Concorde to fly again ?

[V8 Fettler]

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

I doubt if Lockheed or similar would need Airbus SST expertise to resurrect Concorde.

Nothing is impossible (apparently)... but don't underestimate how hard it is to back-engineer the design, manufacture and operation of something as complex as Concorde without any access to the original design intent.

Could Lockheed design something like Concorde from scratch? No doubt. Could Lockheed write all the necessary paperwork for something they didn't design? Much more sketchy....

Money being the key issue.

Like I said, nothing is impossible - but we're in the billions here, not millions.

I doubt if it's possible to currently achieve anything close to cost certainty for return to flight. Feasibility study (including intrusive inspections and tests) would be a good start. GBP10m?

What criteria are you going to test and inspect against? You borescope something and find corrosion or a crack or a bit of fretting - what next? Does it need to be fixed or not? Who's going to work up the repair scheme for a part of an unknown material subjected to an unknown duty?

You're jumping too far ahead. Client's requirements -> concept -> schematic design -> detailed design. We're not at stage one yet.

[eccles]

Dr Jekyll said:

Mave said:

What criteria are you going to test and inspect against? You borescope something and find corrosion or a crack or a bit of fretting - what next? Does it need to be fixed or not? Who's going to work up the repair scheme for a part of an unknown material subjected to an unknown duty?

Some of the Vulcan people reckon they do have the equipment and expertise to overhaul and check one of their engines even if they aren't officially qualified to do it.

But parts and experts for Vulcan engines were presumably far more common than for Concorde engines.

Yes, you need the parts, but you don't have to be an 'expert' to work on the engines, it's just an engine! Much the same with the aircraft itself, it's just an aircraft if you've a set of manuals to work to and it's your trade.

[anonymous-user]

It is just the CAA requiring the original manufacturers (or legacy companies) be on board if you are flying an aircraft in the complex category.

[eccles]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That wasn't the case with the Vulcan

[anonymous-user]

eccles said:

That wasn't the case with the Vulcan

They have Rolls Royce providing technical assistance, and I think Marshalls for the airframe.

It is the withdrawal of technical support, (as the engines and airframe reach the end of their servicable lives) which is grounding the Vulcan this year.

There was talk in 2003 of the Design Authority for Concorde being transferred to Qinetiq, but whether that was just a rumour or whether it was considered an option I don't know.

[eccles]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

MA weren't an original manufacturer or a legacy company of one....

[anonymous-user]

No you are right, MA weren't. A quick check and the three technical authorities for the Vulcan were Rolls Royce, BAe systems and Marshalls (I imagine to actually undertake the work).

Now as I understand it, technical authority could be transferred to another company, however BAe Systems, Rolls Royce etc would need to release all technical data and enter into an agreement with the new authority.

This is something that they were not in a position to enter in to, so really the Technical Authority hangs with the original manufacturers, unless they ever decide to release the technical data.

[nessiemac]

eccles said:

Yes, you need the parts, but you don't have to be an 'expert' to work on the engines, it's just an engine! Much the same with the aircraft itself, it's just an aircraft if you've a set of manuals to work to and it's your trade.

You don't have to be an 'expert' to work on the engines or airframe but you do have to have the correct and in date licences to work them. Which at least as far as BA is concerned there are no engineers that have a current licence and authorisation to maintain Concorde. You can't just pick up a manual and away you go even if it's your trade!

So who's going to work it?

Edited by nessiemac on Thursday 24th September 22:19

[williamp]

lufbramatt said:

I've got a compressor blade from an Olympus on my desk at work, any spares stores have long been split up.

Right! Its a start. Anyone got anything else we can use? I might have some old kerosene in the garage we could use. How far will a gallon get us?

[eccles]

nessiemac said:

eccles said:

Yes, you need the parts, but you don't have to be an 'expert' to work on the engines, it's just an engine! Much the same with the aircraft itself, it's just an aircraft if you've a set of manuals to work to and it's your trade.

You don't have to be an 'expert' to work on the engines or airframe but you do have to have the correct and in date licences to work them. Which at least as far as BA is concerned there are no engineers that have a current licence and authorisation to maintain Concorde. You can't just pick up a manual and away you go even if it's your trade!

So who's going to work it?

Edited by nessiemac on Thursday 24th September 22:19

And you think there were current guys to work on the Vulcan?
Obviously it all depends on what Concorde is used for, but if it's just for demonstration flights like the Vulcan it's easy enough to be legal to work the aircraft.

[Mave]

Dr Jekyll said:

Some of the Vulcan people reckon they do have the equipment and expertise to overhaul and check one of their engines even if they aren't officially qualified to do it.

And in the history of 558 did they actually overhaul and write accompanying lifing statements?

[Mave]

V8 Fettler said:

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

Mave said:

V8 Fettler said:

I doubt if Lockheed or similar would need Airbus SST expertise to resurrect Concorde.

Nothing is impossible (apparently)... but don't underestimate how hard it is to back-engineer the design, manufacture and operation of something as complex as Concorde without any access to the original design intent.

Could Lockheed design something like Concorde from scratch? No doubt. Could Lockheed write all the necessary paperwork for something they didn't design? Much more sketchy....

Money being the key issue.

Like I said, nothing is impossible - but we're in the billions here, not millions.

I doubt if it's possible to currently achieve anything close to cost certainty for return to flight. Feasibility study (including intrusive inspections and tests) would be a good start. GBP10m?

What criteria are you going to test and inspect against? You borescope something and find corrosion or a crack or a bit of fretting - what next? Does it need to be fixed or not? Who's going to work up the repair scheme for a part of an unknown material subjected to an unknown duty?

You're jumping too far ahead. Client's requirements -> concept -> schematic design -> detailed design. We're not at stage one yet.

You can take things one step at a time if you like but it doesn't change the end position. If I tell you I've got £500 to buy a new car, it doesn't matter that I haven't set out my requirements or studied the options. I'm not going to get a new car for £500. Similarly Lockheed aren't going to back engineer Concorde for £100M.

[Dr Jekyll]

Mave said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Some of the Vulcan people reckon they do have the equipment and expertise to overhaul and check one of their engines even if they aren't officially qualified to do it.

And in the history of 558 did they actually overhaul and write accompanying lifing statements?

Certainly not while it was a civilian aircraft. What work any of them might have done on 558 when it was still RAF is an interesting question.

[Halmyre]

williamp said:

lufbramatt said:

I've got a compressor blade from an Olympus on my desk at work, any spares stores have long been split up.

Right! Its a start. Anyone got anything else we can use? I might have some old kerosene in the garage we could use. How far will a gallon get us?

I know a chap who got some Concorde champagne flutes on ebay, I'll give him a call.

[anonymous-user]

Halmyre said:

williamp said:

lufbramatt said:

I've got a compressor blade from an Olympus on my desk at work, any spares stores have long been split up.

Right! Its a start. Anyone got anything else we can use? I might have some old kerosene in the garage we could use. How far will a gallon get us?

I know a chap who got some Concorde champagne flutes on ebay, I'll give him a call.

I know an engineer a first officer and an ex hostie who all worked on Concorde.

[JuniorD]

el stovey said:

Halmyre said:

williamp said:

lufbramatt said:

I've got a compressor blade from an Olympus on my desk at work, any spares stores have long been split up.

Right! Its a start. Anyone got anything else we can use? I might have some old kerosene in the garage we could use. How far will a gallon get us?

I know a chap who got some Concorde champagne flutes on ebay, I'll give him a call.

I know an engineer a first officer and an ex hostie who all worked on Concorde.

Me too. Plus I know a guy whose dad was a Captain on Concorde. Plus Plus I worked on Concorde myself

[anonymous-user]

JuniorD said:

el stovey said:

Halmyre said:

williamp said:

lufbramatt said:

I've got a compressor blade from an Olympus on my desk at work, any spares stores have long been split up.

Right! Its a start. Anyone got anything else we can use? I might have some old kerosene in the garage we could use. How far will a gallon get us?

I know a chap who got some Concorde champagne flutes on ebay, I'll give him a call.

I know an engineer a first officer and an ex hostie who all worked on Concorde.

Me too. Plus I know a guy whose dad was a Captain on Concorde. Plus Plus I worked on Concorde myself

Excellent. We're nearly there. Now we just need manufacturer support for the engines and airframe, an aircraft and some funds to get things started.

[JuniorD]

At the very least I hope the Daily Mail get wind of this plan and will run a story on the rival Concorde revival projects.
To assist, perhaps we should declare the size and value of our houses?

[Dr Jekyll]

Why not put the £120 million into cloning a Mammoth? Almost as exciting as bringing Concorde back and verging on the plausible.

[Simpo Two]

Dr Jekyll said:

Why not put the £120 million into cloning a Mammoth? Almost as exciting as bringing Concorde back and verging on the plausible.

Ah but then the ethical bleaters like Dr Justin Thingy will be wheeled out... and the hippies will whine about GM.