Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Terbs on 10 September 2014, 22:13:08
-
The Russian Concord has been found.....
http://englishrussia.com/2014/09/08/hidden-tu-144-in-kazan-outskirts/
-
Eyuk. Was it made in China? :(
-
That's bizarre! :o :y
-
I think they tried to copy Concorde and then stuck extra bits on until it would fly. ;D
Actually, it pipped Concorde to the post. It first flew before Concorde, and first flew supersonic before Concorde.
Turned out to be a bit crashy, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ)
I believe NASA were flying one not too long ago. Not sure if they still have it even. :-\
-
I think they tried to copy Concorde and then stuck extra bits on until it would fly. ;D
Actually, it pipped Concorde to the post. It first flew before Concorde, and first flew supersonic before Concorde.
Turned out to be a bit crashy, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ)
I believe NASA were flying one not too long ago. Not sure if they still have it even. :-\
Seem to remember the Russian copy was Code Named Concordski and it keep crashing in test flights, seem to remember the flown one had small wings flaps just behind the cockpit to keep it stable.
wasnt the Pan Am one scrapped before it was tested and called something like the SS1 or SSP or something, all from memory going back to the late 60's early 70's. :-\
-
I seem to remember at the time the Rusky's stole the plans some bits were missing and thus they had to improvise resulting in the air show crash, coupled with the fact they didn't get the breaking systems thus the reason for trailing a parachute to stop it.
-
Seem to remember the Russian copy was Code Named Concordski and it keep crashing in test flights, seem to remember the flown one had small wings flaps just behind the cockpit to keep it stable.
wasnt the Pan Am one scrapped before it was tested and called something like the SS1 or SSP or something, all from memory going back to the late 60's early 70's. :-\
Yep, Concorde's wing design was very ingenious, in that it was able to operate over a wide range of airspeed. Concorde used a vortex formed along the leading edge to provide better low speed performance.
This subtlety was probably not evident in the plans that made it to the USSR, so they needed "Canards" in order to provide some lift at the front of the aircraft for low speed flight. In fact, ISTR one of the 144s issues was that it still didn't have very good low speed performance so landing speed was even higher than Concorde's and it needed a very long runway and parachutes to stop it.
-
Great find terbert!! :y :y
Absolutely fascinating video. 8) 8) 8)
You can see how flimsy it was, and how it's origins (copy of Concorde) are based in the 1960s. No wonder it fell apart in the air!! ::) ::) ::) :D
-
Stuff the civil spam - thats a Mig-25 next to it :y
-
I think they tried to copy Concorde and then stuck extra bits on until it would fly. ;D
Actually, it pipped Concorde to the post. It first flew before Concorde, and first flew supersonic before Concorde.
Turned out to be a bit crashy, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ)
I believe NASA were flying one not too long ago. Not sure if they still have it even. :-\
Seem to remember the Russian copy was Code Named Concordski and it keep crashing in test flights, seem to remember the flown one had small wings flaps just behind the cockpit to keep it stable.
wasnt the Pan Am one scrapped before it was tested and called something like the SS1 or SSP or something, all from memory going back to the late 60's early 70's. :-\
Yes Zirk, there was an American SST that reached the full design stage, with, if I remember correctly, at the time at least one mock up in Pan Am livery, and artist impressions of the same galore (rather like the "artist impression" of the Pan Am space shuttle in a 2001: A Space Odyssey!!). However the environmentalist lobby took over and basicly closed the project down. That of course spelt doom for our Concorde as the Americans would not let that European plane fly over the States when they could not do that themselves with their own SST!
Concorde, in truth, never recovered from that as it could never achieve it's full potential with build numbers making it a viable proposition. With only British and French taking delivery of a relative few Concorde's, the Americans had scuppered it!! :(
-
I think they tried to copy Concorde and then stuck extra bits on until it would fly. ;D
Actually, it pipped Concorde to the post. It first flew before Concorde, and first flew supersonic before Concorde.
Turned out to be a bit crashy, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ)
I believe NASA were flying one not too long ago. Not sure if they still have it even. :-\
Seem to remember the Russian copy was Code Named Concordski and it keep crashing in test flights, seem to remember the flown one had small wings flaps just behind the cockpit to keep it stable.
wasnt the Pan Am one scrapped before it was tested and called something like the SS1 or SSP or something, all from memory going back to the late 60's early 70's. :-\
Yes Zirk, there was an American SST that reached the full design stage, with, if I remember correctly, at the time at least one mock up in Pan Am livery, and artist impressions of the same galore (rather like the "artist impression" of the Pan Am space shuttle in a [i]2001: A Space Odyssey[/i]!!). However the environmentalist lobby took over and basicly closed the project down. That of course spelt doom for our Concorde as the Americans would not let that European plane fly over the States when they could not do that themselves with their own SST!
Concorde, in truth, never recovered from that as it could never achieve it's full potential with build numbers making it a viable proposition. With only British and French taking delivery of a relative few Concorde's, the Americans had scuppered it!! :(
Great film and hard to believe that it was made way back in 1968.
-
if you are curious about an event , read more for complete picture ::)
http://tu144.tripod.com/history.html (http://tu144.tripod.com/history.html)
although the design of the tu 144 very similiar to concorde,
controls, navigation ,engines were completely different .. and they completed in a shorter time as Kruschev dictated..
and to remind russians had the technology to land on the ground after turning from space where americans splash in ocean ;D
-
I think they tried to copy Concorde and then stuck extra bits on until it would fly. ;D
Actually, it pipped Concorde to the post. It first flew before Concorde, and first flew supersonic before Concorde.
Turned out to be a bit crashy, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIWAI6GmQQ)
I believe NASA were flying one not too long ago. Not sure if they still have it even. :-\
Seem to remember the Russian copy was Code Named Concordski and it keep crashing in test flights, seem to remember the flown one had small wings flaps just behind the cockpit to keep it stable.
wasnt the Pan Am one scrapped before it was tested and called something like the SS1 or SSP or something, all from memory going back to the late 60's early 70's. :-\
Yes Zirk, there was an American SST that reached the full design stage, with, if I remember correctly, at the time at least one mock up in Pan Am livery, and artist impressions of the same galore (rather like the "artist impression" of the Pan Am space shuttle in a [i]2001: A Space Odyssey[/i]!!). However the environmentalist lobby took over and basicly closed the project down. That of course spelt doom for our Concorde as the Americans would not let that European plane fly over the States when they could not do that themselves with their own SST!
Concorde, in truth, never recovered from that as it could never achieve it's full potential with build numbers making it a viable proposition. With only British and French taking delivery of a relative few Concorde's, the Americans had scuppered it!! :(
Great film and hard to believe that it was made way back in 1968.
Indeed Opti, it seems only like yesterday!!! ;D ;D ;D ;)
1968 was a great year musically, with fashion, with art, in film making, and of course producing I believe a great American muscle car, the Ford Mustang Fastback (with Steve McQueen driving it!!! :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* 8) 8)) ;D ;D ;D :y :y :y
-
Yep, Concorde's wing design was very ingenious I remember when waiting to board looking at Concorde's wings and saying to my mate, 'there ain't any flaps, how the heck are we going to go up and down? Also the blooming wings are drooping'.. The pilot answered my worries shortly into the flight... the Ford Mustang FastbackI'm sure it was actually a Mustang Mach1 Lizzie... ;)
-
if you are curious about an event , read more for complete picture ::)
http://tu144.tripod.com/history.html (http://tu144.tripod.com/history.html)
although the design of the tu 144 very similiar to concorde,
controls, navigation ,engines were completely different .. and they completed in a shorter time as Kruschev dictated..
and to remind russians had the technology to land on the ground after turning from space where americans splash in ocean ;D
An interesting article Cem! :y :y :y
Yes, the TU 144 was an inferior Concorde which perhaps should never have taken to the air. That is the danger of copying when you do not know all the finite details that you need to when building such a craft. Concorde was designed and built from scratch in the time it needed in a commercial, but regulated, society; the TU 144 was designed ( outwardly copied) and built in the time dictated by political masters. That was always the flaw with communism and especially the Russian variety. ::) ::)
In many ways it was fortunate it broke up in the air at an air show, empty of passengers. If it had been rushed into service, as it had been rushed into production, who knows how many lives could have been lost. :( :(
-
Yep, Concorde's wing design was very ingenious I remember when waiting to board looking at Concorde's wings and saying to my mate, 'there ain't any flaps, how the heck are we going to go up and down? Also the blooming wings are drooping'.. The pilot answered my worries shortly into the flight... the Ford Mustang FastbackI'm sure it was actually a Mustang Mach1 Lizzie... ;)
;D ;D ;D No, in 1968 the Mach 1 was not available for the film Bullit . That was not released until 1969. The car used was the Ford Mustang GT 390 Fastback, in a lovely green, that for me is the car. If Steve McQueen could sit beside me; now that would be perfect!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :y :y
Just drawl over this:
http://www.bullitt-mustang.co.uk/index.html
:-* :-* :-* :y :y
-
I stand corrected Ma'am.... :-[ :-X ;)
-
If Steve McQueen could sit beside me; now that would be perfect!! Be a few more rattles in the car than usual though eh Lizzie... ;)
-
The break up and crash of the Tu144 at the Paris airshow was attributed to the pilot pulling a large negative G bunt over at the top of a climb. Many believe this was due to a French airforce Mirage III reconassance plane that had been sent up to 'spy' on the Tu144 during it's display. The Tu144 pilot was un-aware of the Mirage's presence untill he suddenly saw it, and took violent evasive action. The Flight recorder tapes have never been released to the public, and suspicion is that the French and Russians contrived to hush things up.
-
The break up and crash of the Tu144 at the Paris airshow was attributed to the pilot pulling a large negative G bund over at the top of a climb. Many believe this was due to a French airforce Mirage III reconassance plane that had been sent up to 'spy' on the Tu144 during it's display. The Tu144 pilot was un-aware of the Mirage's presence untill he suddenly saw it, and took violent evasive action. The Flight recorder tapes have never been released to the public, and suspicion is that the French and Russians contrived to hush things up.
Yes, this is true. Neither the French nor the Russians are beyond suspicion when it comes to covering things up, after all!
The best theory I've heard is that the bund was violent enough to flame-out the engines, the pilot then entered a dive and concentrated on getting them restarted before realising that he was in a position where he couldn't pull out of the dive without either overstressing the aircraft or hitting the ground. End result: he did both. :(
Having said that, I think the following passage from Wikipedia, if factually correct, probably highlights the most significant differences between the two aircraft:
Whereas Concorde had been subjected to 5,000 hours of testing by the time it was certified for passenger flight, making it the most tested aircraft ever,[42] total flight testing time of the Tu-144 by the time of its introduction into passenger service was less than 800 hours.
Not for the first time, the Russans' priority was to be first, the West's to be safe. ;)
-
I stand corrected Ma'am.... :-[ :-X ;)
That's ok Jusme, you are just too young to know that year! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :y :y
-
If Steve McQueen could sit beside me; now that would be perfect!! Be a few more rattles in the car than usual though eh Lizzie... ;)
Yes, that is the sad bit! Really miss him! :'( :'( :'( :'(
-
The break up and crash of the Tu144 at the Paris airshow was attributed to the pilot pulling a large negative G bund over at the top of a climb. Many believe this was due to a French airforce Mirage III reconassance plane that had been sent up to 'spy' on the Tu144 during it's display. The Tu144 pilot was un-aware of the Mirage's presence untill he suddenly saw it, and took violent evasive action. The Flight recorder tapes have never been released to the public, and suspicion is that the French and Russians contrived to hush things up.
Yes, this is true. Neither the French nor the Russians are beyond suspicion when it comes to covering things up, after all!
The best theory I've heard is that the bund was violent enough to flame-out the engines, the pilot then entered a dive and concentrated on getting them restarted before realising that he was in a position where he couldn't pull out of the dive without either overstressing the aircraft or hitting the ground. End result: he did both. :(
Having said that, I think the following passage from Wikipedia, if factually correct, probably highlights the most significant differences between the two aircraft:
Whereas Concorde had been subjected to 5,000 hours of testing by the time it was certified for passenger flight, making it the most tested aircraft ever,[42] total flight testing time of the Tu-144 by the time of its introduction into passenger service was less than 800 hours.
Not for the first time, the Russans' priority was to be first, the West's to be safe. ;)
...and that is what I meant Kevin:
"Yes, the TU 144 was an inferior Concorde which perhaps should never have taken to the air. That is the danger of copying when you do not know all the finite details that you need to when building such a craft. Concorde was designed and built from scratch in the time it needed in a commercial, but regulated, society; the TU 144 was designed ( outwardly copied) and built in the time dictated by political masters. That was always the flaw with communism and especially the Russian variety. ::) ::) "
-
That's ok Jusme, you are just too young to know that year! Miss Zoom, you are far too kind.. ;) When we flew on Concorde in 1987 the pilot informed us that it was not due its first overhaul until 2012. Now there's build quality for you... :y
-
That's ok Jusme, you are just too young to know that year! Miss Zoom, you are far too kind.. ;) When we flew on Concorde in 1987 the pilot informed us that it was not due its first overhaul until 2012. Now there's build quality for you... :y
Yes, they were quality and of course very advanced for their time. On a school trip to Brooklands in about 1967 (Dr. Barnes Wallis was still in his office and talked to us) we had the privilege of watching a wing being built. It was amazing with real craftsmen (not computers!) at work. Everything lined up by eye and calculated 8) 8) 8) 8).
Today an Airbus wing is still made by craftsmen, but computers, laser cutters, and laser measuring tools do an awful lot of the work. But it does still come down to the human eye and vast experience! :y :y :y :y
-
The break up and crash of the Tu144 at the Paris airshow was attributed to the pilot pulling a large negative G bund over at the top of a climb. Many believe this was due to a French airforce Mirage III reconassance plane that had been sent up to 'spy' on the Tu144 during it's display. The Tu144 pilot was un-aware of the Mirage's presence untill he suddenly saw it, and took violent evasive action. The Flight recorder tapes have never been released to the public, and suspicion is that the French and Russians contrived to hush things up.
Yes, this is true. Neither the French nor the Russians are beyond suspicion when it comes to covering things up, after all!
The best theory I've heard is that the bund was violent enough to flame-out the engines, the pilot then entered a dive and concentrated on getting them restarted before realising that he was in a position where he couldn't pull out of the dive without either overstressing the aircraft or hitting the ground. End result: he did both. :(
Having said that, I think the following passage from Wikipedia, if factually correct, probably highlights the most significant differences between the two aircraft:
Whereas Concorde had been subjected to 5,000 hours of testing by the time it was certified for passenger flight, making it the most tested aircraft ever,[42] total flight testing time of the Tu-144 by the time of its introduction into passenger service was less than 800 hours.
Not for the first time, the Russans' priority was to be first, the West's to be safe. ;)
it was the cold war era where there was a race.. given enough development time it could easily be better.. here is a technical quote ;
"The wing, Concorde had an advanced, highly refined wing design, at the time incorporating new production methods.
The TU-144 has a much simpler wing, a poor performer at low speeds, hence the later addition of canards, with no doubt a big weight penalty.
The early TU-144s had a simply terrible intake layout aerodynamically, improved a bit on later ones, still very draggy however.
Concorde had an advanced (and tough to develop) computerized system to reduce airflow speeds into the engine, by nearly 1000 m.p.h. in 13 feet, by synthesizing air data and converting that into movements of two ramps in the roof on each intake in front of the engine, these cause twin shockwaves slowing the air velocity down to acceptable speeds for the engine compressors.
The TU-144 had no such system, so surges must have been a severe problem, in the 70's a desperate Tupolev even asked British Aerospace if the Concorde intake system could be adapted for their aircraft, being a product of the BAC guided weapons division while the Cold War was still on, told Tupolev were told no.
TU-144 engines were woefully inefficient in supercruise, so had to have partial reheat for the whole of the supercruise phase, but with huge levels of fuel consumption, Concorde disengaged reheat after an approx 10 minute phase taking the aircraft from Mach 0.95/28,000ft to Mach 1.7/47,000ft.
Both types used reheat on take off, however the TU-144 engines were much heavier than the Olympus 593s.
No way could a TU-144 perform as the payload/range advertised.
The TU-144s environmental control system was much heavier and less efficient than Concorde, apparently so loud that pax (on the few flights inside the USSR that the TU-144 actually flew for a short time) had to wear ear defenders and had to write notes to each other to communicate.
Airframe vibration was also apparently very bad on the Tupolev, I shudder to think about the C.G. issues with fuel transfer with it too.
At the end of the day, Tupolev were ordered by the Kremlin to also build a SST, and do it fast, it actually beat Concorde into the air as a prototype, but it was nowhere near a workable airliner, in many areas the technology just was not there, so they tried to get around these issues.
The Kremlin wanted to match Concorde and the US SST programmes in the 60's, however Concorde can trace it's genesis to extensive studies going right back to the mid 50's, before France and the UK decided to pool their very similar efforts in 1962.
So the TU-144 was conceived and built in a rush, if it was anything like a safe, reliable airliner, with a decent range/payload, why did Aeroflot not use it for PR on routes to say Moscow-Shannon-Havana/New York? By the time it entered limited service the US SST was long dead after all.
As it was, a few flights (often just carrying mail) operated internally within the USSR in the mid 70's until chronic unreliability and technical issues forced the whole programme to be quietly abandoned.
Reports about Soviet spying in Concorde factories are true, but likely all they were trying to do was to confirm that Concorde was the real configuration, that was no 'plan B' in a different configuration if the familiar delta winged one was found wanting.
Even with spying, the technical issues that crippled the TU-144 were insurmountable at the time with the rush to build the aircraft, given more time, more money, Tupolev would have solved them probably.
"