aerlingus330
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:21 am

Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 05, 2005 7:26 am

Which one do you prefer... The Anglo-French Concode or the Russian Tu-144?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Powell



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Allan



AerLingus330
Aer Lingus Airbus A330-300
 
AR1300
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:22 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:50 am

In what aspect?Looks? performance?

Mike
You are now free to move about the cabin
 
ACdreamliner
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:15 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 05, 2005 10:30 am

Concordski, I think it looks alot more macho, would have love to have flown one, of only that french mirage fighter hadn't dived infront of it at the paris air show all those years ago.

bit ironic is it not that both 'corcorde' crashes happend in paris dont u think???
Where are you going?
 
ACDC8
Posts: 7203
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:56 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 05, 2005 1:55 pm

The TU-144, hands down. I mean just look at it...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong


It looks like the way a SST should.
A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
 
MH017
Posts: 1473
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:17 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 05, 2005 7:22 pm

Tupolev TU-144: prefer the looks of the engines closer together than the duo-set of Concorde's, especially from the rear as the photo of ACDC8/Peter de Jong shows  Wink
don't throw away tomorrow !
 
aerlingus330
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:21 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:46 am

Quoting AR1300 (Reply 1):
In what aspect?Looks? performance?

Whichever you normally base your opinons on...lol

AerLingus330
Aer Lingus Airbus A330-300
 
AeroVodochody
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:48 am

Tu-144, Faster, more powerful, and better looking, with a range of only about 60mi. less than Concorde  bigthumbsup  Sucks that we won't be seeing more of them....  Sad
Try not to be jealous, we can't all be Czech.
 
An225
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 6:37 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:47 am

Probably the Tu-144, since it has such a great look and appeal.
I wonder if it is comfortable to fly in it. Based on the Russian record of back-breaking seats (Tu-154, Yak-42, etc.) I am not sure it is comfortable. Also, I heard that during the few flights that it flew, the passengers were using ear plugs given to them by the crew. The air-condition and the engines made such a loud noise that it was not avoidable.

What do you think?


Cheers,

Uzi
 
B742
Posts: 3562
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:54 am

I think:

Concorde - Is the female version and is more sleak!

Concorski - Is the male version pure power and toughness!

This has no resemblance to real life male and females btw  Wink

Rob!
 
HorizonGirl
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:59 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:06 pm

I like the Concorde in terms on performance and successes.
I like the Concordski's appearance better.
When I was around 5, I did not know the name of the Tupolev Tu-144, so I
just called it the Concorde with puppydog ears.  Embarrassment

Devon
Flying high on the Wings of the Great Northwest!
 
rootsair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 3:25 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:30 pm

In the long haul plane tournament I think concorde won by 20-1 votes !!!
A man without the knowledge of his past history,culture and origins is like a tree without roots
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:14 pm

Def TU-144.But the Concorde was more Successful.  Smile
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
AeroVodochody
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:30 am

Quoting RootsAir (Reply 10):
In the long haul plane tournament I think concorde won by 20-1 votes !!!

Hehe.... yeah that was my one vote Big grin I guess the Tu-144 isn't as well known... but I think its the better A/C performancewise, eventhough it most likely isnt as comfy as the Concorde  Wink
Try not to be jealous, we can't all be Czech.
 
ACDC8
Posts: 7203
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:56 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:54 am

I voted for the Concorde in the other thread. I never really paid attention to the TU-144 until this thread. But I have to admit I like it somewhat more.

I guess that'll teach me to take a bit more time in a vote next time ...  Big grin

[Edited 2005-06-07 17:56:31]
A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
 
MADtoCAE
Posts: 1094
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:32 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Wed Jun 08, 2005 5:50 am

Concorde
Period.
Off topic: are there any TU-144 safety cards out there?
Operator!!! Give me the number for 911!!
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Concorde Vs Concordski?

Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:55 am

Hate to break it to you all, but TU-144's performance was poor compared to Concorde, forget brochures, consider real life.

TU-144 needed to retain reheat in supercruise, so poor range, worse still with pax. Concorde was efficient in supercruise, TU-144 was not.

No reliable intake system so lots of engine unstarts and other nasties (they were so desperate they even asked for Concorde's system. Made by BAC's Guided Weapons Division, during the Cold War too)!

Poor aerodynamics compared to Concorde, poor wing design leading to extensive redesign to incorporate retractable canards, big weight penalty there.

Poor engine intake config, another big redesign needed.

Bad cabin noise, on the handful of 'commercial' flights inside USSR pax seating next to each other needed to write notes to communicate.

Bad cabin vibration.

But that won't sway people, I know this.

But consider, it is the late 70's, Cold War on, US has dropped out of the SST game after the failure of the B2707.
The USSR would love to rub the US nose in it, imagine TU-144's into JFK, a better image than IL-62 against 747's, DC-10's, L1011's.
Or for the 1980 Moscow Olympics.
So, Moscow via Shannon, then on to Cuba and/or JFK.

In reality, no much more than 100 or so internal USSR flights, some with pax, most with mail.
Really little more a pre service set of proving flights.

Why did the service beyond the USSR I described above never happen? What a great stick it to the US PR opportunity it would have been.
Because the damn thing was too risky to put overwater, too unreliable, SNN-JFK range capability? Only with none or very few pax.
A dead duck after 1978, but it was one of Brezenev's (SP?) pet projects, so only finally and formally axed after he was dead and buried.

A brave attempt by an otherwise the great Tupolev design team, (what a beauty the TU-114 propliner was), but this time they had too little time (started in 1963), too little money, too many irrational goals (like have it flying before Concorde AT ALL COSTS).
In fact, it was just like the N1 Moon Rocket, compared to the Saturn V.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests