Conkordski Crash

Author
Discussion

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Thursday 24th November 2016
quotequote all
Interesting short documentary from Radio 4

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b083ltrs#play

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Tuesday 29th November 2016
quotequote all
I think you will find, as John Farley said in the programme, there was very little in common between the Tu-144 and Concorde - apart from the common goal of building a supersonic airliner.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 30th November 2016
quotequote all
Just because the "man in the street" couldn't tell them apart does not mean they were the same - or even similar.

The wing used on Concorde is WAY more sophisticated than the double cranked delta used on the Tu-144. In fact, the Russians knew very little about how Concorde used the ogival wing to generate a vortex at slow speed to aid landing and take of.

The original Tu-144 design was so lacking they had to install small retractable foreplanes just behind the cockpit to try and get some control at slow speeds.

They were very, very different aeroplanes.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 30th November 2016
quotequote all
It is thought that they did - but they didn't get any useful information. Indeed, they were fed duff data on occasion just in case.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 30th November 2016
quotequote all
I think they had serious stability problems with the 144 which is why everything seems a lot bigger - wings, tail etc. The 144 also has flaps - which Concorde did not. Again, it seems slow speed handling was a big problem for them.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 30th November 2016
quotequote all
Looks like a PHer's heaven.

Definitely must go.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 30th November 2016
quotequote all
Inspired by seeing pictures of the two supersonic airliners mounted side by side, a couple of years ago I bought these two models -





I will build them some day.


Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Tuesday 6th December 2016
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
There was a TV spy drama many years ago called 'Cold Warrior' - in one episode someone made a throwaway comment about giving the Russians fake documents, which then led to the Tu-144 crash.
I don't think there has ever been a claim that the crash was anything to do with false information "leaked" to the Tupolev design bureau. The shortcomings of the 144 were mostly down to the fact that Tupolev just hadn't got sufficient knowledge to build a working SST.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 7th December 2016
quotequote all
Nope - it wasn't a knock off. It was all their own work.

If it had been a "knock off" it might have worked better.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Wednesday 7th December 2016
quotequote all
That is the best and most likely explanation. The French never acknowledged it because they didn't want to admit that they had an aeroplane in the air at the same time.

It's completely believeable because in 1988, the year the first MiG 29s came to Farnborough, the day they arrived, I spotted a Canberra flying high above Farnborough circling the airfield. I found out later that it was taking infra red images of the MiGs as they landed and taxied to their parking spots.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Thursday 8th December 2016
quotequote all
It's not illegal in ALL circumstances.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Saturday 10th December 2016
quotequote all
No need to apologise. I don't mind derailments if the content is interesting.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Saturday 10th December 2016
quotequote all
Not with the Daimler Benz powered 109s as they were fitted with a fuel injection system which worked no matter what way up the engine was.

Another aircraft which featured an upside down version of an engine was the Tiger Moth - which had evolved out of the earlier DH60 Moth family.






Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Saturday 10th December 2016
quotequote all
I'd always score an experienced test pilot with an opinion over some person on the internet.

Plus I've heard the same view from many other aviation commentators over the decades.

And as I keep saying, when you look at the two designs in any detail you will see that they have very little in common where it really matters.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

122,042 posts

265 months

Sunday 11th December 2016
quotequote all
Now that IS what I call a thread deviation (not that I'm complaining, mind).