The Concorde That Lost Its Rudder | The Super Sonic Breakup | Concorde 102
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 พ.ค. 2020
- Disclaimer: All videos are used for representational purposes only and the content of the narration do not in any way reflect on any entities shown in the video.
Donations are appreciated but never expected: miniaircrashinvestigation@gmail.com (Paypal) Thank You So Much To u/adawhy and u/gboad for your help with the footage!
All Photos Sourced From Wikipedia and or the Final Report, Used under creative commons
This is the story of Concorde 102. We had it.For about 26 years we had a passenger plane that shattered the sound barrier. No longer was the supersonic realm only for the military jets. The general flying public was now able to zoom past the sound barrier. Albeit the rich and famous flying public. The concorde was revolutionary, the plane was built in the 1970s but to this day it looks like something straight out of the future.
The last concorde ever built, the concorde with the tail number G-BOAF was chartered to fly 100 people around the world visiting cities like new york london, sydney christchurch honolulu oakland and the list goes on.On the 12th of august at about 1 pm local time the plane lifted off from christchurch for sydney. The climb was uneventful, the copilot was the one at the controls.
The plane departed Christchurch and then it climbed to about 28000 feet. It maintained 28000 feet till it entered the supersonic corridor that was about 100 NM west of christchurch. The Concorde had special supersonic corridors that it had to use to minimise the effects of the sonic boom. Once in these supersonic corridors the concorde was allowed to stretch its legs.
The plane in question entered the corridor at about .95 mach or about 600 knots. Once in the corridor the plane started its climb to its cruising altitude of about 57000 feet.
The concorde turned on her afterburners and she gained speed, they were aiming to hit mach 2 or 1200 knots. Can we take a moment to appreciate the insanity of that sentence? The concorde, a passenger plane, was capable of hitting 1200 knots that is just insane.
As they pushed through mach 1.7 the afterburners were turned off and a thud was heard. The thud felt like a surge or a bird strike. Their cockpit instrumentation showed nothing was out of the ordinary. The plane even felt normal to fly. Thinking that they just had the surge the captain elected to fly onto sydney. Returning to christchurch would mean that they had to drop out of supersonic speeds and turn back and stay subsonic till they reached christchurch. It was easier to get to Sydney and Sydney had better maintenance facilities.
So they pushed onto Sydney as they approached Sydney, they had to slow down and as they passed through 1.3 Mach and 40000 feet the whole plane began to vibrate. Something was indeed wrong with the plane. The vibration was a lot worse in the back of the plane. They turned off engine number 4 to see if it had any effect on the vibrations. it didn't. They idled all four engines to slow down and the plane slipped below mach 1. But this made no difference,
The vibrations continued as the plane passed throught 20000 feet.
As the plane approached sydney they were cleared in for an ILS approach onto runway 34 and at 2:34 pm the plane made a safe landing, on the ground the controllers in the tower saw what had happened, the plane was missing a significant chunk of its upper rudder. The rudder had disintegrated over the ocean.
But first let's talk a bit about the rudders, rudders help control the Yaw of the plane. Rudders usually are made with a honeycomb structure in the core and then it is layered with other - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![fellow fellow - Proud [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9uZF7BlUQPE/mqdefault.jpg)
My grandfather was on this round-the-world flight, he was sitting in the back of the plane with the mechanics when the thud noise occurred. Needless to say the mechanics had a “surprised” look on their faces, they knew something abnormal occurred, but no one knew what it was until they landed. As I recall they were grounded for days until new parts were flown in & installed for the flight to continue. Thank you for this video. 🙏
I was onboard this flight.We(the passengers) were not informed at all about this or any problems whatsoever.The vibration you speak of was not noticeable in the cabin and we knew nothing about it.Also,it was 34L we landed on and whilst haveing a coffee in the lounge afterwards I became aware of a problem.Anyway thanks for the uploads.
Paul Garrett There’s a good reason that you weren’t told about it - because the pilots didn’t know that they’d lost a big part of the rudder. Whilst they knew there was an issue, they had no idea what it was.
Extremely lucky Id say....
@@FutureSystem738 According to Concorde pilots, the rudder was rarely used, even during crosswing landings, due to the design of the wing, so generally wasn't needed during flight ops.
Aeronaut Sounds believeable- very different to us in “slow” jets, like the 747 🤣. Sometimes for a cross wind landing (and takeoff) we need a big boot full of rudder, and that is of course with all engines running.
@@FutureSystem738 Concorde generally landed and took off about 100kts faster than a 747, so that's probably also a factor, but I know she was extremely stable durinf crosswind landings.
Concorde was NOT "An answer to the TU-144". The TU-144 was the answer to Concorde. The development proposals and research of Concorde had been ongoing for 6 or 7 years before the TU-144 had even been conceived. Concorde may not have been the first to fly, but she was designed, built and tested properly, whereas the TU-144 was a bodged design, rushed into production and service with many of her parts (the wing for example) built from stolen blueprints which were "planted" by the British and French, intentionally giving the Russians bad and flawed designs under the guise of them actually being what was being built for Concorde. TU-144 was a flying deathtrap, one of the reasons it was retired and only flew a handful of times.
Thank you i did not know that.i t does not fly at all anymore?
agreed check out the paris tu-144 disaster. long story short the 144 maneuvered to avoid a french mirage that wasn’t supposed to be there and broke up under the stress of the maneuver (or at least thats what i remember, its been a while)
Janice De Lorenzo i think there was one being used as a test aircraft but idk if its still flying
@@janicedelorenzo4924 The TU-144 was taken out of service after only a few months. It only operated from Moscow to Khazakhstan, which is not what it was designed to do. The USSR kept things very secret, especially back then so who knows what problems it had? I believe NASA brought one out of retirement for some test flights more recently but I cannot remember when.
@@janicedelorenzo4924 if you are asking about the TU-144 then no , it was retired very early
Your history is inverted -- the Tu-144 was the Soviets' answer to the Concorde, not the reverse!
Correct. The Tu-144 was mainly developed using stolen Concorde blueprints, but these were incomplete and although the Soviets made huge efforts to get off the ground first, they failed to make the Tu-144 a decent aircraft. I remember my late grandfather telling me about one of his flights with the Tu-144 in the '70s: the noise and the vibration were almost unbearable and he was literally scared for most of the flight.
@@TTFerdinand a
,
@@TTFerdinand The Russians say the Concorde was a poor copy of the Tu-44 that is why it had so many unreported faults...do you think it was Grounded just because of one Big crash?
@@TheMuzikall The Concorde was grounded because of the crash and later resumed flying, but was finally retired because it was too expensive to operate. For every manhour they put into the maintenance of normal aircraft, the Concorde required 5. And there were only a few of those flying so manufacturing the spare parts and keeping Concorde-specialised maintenance staff was really expensive, that combined with rising fuel costs, low fuel efficiency and growing difficulties booking full flights meant that Concorde was constantly losing money for the two airlines that operated it.
I was driving by Dulles Airport IAD outside Washington one day in the late 1980s and the AirFrance Concorde buzzed my car on takeoff. I thought I had been aerosolized! It was great, something I'll never forget. I have a friend whose wealthy mother was being dialyzed in DC and wanted to go to her house in France. So she got her morning treatment in Washington, buzzed Concorde over to Paris and had her afternoon treatment there. Seamlessly!
Sorry about the background noise, Since im in quarantine I had to record this from my bedroom
no noise whatsoever as far as I am concerned. a beautiful and well done recording...
That's fine its great feel better.
I have been fortunate enough to fly in that very aircraft when it was in service, in the 1980's when it was on a private charter visit to Teesside Airport. A truly remarkable aircraft.
I wish I had had the $39,000 air fare. William F. Buckley Jr put together the around the world trip.
It's fantastic, I'm loving the video, very nicely done. Thank you!!
You said "the Concorde was the answer to the Soviets TU-144". Didn't you know that the TU144 was a copy of the Concorde? Soviet espionage was responsible for stealing the design for the British/French Concorde.
It's almost like if he includes errors in every video to generate comments
in addition to the comments above the Russians had to go one better and make the Concordski larger, creating all sorts of problems for themselves such as needing Canards, to take off and land there was no call for its services and in the end was used for carrying mail it was a very ugly aircraft remembered mainly for the Paris air show disaster, oh those Russians
well the tu 144 had its first flight in december 1968 and the concorde had its first flight in march 1969. So technically the tu 144 was first.
The engineers of tupolev and Aérospatiale met often and shared results of their work with each other, therefore the planes look quite similar(and its a pretty good the shape to build a passenger aircraft made for mach 2, its the same reason most airliners today look fairly similar -> its the best design for the task ). But there are some design decisions that are quite differnt on both planes, like the landing gear, the placement of the engines(and the engines itself) and a differnt cooling system. The concode had a slightly more sophisticated wing , so they didnt need the cancards like the tupolev did. There are even more differences in design, but the "Soviet espionage was responsible for stealing the design for the British/French Concorde" is a modern myth spread through the novel "skycatcher".
You're so funny, karen
@@TheKitMurkit As he says himself, yell at him and it helps the algorithm😀 I enjoy watching these videos.
Great once again ❤️ what a sad loss the Concord was - my childhood home lay under the flight path of Heathrow Airport and I used to see and hear this wonderful aircraft regularly- great animation with the old liveries too
how is it to live near an airport's flight path? Does one get used to it?
@@yuriythebest absolutely you do I have lived right under the planes on low approach in to airports in my years working overseas it’s amazing how the noise disappears into the background very quickly……
@@vjfeefeecat586
True enough, you do get used to it. Living in the Midlands as the crow flies several large airports are close by and you do get used to hearing them ascending and descending.
I never knowingly saw a Concorde though, wish I had!
I really appreciate how the videos always have subtitles, just as someone who has a hard time picking out words its really nice to have accurate subtitles if I'm listening somewhere loud
And THAT is the story of Concord 102
And that is the story of the Concord 102
LMFAO
I remember this flight and it was actually widely reported at the time as anything to do with Concorde was in the UK because she was the darling of the nation, your videos are very informative but you must give the subjects you cover the respect they deserve….the TU-144 was nothing but a russian knock off riddled with problems because the British and French VERY successfully fed them false designs in one of the best examples of counter espionage in the Cold War years.
That flight was 12th April 1989, not 12th August. When they lost the rudder, they felt a thud around M1.7. The vibrations started to appear when they throttled back as they approached Sydney at M1.3. The vibrations vanished again but re-appeared intermittently during the descent and slow down. The crew never realized that a section of the rudder was gone. Captain Dave Leney was interviewed shortly after the landing.
I am so sorry about getting the date wrong! Thank you for bringing that to my attention
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation "There was some vibrations at the controls but it didn't affect them at all" Said by Captain Dave Leney, with a rye smile on his face 😁
Excellent video btw 👍👍
The most magnificent machine that ever flew. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
No aircraft ever built has not had some faults.
A350. I haven’t heard any incidents with it.
Owen Klein it will. Give it time
skooter2020B/2081B idk man. It’s been 5 years and nothing noticeable has happened. It usually wouldn’t take that long for a defect to be noticed.
@@owenklein1917 The incident in the article occurred in 1989; 10 years after this particular airframe was built & 20 years after the type first flew & the fact that it continued with its flight in safety due to design safeguards should be acknowledged. I would also like to hope that no major flaws are ever discovered with the A350 but all aircraft are built to a budget so some issues are usually accepted.
I don’t think a flaw will ever be found in the A350. It is kind of surprising that the A350 is so safe. The production of the aircraft was rushed because airbus needed a competitor for the 787. At first, airbus was going to make a aircraft that was somewhat based off the A330. As they were developing the new aircraft, they gave up as not much airlines were interested. They were back to the drawing board but were in a rush. That’s when they started the development of the A350. It didn’t take long and the aircraft was flying soon after. Airbus still had the new aircraft that was based off the A330. Airbus decided to go back to the development of that aircraft but decided not to market it as a new jet series. That’s when the A330 NEO was born. Then more shit happens I guess. I just explained all of that for no reason.
I believe Concorde first flew in April 1969.
So, it was in fact designed in the 60s.
That's true First flight 2 March 1969. I was fortunate enough at age 15 to see the first Concorde prototype at Orly Airfield in Paris on 12 July 1969. It was just sitting outside on the tarmac. Don't know why it wasn't in a hangar somewhere, but it wasn't & I got a photo.
Actually designed in the 50s and fettled in the 60s
@@paula200 The delta wing was possibly inspred by the Vulcan bomber
@@MrTarmonbarry The delta wing design was actually patented in 1867! Research carried out by Barnes Wallis in the 50s and 60s contributed largely to the design of Concorde.
local bod true but if I remember right the official flight was in 1973 my birth year however I do know it entered service in 1976 so there may have been test flights before it’s official flight, also the Russian concorde-isk (a rip-off copy) was first to fly and first to entered service just before the first ever flight of the French/British concorde (1969).
I have been fortunate enough to fly in that very aircraft when it was in service, in the 1980's when it was on a private charter visit to Teesside Airport. A truly remarkable machine.
my dude you are pumpin out these plane vids the algorithim is lovin it you gonna get a lot of growth
Yup, i have a lot of free time on my hands right now and i thought why not spend that time creatively
To fly on Concord was on my bucket list 😢. I remember the sonic booms as a child in the 60's in Chicago. I always asked my parents what that loud noise was and they told me a "sonic boom". But I didnt understand what a sonic boom was!
The Concorde is one of the most interesting airplanes in history. Did you know it cost over $10,000 for a ticket?
When I was a boy in the 1980’s and my parents went on vacation, I remember asking them if they took the Concorde, haha. To me it was a possibility but I had no clue it was an extreme luxury ticket only.
And then for 10 grand, you only got a small, cramped seat squished with the person next to you.
Because this thing is sort of like a gigantic fighter jet!
There was a TV screen on the front everyone could see, that would display the Mach number and applause would break out when it surpassed Mach 1.
There are some great videos on the Concorde on TH-cam, like 30 or 60 minute TV broadcast productions.
It’s really hard to believe that it even existed, much less the fact it was 100% safe and successful - aside from some sharp debris left on the runway from another airplane which ultimately doomed it, not even the Concorde’s fault. But it was a money loser and aging technology so the writing was on the wall anyhow.
Your research is very thorough. I'm a composite manufacturing engineer and I am familiar with those problems. Truth is, sandwich structures are very structurally efficient but quality assurance is difficult and water often finds a way in, in the long run. Airbus had the same kind of rudder problems with water ingressing through fasteners on the A320.
Fantastic job. Really great info and the animation is a HUGE help! Thanks!
The honeycomb core of composite construction airfoils provides very little strength. Due to the way materials behave when flexed, the outer sections take almost all of the loading while the center section takes almost none. The honeycomb core serves to, effectively, keep the entire construct as a single piece by transferring load and not much else.
Also, the water ingress corrosion makes little sense. If the skin was aluminum it wouldn't have mattered too much due to the tendency of aluminum to form an oxide skin, preventing further corrosion, the weakening adhesive also makes little sense as it is extremely unlikely that a water soluble adhesive was used.
I would think it much more likely that, rather than weakening the adhesive or causing corrosion, the trapped water froze and expanded. With a little water that would not be an issue, but once a honeycomb cell filled with water, when it froze the expansion would rupture the cell, allowing more cells to fill with water and freeze, leading to more ruptured cells, until the failure occurred.
Aluminum corrodes when continuously submerged in water. The oxide layer which forms when exposed to air, simply floats off into the water. Believe me, I learned all about this after paying $10k to replace an aluminum fuel tank on my boat. If the water can evaporate, it's generally not a problem for aluminum. But if the water gets into an enclosed place where evaporation is retarded (like inside a honeycomb cell), and it stays on the aluminum for a long time, the aluminum will corrode. My fuel tank had pinprick corrosion holes on sides of the tank which were adjacent to fiberglass and so experienced little/no air circulation. Moisture which got in there stayed there for an extended period of time, slowly corroding the aluminum.
As a child I remember this as I lived in Christchurch and had been out to the airport to see it. It made the news here.
I remember it being on the news! There was another incident at Christchurch airport where a Concorde got hit by a moveable stair on the ground.
Personal story... In 1982, the first 747 landed on our local airport's new runway that went along with becoming "international" and a Presidential renaming. In the lead up to this, when seeking funding, etc., it was decided to make the runway a little😏 longer to accommodate the Concorde. Which made the meetings, protests, campaigns very dramatic in the late 70s. But I was so excited! I knew, absolutely KNEW, the Concorde was coming and that someday I would fly on it! Well, it never came and the opportunity is long past. But to a rural kid watching that first 747 take off from the unofficial viewing area next to a cornfield, I could see the sleek body and hear the boom. Thanks for a walk down nostalgia lane. Be well and stay safe! 🖖🐢👣
Ive been on Concorde 002 a few times. Its based at Yeovil Air Museum in UK. Great place to visit.
I saw that Concorde in the hangar in Sydney- I was walking across the tarmac and detoured to see the plane, still looking beautiful despite missing much of the rudder.
Tarmac?
@@JSMEsq material used for surfacing roads and runways etc, basically another word for asphalt. Only realised now is a British and Aussie word
@@jude_the_apostle Well there you go, learn something new every day 😀
I was not aware that it’s a word that many people wouldn’t recognise.
Very nice job detailing this incident! Please keep making videos! Thank you!
Look how far you've come. It is amazing how much better your mic, talking and everything around it have become in just two years.
amazing that I never heard of this! wow...
the concord did have quite a few close shaves with tragedy, but... it was the most majestic and awesome of planes. it is just strange to think that the space age is now talked of as something in the past!!!
I saw this aircraft on approach to Sydney Airport, it flew directly over my daughters house. In fact, the Air Traffic Controllers noticed part of the rudder was missing while the aircraft was on its approach and notified the crew. The accident report established that the Concorde sat at Christchurch for a number of days, during which the rudder had been allowed to move in the wind, this was identified as one of the causative factors, the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the compromised rudder.
I've been inside G-BOAF twice, both on tours. She is preserved at Bristol's now-closed Filton airport. Great stuff.
Glad to know that the icons of the Aviation world are being well preserved
I live near this airfield!
You have a perfect narrator's voice. Crisp clear and concise.... some of your Aviation stories I've never heard of but they definitely happened.. ....So You sir have done your homework and it shows. 👍
Hey Christian so I read a Comment from you on my Saudia 163 video asking why they didn't open the doors and let oxygen in while they waited for the captain to give them the all clear to evacuate. Well as it turns out in that situation opening the doors and waiting inside would also have been catastrophic. You see when the doors are opened the cabin fills up with oxygen from outside and this can lead to a flash fire. This is exactly what happened with air Canada flight 797 if I'm not wrong
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation oh wow😲... Didnt think of that one. That accident was especially sad because they actually made it to the ground safely and still everyone died.. it just begs the question why didn't the captain apply full brakes so to stop the plane quicker, kill the engines ASAP so they could open the doors😞
@@christainmarks106 That thing about not opening the door also aplies to your home , if there is smoke coming under a closed door leave it closed , just think of the three things that make a fire and oxygene is one of the vital ingrediants , no oxygene = no fire
Christain Marks, You are high! This narrator sounds like he has a mouth full of peanut butter!
Nice work here. Great research and, again, a thorough technical explanation. Thanks.
Flying Concord is something you just don't forget. Just amazing! And the crew was the definition of professional. Absolutely first class.
Thank you for another great and fascinating lesson.
Wow, I haven't heard about this one. Thanks for the video.
That’s what this channel is all about. Discussing old and forgotten incidents
As usual, great, simple analysis!
Very interesting. Good work as usual.
LOved it thanks, hope to see more concorde shows. Douglas
I actually live close to the Sinsheim Technology Museum in germany, which is the only Museum in the world that has both supersonic aircrafts, the Concorde and the Tupolev TU-144 on Display. If you visit them back to back its pretty obvious that the Concorde wasnt an answer to the tupolev since the tupolev was just a copy of the concorde.
*Both commercial/passenger supersonic planes
Hello Barcode Guy: The plural of aircraft is NOT aircrafts. It's aircraft. (One aircraft, two aircraft, three aircraft ... )
This is great! Very informative
Thank you!
I miss the concord… I never was around for it but I think coming up we may see new competitions soon. High atmosphere planes don’t have to worry as much about the sonic boom due to there being less air. I also want to see planes with afterburners again! That just looks awesome.
Thanks for using my Livery :) and our PRODUCT :)
I never knew this story. But that's par for your channel. Great Job
Still the most beautiful plane ever built.
3:45 Looks like Concorde set the parking lot on fire just before landing
Young me so LOVES Concord!
Old me so LOVES You young man!
Thank you so much!:-) 🖖
Great vlog as always!
RIP CONCORDE
Thanks for sharing. 😉👌🏼
My father was involved in the analysis of this incident. Up front, it last half its rudder and the aircraft was completely controllable. The actual failure was a result of poor maintenance - a repair solvent had weakened the skin bonding. The aircraft was never in any danger and because the repair was localized, the other half of the rudder was in no danger. In reality, Concorde was quite remarkable. Most airframes rated for supersonic flight enjoy relatively short lifespans or require expensive, periodic, strip-downs. Not Concorde. Given the materials limitations of the era, the aircraft was an incredible achievement. Even the tire issue, responsible for the only Concorde crash, was a recognized problem. The original specifications called for tires that could withstand disintegration at the high speeds needed for takeoff and landing. However with the limited number of aircraft ordered, the plans for more resilient tires... was binned.
8:22 Yeah, we heard you the first time ;P
I had to double check and make sure I didn’t accidentally rewind 10 seconds haha
I remember the sensation well, and I must concede, the incident has on occasions crossed my mind since. Hopefully, the well-heeled passengers happily endured extended time in Sydney while their plane undertook major repairs. My thought at the time was, what a magnificent aircraft: to incur a serious malfunction yet survive the ordeal and land everyone safely; a tribute to its ground-breaking design. A special time I recall, when technology stood at the precipice of major transformation - which sadly, like most miracles of genius caused even Concorde in becoming victim to the relentless onset of obsoletion. However, Concord's astounding engineering and undeniable beauty continues to profoundly fire my once more vibrant - and younger imagination. 🇦🇺💐🇬🇧
The design was not exactly ground breaking of it allowed the progression of undetectable corrosion (that is a common issue with honeycomb structures such as rotor blades -where a failure is invariably fatal). // The passengers had to wait until a replacement part rudder was flown out from the UK. //The rudder mechanical design was clearly very conservative. Dual actuators and dual rudder sections which clearly were independent so one could be decoupled in case of damage or a jam . I wonder if that was forced on the designers by safety regulators or if it was a natural outcome of the design process.
Some of those well-heeled passengers probably took in a performance at the Sydney opera house, but I'm sure there's other things to do there as well. Maybe they rented a huge yacht together.
I visited this aircraft at NZCH on its tour, the wind was banging the rudder from side to side, there were no gustlucks in place and the plane could have been faced into the southerly storm.things could have turned out much worse.The structure may have already been compromised, this was the final straw
What an amazing machine
Well, giving the fact the Concorde really burned a lot of fuel with its afterburners, I think a lot of younger people wouldn't find it "cool" if it still was around. And well, it only was for the super rich or the famous, like Phil Collins. I grew up near a tiny airfield in Belgium, and in the mid 1980's, they managed to get a number of real eyecatchers flying several times over it during its yearly air meeting. One of them was the C 5 Galaxy, the other big name was the Concorde. So it flew right across my parents home, making terrible noise while reversing the thrust. By the way, at about 30 miles from where I grew up there was the Belgian Air Force base Kleine Brogel. That's why I also once saw another really impressive "big bird" over my parent's home, the English Avro Vulcan....
Vulcans were and still are beautiful
I began work in aerospace as a draughtsman, and managed to get just one little bit of Concorde experience - drawing up an air-bleed pipe anti-rattle strap for one of the engines. I used to walk past (or under) them when they were in for service at Filton. Always impressive...
This might well b the most beautiful aircraft we might ever see. Quintessential
Video is getting better
Excellent video
awesome use of flight sim for footage. really helps out
Yes, I’ve almost forgotten that the Concorde ever existed. Well, except the ridiculously hilarious episode of Absolutely Fabulous where Edina and Patsy fly to New York to get a door handle. It’s like it’s a mythical plane now. Kind of like our Canadian Avro Arrow.
Great work as always 👏
😃 such a good channel!
G'Kar said it best: "go back to your own time: the future isn't what it used to be"
thanks for doing that one i enjoyed hearing that i did not know about it i thought it was just the one in paris
Completely unknown to me - very cool information.
Informative video as always. But can i suggest a topic?, the crash of Cebu Pacific flight 387 would be interesting because of the disputed factors that played a role to it’s collision with a mountain
Ill add it to the list after doing some groundwork to see what official documentation I can find for the crash. Thanks for the heads up!
Nice style of narration
Glad you liked it
Cool Stuff ....i was in Christchurch....at that time ....the Concord did a fly-over of the city ...in a backed turn .. its shape so natural in the air ..and the power/sound of it ...you could feel......after i went to the airport to check it out.........parked .
The most beautiful aircraft ever, and simply the best thing ever to fly in passenger service IMO. So gutted she was retired and I never got to fly her. The Decommissioned one (Alpha Bravo) parked at LHR still outshines every other plane at that airport.
While working overseas in 1978 I got to walk around the Concorde. It was *awesome* which isn't even the best description. I thought it was the future of air travel. Concorde looked similar to another beautiful aircraft the XB-70, which was definitely a cold war project.
They say that breaking-up is hard to do.
They went boom, the tail went boom, but thankfully the plane didn't go boom and no one was injured.
It's the expansion of water when freezing at altitude that causes the problem.
Like water betting under a road surface in winter then freezing and expanding, breaking the road surface, causing potholes.
Good comparison with the road and the laminate design
For structual failures like this, there could be Cameras kept somewhere which can show a pictorial view of outside the plane. This may help Pilots diagnose the issue in the air and act on it.
It no longer looks like “something from the future”, it looks like what something from the future looked like In the 1970’s.
The Concorde that lost ITS rudder.
+1
Years ago, I read an account of this incident by William F. Buckley Jr. He was on that world tour flight.
That definately looks like my beloved X-Plane 11, and the Colimata Concorde FXP which i also fly in the simulator :D
I miss the Concorde.. I think that was peak humanity, and since the Concorde was retired it seems that the world’s just gone downhill ever since. If we don’t watch out we’ll be cavemen again.
G-BOAF is now at Aerospace, Filton, Bristol. Come and see it when the Museum reopens.
I’d love to! If I’m ever in that part of the world I so wanna visit that museum and the titanic museum in Belfast
Dude, Concorde was NOT the West's answer to the TU144. The latter was a rushed, and ultimately botched, "copy paste, enlarge" of the Concorde after plans were leaked (Cold war = Spies)
Do not mistake first flight as a sign of which program started first. Concorde began development first (around 5 to 6 years earlier) and did not fly first because it was being designed and developed competently and not rushed like the TU-144, which suffered for it.
bmused55 Yep, spot on! 👍
Thanks, bmused55 - that’s the point I was trying to make
I so badly wish I could have flown on one of these beauties, or even seen one fly. I’ve been obsessed with them my whole life, they’re beautiful, powerful, just incredible. I liked to say I wanted one as a private jet 😂 I have gotten to see 3 of the remaining planes, they are magnificent 😍
I made a trip to Seattle to see the one in their air museum. Such a magnificent plane! Im also bummed I'll never be able to experience a flight on Concorde or even see it take off or land.
On the Concord you could leave the UK and land in America earlier then when you left. Crazy!
EE-poxee? Nope, it's e-POX-ee
CON-tributed
You noticed that too? He said it as if he'd never heard of epoxy until he learned of the Concorde incident --- then tells you what it is, like it's something new to not just him. I think he pronounced it based on the pronunciations of eBay and email; that's his reference!
@@hlcepeda did you hear him say adhesive? It was so weird hehe. I think the way he pronounced epoxy is one I've heard before though.
@@seeingeyegod It's almost like a robo-voice mispronouncing words. There's an even worse one on another vid, where the speaker mispronounces "capillary"; he says Ca- PILLory (with emphasis on the second syllable, and "ary" as "Or-ree". WTH.
@@hlcepeda I think this is the legit Brit pronunciation. In New Zealand they say "al-you-MIN-ee-um" for aluminum. It's common for the emphasis to be placed elsewhere back in the Mother Country.
Concorde the great swan of the sky.
Concorde is an engineering marvel.
There was a mistake at about 5:37. The Tu-144 was copied from the Concorde, not the other way around. The Soviets stole the design and engineering documents for the Concorde. Instead of finishing the documents\fixing the issues present, they rushed the hell out of it and it shows. The plane's cooling system is so loud, passengers can't even speak to each other. The Concorde program hadn't finished their skin cooling system, so the Soviets threw in an inelegant solution. They also didn't have access to the engines the Concorde was going to use (which are pretty fancy, look them up), so they had to make due with engines that required constant afterburning to maintain supersonic speeds. They did get a plane out first, but this doesn't mean that this was our answer to the Soviets. It's the other way around and they stole from the Concorde project to get it done.
It is my opinion that Aviation went backwards, when the Concord was retired. Instead of going faster civilian Aviation settled, for what I call flying boats, and it is not getting any better soon.
How is this not more we’ll known! Still awesome plane though
This may have been mentioned already, but you have aliasing artifacts in your flight simulator footage - you can get rid of these using an anti-aliasing filter. In any case, keep up the good work!
i have to agree, the concorde was a really good plane, i wish i could fly on it
I remember this flight as very few, if any apart from this flight, Concordes flew to NZ.
G-BOAF was the first I'd actually seen the registration of in the late 90s. She was doing charter flights from Leeds Bradford. It's only since Concorde's retirement tht I'd actually been able to sit on Concorde G-BOAC at Manchester runway viewing park.
Rudder delamination occured several times with Concorde, to both BA and AF aircraft, saw it myself at JFK once, was never a real issue as it flew like a charm even with small parts missing. Some 100 events of missing parts of the rudder (different sizes and places) are recorded.
interesting vid, thanks for sharing, one small point however, correct me if I'm wrong but when you state the concord was the west's answer to tu144. I am aware that the tu144 was built after the Anglo French concord and therefore tu144 cannot be an "answer" as it was "copied" and built after concord's maiden flight, we all know the unfortunate fate of the tu144 but it was an interesting bird and had a striking resemblance to concord. thanks, keep those vids coming:-)
Hey, im really enjoying your content, and i would recommend you to make the thumbnails a little bit more vivid, i think they say just enough and in a neat fashion, but a soft shadow and a thicker text would look better and maybe a little bit of rack focus on the plane.. not too much though as itd look too unprofessional to what you are offering. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the feed back! I’m working on my thumbnails
The strength doesn't come from the core, as the stresses are zero at the neural line at the centre and progressively get higher towards the outside. The highest stresses will be on the surface.
There is a problem with this episode: it was NOT a flight London to Sydney. First, it cannot be. London to Sydney is 10,500 miles, Concorde range is 4,500 miles. It was a LHR-JFK flight. Ultimate destination might have been Sydney, but it would have been through several hops (that was common for world tour at that time). The official record is here: aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19920321-0
I wish people weren’t so upset with sonic booms. I grew up on a military practice area in the west where, through the 80’s military aircraft could break the sound barrier. It was loud but, you get use to it. My mom complained incessantly but the rest of us thought ... cool. Someone is flying fast
Later when I was in and out of Kennedy ... it was a common occurrence to see the Concord flying.
It seems we just keep going backwards in terms of speed.
Wait, what? Concorde was *NOT* "the West's answer to the Soviet TU144"! If anything that sentence is the wrong way around
Also, it is *NOT* "a plane from the 1970s", it's from the 1960s, and it can be argued that it's from the 1950s (design and first flight count more than actual production date).
Am I not right in thinking that this is the only commercial aircraft ever grounded after only ONE blameless crash?
I know (because I spoke to an engineer installing them) that after the crash self sealing linings were installed in the fuel tanks making a repeat crash impossible. I believe that it was pressure behind the scenes from the jealous usa that really dealt the death blow to one of the 3 most beautiful aircraft that ever flew.