would this be influenced by the Shoreham accident.


Absolutely the Vulcan project is a proven success and is something I have referred to when trying to drum up interest in pursuing the "next project".

The references to CAA suggestion is from a few years back when the Concorde idea was muted, once again. With the Vulcan, the CAA had to create the guidance/regulations from scratch, and they had to establish the contact liaison and testing ; the Concorde would be way beyond that.

A certain lady whom I spoke to the other week, who is very close to the Sally B project, her name began with "S", bemoaned the fact that nothing could be manufactured for Vulcan but virtually everything for the B17 was available from other aircraft still in use.

The OEM's who have now withdrawn their support, would again have the problems in that the staff experienced in those fields to maintain such a beast are no longer available . The engines of Concorde are almost the same model as in the Vulcan and RR have had problems in assuring their integrity for years. Because most vintage/historic aircraft are not "complex" they can be maintained under licence.

Whilst trying not to make judgement on the tragic events of Shoreham, I doubt the outcome will affect the maintenance of aircraft.

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13190
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Brevet Cable »

As per previous topics......
Is there OEM support for the Olympus engines ?
No.
Are there a number of zero-houred , 'bagged-and-tagged' engines lying around ?
No. ( Unless someone knows differently )
Will they receive the required OEM support for other aspects of the airframe ?
No.

Endex.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

Steve p
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu 13 Aug 2015, 5:36 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Steve p »

Would be great but surely the amount of money needed and the amount of red tape to get through would be enormous!.
I wish them luck though and if 'and thats a big if' they achive there aims i will be the first to thank and applaud them.

Big Eric
Posts: 2044
Joined: Sun 22 Aug 2010, 6:15 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Big Eric »

Simple answer to the question :- No

User avatar
capercaillie
Posts: 8051
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 3:04 pm
Location: Leominster

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by capercaillie »

What are the chances of the other great Olympus powered bird getting airborne?

TSR2 to the sky anyone, there's a couple of spare engines at Gatwick and a few spare parts lying around. Just need a tin to rattle at a few shows and we're good to go....... :tongue:
"The surrogate voice of st24"

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3318
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:17 am
Contact:

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Spiny Norman »

capercaillie wrote:What are the chances of the other great Olympus powered bird getting airborne?

TSR2 to the sky anyone, there's a couple of spare engines at Gatwick and a few spare parts lying around. Just need a tin to rattle at a few shows and we're good to go....... :tongue:


It would get my vote. I've seen plenty Concordes fly.

User avatar
CJS
Posts: 7611
Joined: Thu 15 Jul 2010, 3:30 pm
Location: Hogwarts

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by CJS »

Ha ha ha ha ha ha h...wait, they're being serious aren't they?

Oh Lordy :-o
With just the slightest bit of finesse, I might have made a little less mess.

Rory76
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:38 am
Location: Brummagem

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Rory76 »

Seems unlikely, but if the financial war chest is accurate, then who knows......
Ricoh Caplio R5

Sony A300 ('L' Plates Fitted)

MJ83
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun 06 Sep 2015, 11:52 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by MJ83 »

I don't think it will happen.

However, why are there so many nay sayers? Surely the Vulcan shows that with enough money and enough fight, anything is possible?

I wonder what people's first reactions were when they were trying to get the Vulcan to the sky again?

To be honest, I think you'll get more people donating towards Concorde than have helped with the Vulcan.

User avatar
aviodromefriend
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2010, 2:22 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by aviodromefriend »

planenuttoo wrote:The references to CAA suggestion is from a few years back when the Concorde idea was muted, once again. With the Vulcan, the CAA had to create the guidance/regulations from scratch, and they had to establish the contact liaison and testing ; the Concorde would be way beyond that.
I remember to have read an interview with the Big Boss of the CAA that stated they wouldn't have a problem to allow more complex aircraft flying, as long as it was run like the Vulcan. To have a thought like operating Concorde like the Vulcan has been operated isn't even wishfull thinking, it is more like raising questions under which gravestone those people have been living for the last 10+ years. OEM support will never materialise, just because if it would, Airbus would never have withdrawn the type certificate.
planenuttoo wrote:The engines of Concorde are almost the same model as in the Vulcan
Wasn't there a post years ago on the Vulcan's own forum from Sam Evans stating that the number of parts that those engines share is exactly 0? They only share the name Olympus.
A weather forecast is a forecast and just that

Mike Moses, Launch Integration Manager Space Shuttle Program

Airshowhammer

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Airshowhammer »

Another reason (don't shoot me down) is the amount of people that they say 'meh won't happen'. If it was made more public and you had millions of people demanding it in the sky with donations anything is possible. Even if it was restored so it is able to taxi, is an achievement. Would love to see something similar to the Vulcan. But made more public, hundreds and thousands of people coming together to get what is a British aviation icon back in the skies. Yes you're problably wondering what i'm smoking! People need to stop being so negative.

User avatar
aviodromefriend
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2010, 2:22 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by aviodromefriend »

Another one I always forget to add: There is no complete set of original drawings anymore, as a number of those have been sold for charity post final flights.
A weather forecast is a forecast and just that

Mike Moses, Launch Integration Manager Space Shuttle Program

Steve p
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu 13 Aug 2015, 5:36 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Steve p »

I tend to agree with some posts on here, nothing is impossible if they have enough money, expertise and somehow they manage to talk the CAA into allowing a concorde to fly again then it may just happen. I am not saying it will but also i am not saying its never going to happen. Its only a machine at the end of the day held together with welds, rivets, nuts and bolts and with enough money any non-available bits could possibly be re-manufactured.
It would take huge amounts of money and lots of begging to the CAA, i wont be holding my breath but i will stay in hope.

Goody
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:49 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by Goody »

aviodromefriend wrote:Another one I always forget to add: There is no complete set of original drawings anymore, as a number of those have been sold for charity post final flights.

That's not really an issue though as the people that have those drawings are almost certainly likely to be enthusiasts, some of whom would lend them back or copy them for such a project.

frank
Posts: 1096
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:16 pm

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by frank »

The original OP got me thinking why don't we ( the nation) plan another big aviation project. With the Vulcan effect and experience surely we can find another "nations plane" that people will get excited about.
Choose an iconic aircraft, Plan it carefully with the National Lottery and CAA, lots of PR and go from there.

With WWII very much in focus maybe the choice could lie there rather than a jet.
Thoughts?

FGR2
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 15 Sep 2008, 11:12 am

Re: Concorde to fly again...?

Post by FGR2 »

I went to a Concorde SST get together in 2003, and even then with the aircraft fully serviceable, it was effectively a non starter.

It is not simply a case of throwing money at it.

The difference between the Vulcan and Concorde was that the Vulcan was kept in a condition where it could be taxied and a large number of spares were acquired with the intention of future flight. All Concordes have been placed in museums with no preventative, anti deterioration maintenance. Only the one AF one was kept in a running condition.

As previously said, design authority and technical assistance would be required from Airbus, and Rolls Royce at very least. As seen with the Vulcan, RR aren't in a position to overhaul what are very old engines. I imagine Airbus are of the same train of thought. They very likely do not have people with the skills for this anymore, or the specialist tooling, or the spares to do it. There is also the potential risk of something going wrong and liability if their parts fail.

Couple with that the Vulcan fleet were well over a hundred strong, Concorde only had around a dozen aircraft at retirement, so the spares pool would have been very small in comparison. Most spares were auctioned off, so everything would have to be re-manufactured.

There are no current pilots or engineers, no spares, no willingness from the OEMs, no aircraft that has been maintained in an Airworthy condition, no guarantee that the Aviation Authorities will authorise it (as I believe it would need to comply with COA rather than experimental PTF), and very likely no tooling for parts re-manufacture. Ownership, certainly of the UK airframes is with BA. The fact there was a large enough spares pool for the Vulcan and Marshalls and RR were able to provide support meant that The Vulcan project was viable.

One of the reasons I believe than Concorde was pulled out of service so quickly was that Air France wanted to curtail operations, and it was up to BA to pick up all the costs. I can't help feeling ending Concorde's support was also convenient for Airbus. Why would the OEM's want to employ people now on old technology and open up themselves to a whole lot of risk for something that is not part of their core business?

If they did, the costs would be so huge, no-one would be able to afford it for an airshow, and only a handful of people would ever be able to afford to fly on it. There would be no economies of scale just supporting one aircraft, BA couldn't justify continuing operations in 2003 with healthy passenger numbers and 5 aircraft, even though they wanted to continue for longer.

Post Reply