Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Could The Concorde Do A Loop?  
User currently offlineVio From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1414 posts, RR: 10
Posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11779 times:

Hi,

Here's a silly question. Could the Concorde do a loop? I was looking at photos from some of "its" last flights. Consider that there would be no passengers in the back would this airplane have enough power for that and still be structurally sound enough to perform such a manouver? (I wonder if the pilots "tried" anything new with her on her last flight)

Thanks,

Vio


Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
95 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11795 times:

Any airplane can do a loop... staying in one peice and wings level is another story...


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineBoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11766 times:

Isn't there some issues other than structural endurance? At least in a Cessna, the carburetor won't get any fuel and the engine will stop, but I guess that is because it doesn't have a fuel pump.


norwegianpilot.blogspot.com
User currently offlineVC10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1408 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11751 times:

The French were mad enough to barrel roll Concorde, and more than once, so if it was plausible to loop it I am sure they would have, but I have never heard of it.

littlevc10


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11736 times:

Quoting VC10 (Reply 3):
The French were mad enough to barrel roll Concorde, and more than once, so if it was plausible to loop it I am sure they would have, but I have never heard of it.

A barrel roll is nothing but a 1 G maneuver. Doing a loop is another thing though. The Concorde wasn't built to do any type of G maneuvers, so a loop would have been out of the question.

Now for all the "experts" out there, you could do a loop that required just over 1 G, however, you would have to have almost unlimited thrust available, which wasn't the case with the Concorde. If you don't have unlimited thrust available then you will run out of airspeed before you get your nose down on the back side of the loop. Not a great place to be.


User currently offlineVC10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1408 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11719 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 4):
A barrel roll is nothing but a 1 G maneuver

Did I say any thing different

littlevc10


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11720 times:

It is a question of thrust to weight. Stunt planes and airshow fighter jets have more than their weight in thrust, so they can pitch up and over loop. Concorde was maginally more powerful than every other airliner in the world. She was designed for straight-level performance, just because she looked like a fighter jet doesn't mean she could perform like one.

Technically, a plane would have to be moving really fast & straight level at the begining because almost all the of speed would be lost to altitude (knetic energy to potential) until the apex velocity was just above stall. Like any airliner of similar class, going past 2.5g's makes structural failure is imminent.

For aircraft as large as Concorde in mass, I think a 763 would classify, a 1g pitch up loop would be difficult to complete more than 90-degrees pitch, I think they would stall due to not having enough thrust to overcome gravity and drag, to keep going up and over.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 11641 times:

Quoting VC10 (Reply 5):
Did I say any thing different

littlevc10

Actually you did!

Quoting VC10 (Reply 3):
The French were mad enough to barrel roll Concorde, and more than once, so if it was plausible to loop it I am sure they would have, but I have never heard of it.

You pull less Gs during a barrel roll than you do in a 60 degree level turn.

The original Boeing 380 prototype also did a barrel roll over Seattle. I suppose you'd have to lump them in the same category as the French?


User currently offlineVC10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1408 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11580 times:

All I can say is read my original entry, where I suggested that if it was possible the French would have given it a go,however as they had not attempted it then it was probably not possible

I think you would have to agree that barrel rolling a airliner is not considered just another maneuver, but if you insist it is, well that is OK with me.

littlevc10  smile 


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11574 times:

Quoting VC10 (Reply 8):
I think you would have to agree that barrel rolling a airliner is not considered just another maneuver, but if you insist it is, well that is OK with me.

Please re-read my post. I never insinuated, implied or stated a barrel roll in a transport category aircraft was "just another maneuver". My statement was a barrel roll is a 1 g maneuver that when put in the context of a steep banked turn, has less g loading on the aircraft.

The original poster asked about the feasibility of the Concorde doing a loop. Given the g loading required and the lack of excess thrust, my opinion was no. It wasn't about if the french did barrel rolls or anything like that.


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11571 times:

Quoting BoeingOnFinal (Reply 2):
Isn't there some issues other than structural endurance? At least in a Cessna, the carburetor won't get any fuel and the engine will stop, but I guess that is because it doesn't have a fuel pump.

That happens when you pull negative Gs. If you maintain positive Gs all the way around the loop, it won't be a problem.

To perform a loop, an aircraft needs to be able to pull the Gs required and have enough energy to cope with the climbing part of the loop and the drag generated by pulling Gs. That's all there is to it. The energy can come from excess speed or engine power.

The Concorde wasn't exactly overpowered, and it generated huge amounts of drag as you increased the AoA (as you would when performing a loop). It did have a lot of smash in the form of kinetic energy at high speed though, so just maybe, if you brought it up to speed, put it into afterburner and pulled...  Smile

If we had the performance data (the real data, not the boiled down data in the AFM), it would be possible to calculate. How much is in the public realm?

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 6):
Stunt planes and airshow fighter jets have more than their weight in thrust

Only a select few do...



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11572 times:

Quoting VC10 (Reply 8):
I think you would have to agree that barrel rolling a airliner is not considered just another maneuver

I was under the impression that it was considered taboo due to public perception more than anything else, considering that it's an unnecessary manoeuvre.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17030 posts, RR: 67
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11560 times:

Quoting David L (Reply 11):
Quoting VC10 (Reply 8):
I think you would have to agree that barrel rolling a airliner is not considered just another maneuver

I was under the impression that it was considered taboo due to public perception more than anything else, considering that it's an unnecessary manoeuvre.

There's also the pesky fact that aerobatics in airliners aren't officially tested, and thus there is little data on their viability. Unpredicted problems may well occur.

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 6):
It is a question of thrust to weight. Stunt planes and airshow fighter jets have more than their weight in thrust, so they can pitch up and over loop.

As FredT mentioned, aircraft with more than thrust than weight are quite rare. Certainly I cannot think of an aerobatic plane with more thrust than weight. Some fighters like the Su-27 are this powerful. Aerobatic planes achieve loops and such by using built-up kinetic energy as opposed to raw thrust.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAirfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11543 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
As FredT mentioned, aircraft with more than thrust than weight are quite rare.

Not really, there are quite a lot in fact. They are all helicopters. Big grin


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17030 posts, RR: 67
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11524 times:

Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 13):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
As FredT mentioned, aircraft with more than thrust than weight are quite rare.

Not really, there are quite a lot in fact. They are all helicopters.

Helicopters don't fly. They're so ugly the ground repels them Big grin



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineHaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 11415 times:

F-15
F-16
F-22
F-35
Harrier
MiG-29
Su-27



Here Here for Severe Clear!
User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 11405 times:

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 15):
F-15
F-16
F-22
F-35
Harrier
MiG-29
Su-27

Eurofighter
EE Lightning


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13194 posts, RR: 77
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 11363 times:

Well it's not some that was ever discussed in my time, nor I suspect anyone else's on the fleet.
As for it's last flights, they were full of pax, all of them, I should know being on the last but one, also being the last international one (to BGI), as for 'not exactly being overpowered' it did not feel like that, I can assure you-any airliners with a thrust to weight ratio similar to a supersonic fighter?


User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 11354 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 7):
I suppose you'd have to lump them in the same category as the French?

I never met Tex Johnson, but I've seen videos of him flying, (including the infamous "chandelle, roll, chandelle, roll" over the boat show.

Whether he was crazy or not is between him and his doctor. What I CAN say is, the man was an artist with a vast blue canvas.

I've heard various iterations of the story of that particular day (and the aftermath) including that he was fired then rehired, or that the boss just hauled him over the carpet then invited him over to dinner.

Either way - and notwithstanding the fact that rolling the Dash 80 wasn't exactly dangerous as such - you have to admire the size of the man's huevos for doing it at all.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
Aerobatic planes achieve loops and such by using built-up kinetic energy as opposed to raw thrust.

I seem to recall that certain WWII fighters achieved the manoevre by entering a shallow dive at WOT prior to pulling up. This would certainly back up your statement, (not that I think it needed it).

Personally, I think that if it was possible to loop the Concorde, you would do it precisely once and never again.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineAirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 11345 times:

Can you withstand 14Gs?

User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 11342 times:

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 19):
Can you withstand 14Gs?

I don't know if you're asking me, but if so the answer is, "I've never tried to, but probably not. Not without a lot of assistance at least."



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineMHG From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 778 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 11245 times:

I think there are simply 2 facts (related to each other) that let the Concorde NOT make a loop:

1) The structure was not designed for such G-stress.
The a/c certainly had enough power to build up enough kinetic energy to perform the loop.
But especially the interception maneuvre on the way down from the top would overstress the structure since the a/c has no speed brakes to reduce/limit acceleration.

2) The loop diameter would be extraordinary huge in any case (plus sufficient base altitude to start from to ensure a safe interception on the way down) but in particular to keep the airframe stress low enough to ensure it doesn´t break apart already on the way up!



I miss the sound of rolls royce darts and speys
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9031 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11229 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 4):
The Concorde wasn't built to do any type of G maneuvers, so a loop would have been out of the question.

It would have been certified for +2.4 and -1g just like any other aircraft, so it can do a steep turn, or go through a gust.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11227 times:

Sure a lot of opinions offered by people who don't have a realistic idea of what a loop requires. Not a lot of aerobatic experience? I don't either but let me clear up a couple points.

• An airplane does not need gobs of thrust to do a loop.
Gliders do loops all the time. You start at a higher altitude, dive a bit to gain speed, which is energy, then pull smoothly back and the surplus energy carries the nose up past the vertical. After that, keep pulling and gravity begins to lend a hand.


• An loop does not generate a hundred Gs.
Loops can be done all day long without exceeding 2.5G which happens to be the limit for "transport category" airplanes. If Concorde would not withstand that kind of load it would have disintegrated in turbulence long ago.


• An airplane does not have to go negative to do a loop.
A nice round "barnstormer's" loop will hang you in the straps while going over the top. A glider loop will keep the coffee in your thermos cup all the way around. How hard do you want to pull coming over the top?


I would suspect that the biggest problem in looping Concorde would not be the entry but in preventing too much speed buildup on the downhill half. Not that it couldn't tolerate higher speeds but that same G at higher speeds increases the radius of the loop. Concorde could not withstand the results of running out of sky after 7/8 of a loop!

While unrelated to looping ability:

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 15):
F-15
F-16
F-22
F-35
Harrier
MiG-29
Su-27



Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 16):
Eurofighter
EE Lightning

Add this airplane to "thrust > weight" list

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Chambers


...after Wayne Handley put a P&W PT-6A on it and before the prop stuck in beta and crashed him into the ground. (...coming out of a loop)

I saw one of his last shows at Reno with that plane. (maybe the last complete show) He would pull it straight up, then reduce power and lower it down tail-first, hanging on the prop. Then he would add power and the hovering airplane would begin to climb, accelerating away from the ground all the while going straight up. It was the most amazing airshow act I have ever seen and I have seen all the big names over the last forty years.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offline727200er From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 11182 times:

The mighty F-104 would need to be listed under more thrust than weight as well.


"they who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only at night" - Edgar Allen Poe
25 Lehpron : If any airliner's only payload was the pilot and maybe 5% fuel tank or whatever is needed to takeoff, do a loop and then land -- which has the greates
26 EssentialPowr : What Lehpron???? You're fired due to a very Gross Conceptional Error (GCE) Performing a loop is a function of kinetic energy. A C152 Aerobat doesn't
27 Post contains images Starlionblue : Just because I couldn't think of one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. As SlamClick points out, some aerobatic planes have more thrust than weight. Howe
28 BoeingOnFinal : How about half a loop then half a roll? Then you could start low, and not do the risky last half of the loop. Cause it would still look awsome if the
29 BAe146QT : I can never remember if that's an Immelmann or half of a Split-S
30 PhilSquares : Immelmann.... Just trying to put things in perspective. I was a T-38 IP and for the loop/cuban 8 our entry parameters were mil power and 500-550KIAS;
31 BAe146QT : Your quoting was a bit on the wonk there, Phil. Thanks for the reply though!
32 Post contains links and images YYZYYT : Strikes me that a good refernece point when considering this would be the TU144 crash in Paris in 1973: there are referneces to tha crash resulting fr
33 Post contains images SLCPilot : With all due respect, it wasn't merely an engine substitution, but a whole new aircraft. It was essentially a modified Giles-202. I agree with the re
34 SlamClick : Hey, that's the one. Thanks. What an amazing show that was! Not disputing this, just wondering if you have an explanation for that, given that, as I
35 Post contains images SLCPilot : Not that we really have any way of settling this discussion, but I suspect Concorde could do a loop if she was lightly loaded. Different planforms (a
36 PhilSquares : One is the wing(swept wing v. straight), the ability to generate potential energy and translate it to kinetic energy.
37 Litz : Weren't there a few (at least one) 707s lost early on due to pilots attempting (particularly on delivery flights) to re-create Tex's roll? Or is that
38 Essentialpowr : SLCPilot, You get a Gross Conceptional Error (GCE) Award as well. You talk about pitch rates, induced drag and other things but certainly w/o underst
39 SlamClick : Okay, fair enough. I've extrapolated beyond your "swept" to a delta wing and must confess that I've never seen a delta-winged glider, must less see o
40 Post contains links and images MissedApproach : That depends. Are we talking about sustained Gs, or instantaneous G's? Do we mean surviving, or are we talking about G-induced loss of consciousness?
41 SlamClick : There is a record up for grabs, it's stood since 1977. David Purley crashed an F1 car into a wall, decelerating from 107 miles per hour in 26 inches.
42 Post contains images 2H4 : Here you go, Slam: 2H4
43 Post contains links SLCPilot : E-power, Thank you for your lesson. When I used to build aerobatic aircraft we were proud of our airfoil, and its ability to maintain energy through
44 PhilSquares : Just to clairfy things, for aerobatics in high performance swept wing aircraft it's about TOTAL energy management. For instance in my previous exampl
45 EssentialPowr : Absolutely, and in all types. As I and others have stated, performing a loop is completely about energy management, or having sufficient excess thrus
46 YYZYYT : On a related aside, there was a great show on Col. John Boyd on "Legends of Airpower" last night... described as a pioneer in the very field of kineti
47 Prebennorholm : There is absolutely no doubt that a plane with the shape, power and empty weight of a concorde (plus a little fuel) could do a loop. But it's a big qu
48 AC320tech : Not entirely true. Airbus's with FBW cannot do loops. Flight Computers prohibit the plane going past 30 degrees up and 15 down.
49 Venus6971 : Saw a GAANG B-1 do a loop with the wing DO flying it right before he retired and they transitioned to the E-8 JSTAR at the OKC air show. Quite a site.
50 Post contains images FredT : Except for the small fact that you'd rip engines, batteries, avionics and other components the weight of which does not change with gross weight off
51 Prebennorholm : Absolutely right, Fred. There is always a "but" out there. Anyway, I don't think that it should be a problem. A properly flow loop - maybe a little e
52 EssentialPowr : A Concorde could certainly perform a 2 G loop. It would probably have a 7000 - 9000 foot diameter due to the low G, but it could easily be done.
53 BAe146QT : This got me to thinking*. At a slight tangent. Although a B58 Hustler would probably never use a loop in practice (its main strength was apparently s
54 Post contains images 2H4 : So, this theoretical looping Concorde.....would it happen to have a large number of birds in the cabin? 2H4
55 MDorBust : Would it start the loop from a conveyor belt like runway?
56 FredT : And would it generate lift by bouncing air off the lower skin of the wings or by having the air particles divided at the leading edge meet up at the t
57 Post contains images EssentialPowr : I like Newtonian lift... who says the particles have to meet up at the TE in the first place  ?[Edited 2006-10-25 21:52:51]
58 David L : And which is better for performing such a loop: a yoke or a sidestick?
59 BoeingOnFinal : My vote for best controller goes to an RC radio kontroller on the ground, wouldn't want to be sitting in that Concorde on the first try :p
60 Speedracer1407 : Don't be silly. Everyone knows that ram-horn yoke is VERY comfortable during loops. Like holding a ram by its horns while flying Concorde upside-down
61 Post contains images David L : Now, I was going to say something like that but I chickened out.
62 Areopagus : Not that this bears on the Concorde question, but I saw Bob Hoover perform an amazing feat of energy management in his Aero Commander twin. Having gai
63 Starlionblue : A loops is hardly a good escape maneuver from a collision. So I have a hard time thinking of a scenario where it would be the best option. Sure, ther
64 Post contains links and images 3DPlanes : How about: View Large View MediumPhoto © Brian Spurr Surprised nobody's mentioned the Mirages yet. The delta wing throws up lots of induced drag
65 Post contains images EssentialPowr : Wasn't that Bob Hoover in the Rockwell Shrike (a twin?)
66 Speedracer1407 : I should have included smileys or something to make it clear that my post was entirely sarcastic.
67 Post contains images David L : It's not like you to miss something like that, Starlionblue. Focus! I took Speedracer1407's comment to be another jibe at the list of recurring (mis)
68 BAe146QT : [small voice] I still want to know if I can do an Immelmann [/small voice] I would have pistol-whipped my mother to see that. She wasn't a very nice p
69 Post contains images Areopagus : Gack! I meant to say low altitude pass.
70 Areopagus : I believe he meant that he saw Bob fly both the energy demo in the Shrike and a demo in the P-51.
71 HaveBlue : I've seen Bob do that same routine here in Daytona in the mid 90's and have an excellent picture of him standing just outside the Shrike right afterwa
72 Oldtimer : Roly Falk, Avro's Chief test pilot did many aerobatics in the Vulcan bomber in the 1950's. He would do a half loop on takeoff at the Farnboro Airshow,
73 Post contains images Starlionblue : Friggin jetlag. Sorry guys.
74 WSOY : Would the Concorde's engines stall (flameout) at higher AOAs like the modern turbofans? If, then could anyone conjecture roughly when?
75 Rufruf : All public aircraft are tested for these things with test pilots flying them.
76 MDorBust : When you find he A380 loop video, let me know.
77 Starlionblue : Ehm. No. Commercial aircraft are tested for stall and stall recovery. All other aerobatics are pretty much out. No rolls, no loops, no immelmans, no
78 EssentialPowr : An A380 could be looped too. It is proportionately no different than any other airliner in terms of wing/thrust loading or other performance characte
79 2H4 : ...Even with it's envelope protection? 2H4
80 EssentialPowr : Doubt it. But a Boeing/Lockmart/Antonov/etc produced a/c without the FE protection could certainly do it. The higher the thrust and wing loading, the
81 RichardPrice : I think you are thinking of a roll rather than a loop - a loop produces significant G forces on the airframe while a roll is G neutral. I have no dou
82 BoeingOnFinal : No, I think he means a loop. There is no "loop diameter" in a roll. And in terms of maximum g-force, as long as the aircraft stays within limits, it w
83 Starlionblue : I'll go with Mr Final on this one. I have no doubt there is enough power to go over the top. It all depends on if you can pull out at the bottom befor
84 Post contains images Lehpron : Why is this thread still going? I wanted to restate my own post, while I did not explicitly state the energy equation when stating the thrust is neede
85 EssentialPowr : I know exactly what I was meaning, thank you. All the yoke or stick does in a loop is control how much "g" is used, and a 2 g loop is perfectly possi
86 BoeingOnFinal : Ok, let me point out another issue. Say the airliner does manage to perform the loop regarding g-force limits, what about failures of motoring and ele
87 Starlionblue : Although I was a mite unclear this time, there is nothing wrong with my statement and I do understand the concept thank you very much. In fact, befor
88 EssentialPowr : ok Really? Power?? There is a significant diff b/t energy and power. Not needing "gobs of power", as you state, is still a technically inaccurate sta
89 Starlionblue : Sure. What I meant was "there is nothing wrong with my statement but it may not accurately describe the situation nor be precisely germane to it." I
90 David L : Maybe but it can also be due to people still trying to get the full picture. I don't doubt that it's resolved as far as you're concerned. However, I
91 3DPlanes : That may be the crux. Doing a nice round loop with a high wing loading takes lots of energy (or to quote Starlionblue - "gobs of power," given that y
92 FredT : At 1G, that may be below Vs (stall speed). At lower G loadings, it won't. At 0G, you will not ever stall*. Once you have the pitch attitude and punch
93 BAe146QT : See? I told you this would happen. Next thing, someone will ask if you could use the thrust reversers to stop you exceeding Vne on the downside of th
94 3DPlanes : While I agree in principal, I'd say the line between a wing "flying" and a "controlled fall" at zero g is is verrrrry fuzzy. You also mentioned being
95 Starlionblue : And the plane has a bunch of birds inside. Don't forget the birds.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Could The Concorde Do A Loop?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Could The Space Shuttle Do Normal Flights? posted Thu Apr 25 2002 18:15:04 by Sushka
How Do The Concorde's Doors Open? posted Thu Jul 26 2001 04:02:52 by Airplanetire
Size Of The Concorde's Rolls Royce Olympus posted Sat Jul 8 2006 01:54:37 by 747400sp
Did The Concorde Need A Long Take Off Roll? posted Sat Jul 8 2006 01:46:49 by 747400sp
What Does The Squigglely Thing In The Engine Do? posted Sat Apr 8 2006 04:19:14 by Tony Lu
Max Distance For The Concorde? posted Tue Mar 28 2006 17:39:51 by 747LUVR
Could A318 Elite Do 6,000+NM Non-Stop? posted Sun Jan 29 2006 07:08:57 by DEVILFISH
Did The Concorde Have Any Speed Brakes? posted Tue Aug 23 2005 23:00:02 by Aak777
Was The Concorde Made Of Stainless Steal. posted Thu Aug 11 2005 18:39:53 by 747400sp
Could The 747ADV Be A Twin? posted Fri May 13 2005 20:26:09 by Tockeyhockey

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format