FlySSC From France, joined Aug 2003, 7313 posts, RR: 61 Posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7549 times:
Here is a video of a Concorde take off from JFK, Rwy 31L.
I find it interesting as the take off is shown from an unusual angle as it is filmed from the side of the runway.
Unfortunately, the video is short but you can see Concorde initiating the famous steep left turn at 100ft, to comply with the strict noise abatement procedure.
Hope you will enjoy it !
SJC-Alien From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 919 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7428 times:
Well, people who have the right contacts can get the necessary ramp access - notice there are only 4-5 people out there - but what is interesting to me, is the videographer forgot to use a little Zoom on the camera lens - unless it was a fixed lens camera - a little zoom to chase the jet on the low altitude left turn would have made this a better video.
747fan From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1165 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7422 times:
WOW! I don't see the videographer didn't have temporary hearing loss after shooting this...
Anyway, I thought that the Concorde had a steeper takeoff than that, as that looked like a pretty shallow climb rate. That video seemed to contradict what I heard on here about Concorde takeoffs, which was that they have a pretty steep climbout.
Clipper002 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 671 posts, RR: 14 Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7422 times:
That brings back a lot of memories. I got to watch and hear that flight every weekday morning from the conference room atop the Pan Am Worldport. Never got tired of it. Very unusual not to have gained more altitude after beginning the left hand turn.
SJC-Alien From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 919 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7228 times:
I have video of it departing OAK in about 1990..? Air France - - BVFF - but it did take off and climbed up high and fast - straight out, as I'm sure - as not to p*ss off the people who live in the homes north of Oakland Intl....
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12708 posts, RR: 80 Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7112 times:
Thanks for the videos.
Yes she was loud, but not lingering loud , she was soon off and away.
I'd rate, from plenty of seeing it at close hand, a IL-86 taking off, or rather trundling along the runway eventually lifting off!
At first, if it wasn't in view, people would think it a Concorde, until the roar carried on and on.
The same was true of the HS Trident, a fully loaded T3, complete with 4th 'booster engine' fully loaded with pax and fuel, again on and on the racket went until the Ground Gripper finally let go of the ground.
In pure decibel levels of course, Concorde would have been loudest, but it might not have seemed so compared examples like the above.
The VC-10 made a huge amount of noise, but they were very beautiful too, like Concorde, in life the very beautiful often gets a pass on certain flaws, including for me, aircraft!
SJC-Alien From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 919 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6764 times:
The second video embeded by KPDX is a lot better -
the set up for the camera rig was 'right on' for the rotation as a side view - this is better along with the big crowd parked back just a bit behind the camera rig - wonder how many shots were 'messed up' on the still photogs behind the rig - I imagine it blew the view as it rotated past them...wonder if Hough was there to jinx it somehow..but it wasn't raining or cloudy so maybe not
Skymiler From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6508 times:
Years ago one could watch the BA and SIA Concordes take off from the bar at the old Hilton Hotel at LHR (North side), as it was very close to the road and the fence. In the late afternoon fall and winter darkness one could see the flames from the reheat (afterburners) and feel the earth shake. Incredible.
Only flew her once -- it was the trip of a lifetime. I have the date I flew LHR - BWI (divert from JFK) and would like to research exactly which bird I was on, to complement my memorabilia (including a certificate) from BA.
MadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, RR: 40 Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 6342 times:
These videos are wonderful reminders. I am very grateful to all that filmed Concorde. I only have made pictures from the very first take off in TLS 2 March 1969, but no films.
I loved the sound of Concorde's 4 Olympii. I used to go to CDG and LHR to watch them take off until the very end. LHR was nice with the evening flight with the afterburners. She was such a pretty sight. Landing was less spectacular on the noise level. I liked the sound of the Olympii better from outside than from inside the plane.
I got quite close to her one time with her engines on.
The 4 Olympii sounded like Beethoven's 9th final to my ears!
I have been given some (very heavy) flown engine parts both from BA and AF Concordes. Some are black from smoke and heat. Others look like true works of art! In my Concorde collection, they are the pieces I treasure the most.
Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 1): Isn't such a close distance to the runway rather dangerous for your ears?
I have flown on VC10s and Trident Threes too, and many other aircrafts including the A380.
Many of them were and are great but there are none like Concorde. She will always be the Queen of the Skies.
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
FlySSC From France, joined Aug 2003, 7313 posts, RR: 61 Reply 18, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 6262 times:
Quoting San747 (Reply 11): Here's a question that the ramper part of me has been wondering for months... How and where did they load cargo and baggage on the Concorde?
Luggages were stored in a compartment located completely at the rear of the aircraft, behind the rear Galley.
The access door to this compartment was located on the right side of the aircraft, right next to the Door 3, close to the registration. It can be seen clearly on those two pictures :
VC10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1381 posts, RR: 17 Reply 19, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 6201 times:
Quoting FlySSC (Reply 18): Luggages were stored in a compartment located completely at the rear of the aircraft
Although the rear cargo hold was the biggest, remember there was a smaller underfloor baggage hold just forward of the wings. Both holds were loaded in the old fashion way by using a belt loader with a person in the hold humping the bags into position, and in the front hold he would do this whilst lying on his side. On a hot summer's day, by the time he had finished he would be dripping with sweat, but believe me these baggage loaders were one of the many unsung heroes of the Concorde operation as to get 109 bags into the hold took not only physical effort but a great deal of skill
and experience as to how to fill a hold with all different size cases and yet not waste a cubic inch.The front hold would be loaded to capacity first, as this would drag the C of G forward and so allow more fuel to be loaded in the rear fuel tank [No 11]
In Beijing on a round the world charter it some how became my job to ensure that the 110 bags all got on board, and so I explained the technique to the loaders and got on with my day job, only to be told that the holds were full, but 12 bags would have to be left behind. As we had brought 110 bags in I had the holds emptied again and I became the person inside the hold stacking, and we managed to get all bags in the hold. That is how I found that you come out dripping.Loading Concorde was definately an art form.
Quoting 747fan (Reply 3): Anyway, I thought that the Concorde had a steeper takeoff than that
Rememeber Concorde's performance was not that spectacular at the lower airspeeds associated with flight just after take-off, and on the 31L dep at JFK shortly after the gear was on it's way up and the left turn initiated the reheats would go off and the engines throttle for noise abatement reasons, ie quiet over the listening post. Once past the post some extra RPM would be added to give the aircraft the power to reach the height required for the 31l dep proceedure
747fan From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1165 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 6070 times:
Quoting VC10 (Reply 19): Rememeber Concorde's performance was not that spectacular at the lower airspeeds associated with flight just after take-off, and on the 31L dep at JFK shortly after the gear was on it's way up and the left turn initiated the reheats would go off and the engines throttle for noise abatement reasons, ie quiet over the listening post. Once past the post some extra RPM would be added to give the aircraft the power to reach the height required for the 31l dep proceedure
Thanks for that explanatiion - I wonder if that's just JFK where that occurs, as I've watched some Concorde TO videos from LHR where the reheats are on for a good 40-50 seconds after liftoff. The Concorde in those videos appears to have a much steeper climbout, probably 4000-5000 fpm.
Here are two videos taken at LHR that really demonstrates how loud the Concorde was with its reheats: Concorde night takeoff from 09L at LHR Concorde sunset takeoff from 27R at LHR
I recommend turning up the volume for this videos (some awesome air distortion), but not too much - I don't want to be blamed for any blown speakers/subwoofers! Listen for the car alarms!
This video demonstrates the Concorde's takeoff performance, although its probably lightly loaded: Concorde Farewell Tour Takeoff from Toronto, taken from inside
Those two LHR videos do demonstrate that while the Concorde is loud, its sound doesn't linger for very long, unlike aircraft such as the 727, DC-9, DC-8 (except for the Super 70), 707, etc.