Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SE-210 Caravelle Questions / Variants  
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

I have a number of questions, and I'd appreciate it if somebody even had an answer to one of 'em, although if somebody know's 'em all that would REALLY help!

The first question regards the plane's hydraulic control's
From what I remember, the SE-210 Caravelle featured fully-powered hydraulic surfaces, did these hydraulic systems have artificial feel, and were all the control-surfaces capable of manual-reversion should hydraulics fail?

Second question regards the airplane's average takeoff distance? I remember hearing a case where a fully loaded Caravelle (III, I think) took 8,000 feet to get into the air when fully loaded after a 42-second takeoff run, but what would most of the Cavelle's fair in terms of takeoff distance under light or average loads?

Third, the flaps appeared to be fowler-type. Were they single slotted, or double-slotted? And does anyone know what settings they used? Even if nobody knows all the settings, does anybody know what settings were used for takeoff and landing? Also, did any variants have any leading-edge devices?

Fourth, to the best of my knowledge, some Caravelle's did not have speedbrakes/spoilers or the like. Which variants did, and which did not? And regarding the ones that didn't, how the hell did they slow-down in a reasonable distance (particularly in the air)?

Fifth, does anybody know what the plane's .mmo and .vmo are?

Sixth, from what I remember reading, the plane's thrust to weight ratio, fully-loaded, was quite low compared to other jetliners, say the 707-120, fully-loaded? How was the airplane considered to be considered to be such a good performer if it was so underpowered?

Seventh, how many variants and sub-variants of the SE-210 Caravelle were built?


Andrea Kent

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6903 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2355 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter):
the plane's thrust to weight ratio, fully-loaded, was quite low compared to other jetliners, say the 707-120, fully-loaded?

Compared to a JT3C-powered 707? That can't be right.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2348 times:

Take the weight of a fullly loaded caravelle, divide by the amount of thrust the two avons produce. You end up with one pound of thrust for five pounds of plane.

With water injection a 707-120 had 1 pound of thrust per 4.57 lbs of plane. With no water injection it's about one pound of thrust per five pounds of plane.


Andrea Kent


User currently offlineUSCGC130 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2338 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter):
Fourth, to the best of my knowledge, some Caravelle's did not have speedbrakes/spoilers or the like. Which variants did, and which did not? And regarding the ones that didn't, how the hell did they slow-down in a reasonable distance

At least some Caravelles were equipped with drag chutes. According to what I've read, they were mostly just used on wet or icy runways.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kjell Nilsson



User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2329 times:

USCG130,

I was more or less referring to the airplane's ability to slow itself down while in the air, not on the ground.

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2577 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2310 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter):
From what I remember, the SE-210 Caravelle featured fully-powered hydraulic surfaces, did these hydraulic systems have artificial feel, and were all the control-surfaces capable of manual-reversion should hydraulics fail?

Any non fly-by-wire aircraft with fully powered controls requires an artificial feel system. As for manual reversion I don't know but I would hazard a guess and say yes. Only large aircraft with powered controls have no possibility of manual reversion. Other similar sized aircraft have it for sure.

Are you sure the Caravelle's flight controls were fully powered? Hydraulically boosted controls were common in 50s and 60s.

Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter):
And regarding the ones that didn't, how the hell did they slow-down in a reasonable distance

I thought all Caravelles had airbrakes (mounted above and below the wing). However if some versions did not have them, they could always extend the gear to slow down.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2302 times:

Jetlagged,

To be honest, I'm not sure if they're boosted, or fully powered, or what have you. I also am not sure if they have an artificial feel system.

Well, I remember hearing that some Caravelle's had speed-brakes, which would imply that others did not. Regarding landing gear-use to slow the plane down, keep in mind that the Caravelle can achieve at least 335 kts indicated, and most gears have a max deployment speed of 270 kts, unless the Caravelle has a stronger gear to go from 335 to 270, I'm kind of wondering how they slowed down in time?

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2577 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):
To be honest, I'm not sure if they're boosted, or fully powered, or what have you. I also am not sure if they have an artificial feel system.

Well, as I said: a boosted system would not need artificial feel, but a fully powered system must have it.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):
I remember hearing that some Caravelle's had speed-brakes, which would imply that others did not.

I don't see that one follows from the other, but I then didn't hear what you heard.  Wink

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):
keep in mind that the Caravelle can achieve at least 335 kts indicated, and most gears have a max deployment speed of 270 kts

Most aircraft are quite capable of slowing down to 250 knots by 10000 feet (even while descending) without speedbrakes (well maybe not the 777). Clean drag is sufficient.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

The following applies to various models of the SUD Caravelle...

SE210 model I

RollsRoyce Avon 522 engines
Vne 325 knots or M.81, whichever is higher
Vno 300 knots or M.77, whichever is higher

Air brake operation, 305 Knots or M.81
No Vmc listed, as at all weights/CofG locations, always LESS than the stall speed.

SE210 model III

RR Avon 527 engines
Vne, 325 or M.81
Vno, 300 or M.77

Air brake operation, 325 knots or M.81
Brake parachute operation, normal operation, 115 knots, maximum, 130 knots.

No Vmc (as above list reason).

SE210 model VIR

RR Avon 532R or 533R engines.
Vne, 350 or M.81
Vno, 300 or M.77

Air brake operation, 350 knots or M.81

No Vmc.

SUD/Lear autoland fitted to some models, and all of those delivered to the French Post Office.

All models had hydraulic assist to elevators, ailerons, rudder.
In addition, all models had artificial feel systems for elevator, ailerons, rudder.

And now, engine starting...
112V DC was used in the SE Caravelle (Comet as well).
The RR Avon engines fitted on the Caravelle had 112V DC electric starters. All types mentioned had a large bank of multiple lead-acid 28V DC batteries in the belly, and the F/E had a selector for "Start 112V DC" or "Normal 28V DC"...
The batteries were switched by this selector to be connected in "series" to obtain 112V DC, for start purpose, then after engine start, the selector was moved back to normal (or parallel) to supply the aircraft 28V DC for most of the electrical requirements, and into inverters to produce 112V AC for various avionics.

Caravelle, a very well built airplane, and certainly a commercial success


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2261 times:

Thank you, 411A


Also, is there a Caravelle II, IV, V, etc... since you didn't mention them...

I actually knew the SE-210 had electrical-starters for the engine, I didn't know the Comet had a self-starting system.

I know this question might sound redundant, but I'll ask anyway... do all the control surfaces have manual reversion?

Do you know what the MTOW's and if possible, Max Landing Weights for the Caravelle's I, III, VI-R, and out of curiousity, while your at it -- I'm not sure if you'll know, but... do you know how much thrust the RR Avon Mk 522, 527, 532R, and 533R engines produced?


Andrea K


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2577 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2253 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 9):
I know this question might sound redundant, but I'll ask anyway... do all the control surfaces have manual reversion?

Boosted controls have manual reversion by definition, but the forces will be high. Usually there is a tab which unlocks when hydraulic power is lost to provide aerodynamic assistance to the now unboosted control.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2249 times:

I was just curious since the SE-210's rudder doesn't appear to have any control or trim-tab.

Is it also true that the SE-210 has a small seperate lower rudder used for yaw-trimming alone (Hey, it may be a ridiculous question, but I heard it once in a book)

Andrea K


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6903 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2235 times:

One 1962 book says the original Caravelle I had 10760-lb Avon 522s and MTOW of 43.5 tonnes.

The IA had Avon 526s, thrust and weight not shown.

The III had Avon 527s, thrust 11400 or 11700, MTOW 46T.

The VI had Avon 531s, thrust 12500, MTOW 48T.

The VIR had 12600 or 12920 lb thrust and MTOW 50T.

Another 1962 book says the I had 11400 lb Avons and 43.5T MTOW-- they might be referring to the 1A, which they don't mention by name.

That book says 11700 lb and 46T for the III and 12200 lb and 47T for the VI. It also says the 10A had 16100 lb GEs and 52T MTOW.

Jane's 1959-60 says Caravelle was initially to be 43.5T with 10500-lb Avons, to be followed by the III with 45T/11400 and the VI with 47T/12200.

The Caravelle I was to be powered by the RA29 Stage 1, the III by the RA29 Stage 3, and the VI by the RA29 Stage 6. Apparently RR picked those numbers and didn't pick 2 or 4 or 5-- so no Caravelles with those marks.

Note that none of the combinations gives thrust-to-weight less than a 707-120.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2211 times:

When you say ton... do you mean regular ton or metric ton?

Andrea K


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6903 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2181 times:

Tonnes are metric tons. Or does no one use that spelling any more?

User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2158 times:

Regarding the speed-brake thing... the Caravelle had brakes above and below the wing? How did that work with the flaps down?

Regaridng weight/mass issues, -- A metric ton is 1,000 kg right?

Andrea


User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2117 times:

I'm doing some research into the Caravelles production numbers. As far as I can determined, there were 280 airframes assembled. Hopefully, I'll have a breakdown on the various variants in a day or two...unless someone else beats me to it.
Regards.



"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2577 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2092 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 15):
Regarding the speed-brake thing... the Caravelle had brakes above and below the wing? How did that work with the flaps down?

Exactly the same as with flaps up. More drag.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 15):
Regaridng weight/mass issues, -- A metric ton is 1,000 kg right?

Metric ton is usually spelt tonne. Yes 1,000 kg or 2,204.6 lb (an imperial ton is 2,240 lb, so it's quite close in weight).



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2046 times:

Well, I did some research into the variants of the Caravelle, and here's what I came up with a breakdown on the production numbers.

Caravelle prototypes...2
Caravelle 1......22
Caravelle 1A....10
Caravelle 3......79
Caravelle 6N....52
Caravelle 6R....56
Caravelle 7........1
Caravelle 10R..20
Caravelle 11R....6
Caravelle 12.....12
Caravelle Super 10B...22

Total built of all airframes is 282. All noted above are as originally assembled. There were several upgrades & conversions in the years the aircraft were in service. An example...some -1s into -1As, and all -1As into -3s. The prototypes remain the property of Sud Aviation. The last Caravelle built in 1973, a -12, was scrapped after only 18 yrs of service, in 1991.
Hope you all find this info useful. Regards.



"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2037 times:

The Caravelle III with the 11,700 lbf engines has a T:W of about 1 : 4.33... not as bad as the 707-120 with water injection.

Andrea K


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1988 times:

Are the trailing edge flaps single or double-slotted? Also, anybody know what the settings were?

Andrea K


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic SE-210 Caravelle Questions / Variants
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...
Some Questions On The Caravelle posted Tue Aug 17 2004 22:44:40 by FriendlySkies
SE-210 Caravelle Questions / Variants posted Fri Jul 13 2007 20:01:24 by Blackbird
Help With LH Flight Questions posted Mon Jul 2 2007 05:34:40 by Airportmanager
3 Basic Questions On 787 Fuselage Structure posted Thu Jun 28 2007 17:54:39 by Superstring
Logging FAA Flight Time In Europe- Questions posted Mon Jun 18 2007 16:01:57 by HighFlyer9790
2 Questions About Business Jets posted Sat Jun 16 2007 00:58:06 by N231YE
Two Stupid Questions About Runways! posted Wed Jun 6 2007 11:38:12 by Planeboy
DC-8 Mid-Air Thrust Reverse Questions posted Sat Jun 2 2007 02:52:19 by Blackbird
NWA's DC-10 Questions (Before They Were Retired) posted Fri May 25 2007 22:01:17 by Blackbird
Flap Extention Questions posted Fri May 25 2007 06:15:46 by Blackbird

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format