Investigation started on getting Concorde flying
Discussion
In a heritage capacity, that is. Still, be good news if the engines turn out to be in good nick 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8712806.st...
Bit cynical after the constant request for funds for XH558, mind.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8712806.st...
Bit cynical after the constant request for funds for XH558, mind.
Edited by Famous Graham on Saturday 29th May 16:45
There are spares, I know of 4 zero life engines for a start, and there are a few other frames that some things can be nicked from.
Most of what has been going on at the moment is a boroscope checking the engines, the next step is actually getting them fired up, then moving on to taxiing, RTF is difficult but not impossible, it doesn't need to go supersonic again, in fact if it does go back up in a heritage role, then it won't be allowed to go supersonic, the occasional burst at Mach 0.9 will be as much as it gets, so thats a help.
Just a shame that it have to be a French one, but then they have been keeping this airframe in a rather surprisingly good condition, it still has a lot of the fluids etc, the electric still work, and the nose/visor is still operational, plus it hasn't has drain holdes drilled in the bodywork like the British ones have.
For the record, I have been part of SCG for a long time
Most of what has been going on at the moment is a boroscope checking the engines, the next step is actually getting them fired up, then moving on to taxiing, RTF is difficult but not impossible, it doesn't need to go supersonic again, in fact if it does go back up in a heritage role, then it won't be allowed to go supersonic, the occasional burst at Mach 0.9 will be as much as it gets, so thats a help.
Just a shame that it have to be a French one, but then they have been keeping this airframe in a rather surprisingly good condition, it still has a lot of the fluids etc, the electric still work, and the nose/visor is still operational, plus it hasn't has drain holdes drilled in the bodywork like the British ones have.
For the record, I have been part of SCG for a long time
Edited by speedchick on Sunday 30th May 11:48
SCG and Concorde SST have been at opposing ends of the scale on the Concorde debate for years.
In fact at the end of Concorde operations I really wanted for Concorde to continue flying in a heritage role. I went to a Concorde SST meeting. It was then when experts who had spent years working on Concorde explained, that you began to realise the enormity and expense of flying this aircraft. I am lead to believe that BA retired it because Airbus wanted to put all the maintenance costs on to them.
SCG are seen as a bit of a joke amongst the aviation community to be honest (no offence intended) but bring them up on any number of aviation message boards and wait for the responses. I joined SCG just before Concorde was retired, but never really took much notice from then on. All they had managed to rustle up at that time was support from a former pilot, a south coast radio station and Lembit Opik if I remember correctly.
I have met a former engineer on Concorde, and am confident with what he and other people said on the subject at the time.
I don't believe that there are enough spares to operate one, and any parts stripped off an existing airframe would have to be completely overhauled/re-lifed anyway.
Theoretically all possible, but £15 million is not going to do it, and not by 2012. Airbus, Rolls Royce and other legacy manufacturers will all need to be on board aswell.
I'd be happy to be proved wrong, but IMHO (and many others) it is not going to happen.
The thing that I haven't heard after 7 years is:
1) Are Airbus willing to provide Design Authority or support the project?
2) Are Rolls Royce supporting the project?
3) Are legacy manufacturers on board?
4) Has a spares source been located? I thought BA were lending spares to AF near the end (wasn't a rudder lent or sold to them)??, and BA auctioned off anything that was Concorde related. Parts that weren't auctioned I thought went to G-BBDG at Brooklands for that restoration.
5) How do museums/AF and BA feel about having their aircraft robbed for spares?
6) How is this viewed by the CAA and other aviation bodies, particularly as I believe, it would not be allowed to fly in the UK on a permit to fly?
7) Are there any maintenance facilities/tooling still in existance?
These are all key things, running engines is one thing, overcoming all the hurdles above is another.
The Vulcan was a hugely expensive step into the unknown, and is proving very difficult to support, no major sponsor has been forthcoming and the enthusiast community is to a large extent bankrolling it. The Vulcan is a simple aircraft compared to Concorde.
In fact at the end of Concorde operations I really wanted for Concorde to continue flying in a heritage role. I went to a Concorde SST meeting. It was then when experts who had spent years working on Concorde explained, that you began to realise the enormity and expense of flying this aircraft. I am lead to believe that BA retired it because Airbus wanted to put all the maintenance costs on to them.
SCG are seen as a bit of a joke amongst the aviation community to be honest (no offence intended) but bring them up on any number of aviation message boards and wait for the responses. I joined SCG just before Concorde was retired, but never really took much notice from then on. All they had managed to rustle up at that time was support from a former pilot, a south coast radio station and Lembit Opik if I remember correctly.
I have met a former engineer on Concorde, and am confident with what he and other people said on the subject at the time.
I don't believe that there are enough spares to operate one, and any parts stripped off an existing airframe would have to be completely overhauled/re-lifed anyway.
Theoretically all possible, but £15 million is not going to do it, and not by 2012. Airbus, Rolls Royce and other legacy manufacturers will all need to be on board aswell.
I'd be happy to be proved wrong, but IMHO (and many others) it is not going to happen.
The thing that I haven't heard after 7 years is:
1) Are Airbus willing to provide Design Authority or support the project?
2) Are Rolls Royce supporting the project?
3) Are legacy manufacturers on board?
4) Has a spares source been located? I thought BA were lending spares to AF near the end (wasn't a rudder lent or sold to them)??, and BA auctioned off anything that was Concorde related. Parts that weren't auctioned I thought went to G-BBDG at Brooklands for that restoration.
5) How do museums/AF and BA feel about having their aircraft robbed for spares?
6) How is this viewed by the CAA and other aviation bodies, particularly as I believe, it would not be allowed to fly in the UK on a permit to fly?
7) Are there any maintenance facilities/tooling still in existance?
These are all key things, running engines is one thing, overcoming all the hurdles above is another.
The Vulcan was a hugely expensive step into the unknown, and is proving very difficult to support, no major sponsor has been forthcoming and the enthusiast community is to a large extent bankrolling it. The Vulcan is a simple aircraft compared to Concorde.
mybrainhurts said:
I thought some organisation or other had removed and destroyed some equipment to make sure it never flew again...??
BA certainley removed quite a bit of specialist kit from the BA aircraft that are 'on loan' rendering them unserviceable.....but I'm not sure about BOAF, given it's more specialist location at Filton?Nice thought but no chance without manufacturer support. Taxiing condition maybe but flying condition, no chance. Besides, BA wouldn't let it fly in their livery unless they had absolute (and if there's any doubt, I mean ABSOLUTE) control. I have no doubt Air France would be similar.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff