Happy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 298 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3769 times:
Perhaps many have already seen this and an older video, but it's so interesting for fans of classic jets that I thought I'd post this anyway.
The last serviceable / near-airworthy Dehavilland Comet, is shown here doing a taxi and fast-taxi in this May 2008 video. Notice the piercing harshness of the no-bypass, classic turbojet engines. It's a painful but amazing look into what the original jets sounded like half a century ago!
GeorgiaAME From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 869 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (4 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3644 times:
If you think THAT was loud, you should have been inside of one! 1972-student charter from Athens to London Gatwick via Edinburgh on BEA, sitting window just ahead of the engines. The noise was beyond belief, and I had thought the 707s were loud. We flew for about 3-4 hours. These served some of the best tea I've ever had, on the ground or above it. Still, it's painful to think these beasts flew trans Atlantic, as well as trans Africa. My teeth are still rattling.
"Trust, but verify!" An old Russian proverb, quoted often by a modern American hero
ClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4528 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (4 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3267 times:
Quoting Happy-flier (Thread starter): The last serviceable / near-airworthy Dehavilland Comet, is shown here doing a taxi and fast-taxi in this May 2008 video. Notice the piercing harshness of the no-bypass, classic turbojet engines. It's a painful but amazing look into what the original jets sounded like half a century ago!
I like it I'd pay good money for a flight in one...
Shame it no longer flies!
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
ImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1242 posts, RR: 14 Reply 5, posted (4 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3148 times:
Quoting David L (Reply 3): but look at what it originally replaced
Oh, I don't know if I'd mind spending some time relaxing in the comfortable seats of an old Britannia (but I think I know what comparison you had in mind---a -377 or -7C for instance!).
Quoting GeorgiaAME (Reply 2): just ahead of the engines. The noise was beyond belief, and I had thought the 707s were loud. We flew for about
Interesting observation. Back in the days when one was used to flying on those old pure-jets it just didn't seem so loud. By the time the jets with rear-mounted engines became commonplace----then the difference between jets with wing-mounted engines was much more noticable---especially on a multi-leg trip starting with, say, a -721 X to an -8.
To me the only times the jets with wing-mounted engines were loud was at take-off. The exception was the -880. Sitting ahead of the wing, abreast of the engine air inlets on the -880 there was a cyclic "mode" of noise very much like sitting in a "shrapnel-seat" adjacent to the engine inlet of, say, a -722, or a -9. (But those old 805's had a higher-pitched sound than the JT-8D's made) Oooooowow,ooooowow,oooooowow almost everyone has experienced that sound. Without some way to block it out (ear-plugs, cotton or noise-cancelling earphones!) it will wear you out on a long flight. The -880 was just like that.
Approach to landing was the same on all of 'em. With everything down and dirty, you would need a good amount of thrust going on especially in the event of a TOGA. Then the engine noise level was very noticible and one could detect even the finest corrections to the thrust levers.
Quoting Happy-flier (Thread starter): it's so interesting for fans of classic jets that I thought I'd post this anyway.
Hey! Thanks for the post and link! Always cool to observe one of the old birds in ops.
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
DALMD88 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2370 posts, RR: 15 Reply 7, posted (4 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2061 times:
Cool video. I've always thought the Comet to be 90% beautiful. The fuselage has got a great shape and I love the look of the engines buried in the wings. I bet they really sucked to work on back in the day. But then we get to that damn tail. They just went and stuck a prop era vertical on a sleek jet.
Rikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1470 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (4 years 12 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1959 times:
Quoting DALMD88 (Reply 7): They just went and stuck a prop era vertical on a sleek jet.
the 50 seater "pocket rocket"... built after the comet, and before the 707...what a shame it never went into production!
Although it didn't make it into production, the AVRO (Canada) Jetliner was a contemporary design, and about half the size of the Comet. If you notice, the tail is a similar design to the Comet, which tends to suggest that tail design for jet aircraft of that era was still in its infancy.
Cessna 172; King Air 100; Twin Otter; SAAB 340; Dash 7; Dash 8-100,-200,-300,-400; CRJ-200,700,900; ERJ-170; F-28; DC 9-
BCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 18 Reply 9, posted (4 years 12 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1939 times:
Quoting GeorgiaAME (Reply 2): from Athens to London Gatwick via Edinburgh on BEA
Rather strange routing, but then I think it must have been a BEAirtours Comet charter flight and LGW was their base.
Having flown on Comets at least 20 times, albeit many years ago, I do not seem to recall they were that noisy inside. Certainly quieter than most propeller aircraft of the era and, as has already been mentioned above, they seemed quiet until you experienced flying in a rear-mounted jet engine aircraft (although not a Caravelle).
I did some quick research about this Comet at Bruntingthorpe Airfield and according to the Comet website
Quote: Comet XS235 is the last nearly airworthy Comet. It is stored at Bruntingthorpe Airfield and is in a pretty good shape. Taxi runs are performed every 28 days. There are projects to get Canopus back to the air, more about this will follow, as the major decision should be taken at the beginning of December '98.
Obviously out-dated information (a decision to be taken in December 98).
Does anyone know the state of play regarding the Seattle Comet that they were planning to make airworthy?
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
BCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 18 Reply 11, posted (4 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 1717 times:
Quoting David L (Reply 10): Since it wasn't as fast as most jet airliners these days
Just checked some technical details from aircraft data and from the Comet website. Comet 4 variants speed was on par with today's jet airliners, and in the case of the 737, exceeded it. The economic cruising speeds are as follows, all figures in km/h:
Comet 4 - 805
Comet 4B - 853
Comet 4C - 805
And by comparison
Airbus A320 - 840
737-800 - 785
737-500 - 813
747-100 - 907
757-200 - 850
DC10-30 - 798
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16932 posts, RR: 57 Reply 12, posted (4 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 1638 times:
Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 5): To me the only times the jets with wing-mounted engines were loud was at take-off. The exception was the -880. Sitting ahead of the wing, abreast of the engine air inlets on the -880 there was a cyclic "mode" of noise very much like sitting in a "shrapnel-seat" adjacent to the engine inlet of, say, a -722, or a -9. (But those old 805's had a higher-pitched sound than the JT-8D's made) Oooooowow,ooooowow,oooooowow almost everyone has experienced that sound. Without some way to block it out (ear-plugs, cotton or noise-cancelling earphones!) it will wear you out on a long flight. The -880 was just like that.
Wow! Dood! You sure are old!
Quoting Rikkus67 (Reply 8): If you notice, the tail is a similar design to the Comet, which tends to suggest that tail design for jet aircraft of that era was still in its infancy.
And then look at the nose of this bird. Look familiar, anyone?
JumpJet From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 218 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 1617 times:
I flew on an RAF Comet 4c of 216 Squadron from RAF Lyneham back in about 1970. It was a training flight with just 2 passengers. 90 minutes of circuits & bumps, what an amazing experience. I've also done the same on a Nimrod from RAF ST Mawgan, it didn't quite have the same magic.
Wasn't the HS Trident one of the fastest airliners ever, Concorde excepted of course?
BCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 18 Reply 15, posted (4 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 1517 times:
Quoting JumpJet (Reply 13): Wasn't the HS Trident one of the fastest airliners ever, Concorde excepted of course?
It shared the honour with the Convair Coronado. The cruise speed of the Trident 2 was 525 kts and the cruise/max speed of the Coronado was 495/534 kts. The maximum speed for the Trident is debatable. Some BA/BEA pilots claim that they had flown her at Mach 1.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 298 posts, 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6345 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 869 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9242 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4528 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
