Concorde announced by Aeroplane Heaven

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

Pretty hard to judge it until the instruments and gauges are created. A decent enough base from which to build though.

[MaDDogz 242]

But will they model the gap that occurs in the front panel at supersonic speed when the aircraft 'stretches' ?? 🙃

The renders look good!

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

1 hour ago, Afterburner said:

Interestingly, Concorde had some specialties over most subsonic airliners:

- A pilot was never at risk of forgetting to extend the flaps before takeoff or landing, since Concorde had none 😉  (Sadly, forgetting to extend the flaps resulted in some crashes in airline history).

- You could push the throttles all the way forward and keep them in that position until descent (this was done on flight from Barbados to London), while with subsonic airliners, pilots are only allowed to keep the throttle setting at full for a limited time (to prevent excessive wear of the engines).

Very true. Although technically the levers were full forward or "balls to the wall" as it was known, the actual take-off power setting was changed via the ratings switches, in normal circumstances by 1000ft on the climb or after noise abatement when required. 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

Concorde must be like buses! Once one arrives more follow. This looks like a more serious product.

What is welcome is that 17 years after it last flew there is still plenty of interest in bringing her back to life in a sim.

LATER: @Canine Crew, it seemed appropriate to create a new topic for a different company.

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

45 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Concorde must be like buses! Once one arrives more follow. This looks like a more serious product.

What is welcome is that 17 years after it last flew there is still plenty of interest in bringing her back to life in a sim.

LATER: @Canine Crew, it seemed appropriate to create a new topic for a different company.

In some ways, there is more interest now than when she was flying.  The usual human psychological thing of wanting something more when you can't have it and like art, being worth more when you're dead! 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

1 hour ago, trumpetfrazz1 said:

In some ways, there is more interest now than when she was flying.  The usual human psychological thing of wanting something more when you can't have it and like art, being worth more when you're dead! 

How very true. They say things come in threes. Another announcement soon perhaps?

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

How very true. They say things come in threes. Another announcement soon perhaps?

Let's not start that debate on here as well - I've just been reading through the thread over on FSL...

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

12 minutes ago, trumpetfrazz1 said:

Let's not start that debate on here as well - I've just been reading through the thread over on FSL...

Who mentioned them? I didn’t. Given two companies I’ve never heard of have made announcements who’s to say it stops there?

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

11 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Who mentioned them? I didn’t. Given two companies I’ve never heard of have made announcements who’s to say it stops there?

Well, there aren't that many companies making quality addons - PMDG and FSL are (in my opinion) the two that really make a quality airliner, but the former I would doubt would ever make a Concorde - they are "if it ain't Boeing..." people. 

Just sit tight, we've waited this long so can wait a bit longer.  With a bit of luck we might be able to choose the best of three eventually!  I think for your own reputation though, best not get into debate with the Airbus fans on the other forum - they will never change their mind the same as we won't (and I fly the 'buses) and it just makes all parties look childish without having any effect on the outcome - please don't take this as a criticism because it isn't, it's just the way it looks to someone reading the thread.   Only type facts that you can prove and avoid conjecture or assumptions because there are always people willing to believe something to be fact when it was opinion. 

I now have a habit of quoting sources, even if not by name, so that people know I got the information from a reputable place and I'm not just making it up.  Even then, there are people who have their own view on it and won't change their mind - for example when I've given some factual Concorde technique or other, and I've even given the page reference in the BA manual that I got it from, there is still always somebody that says "no, that's not right", even though they can't prove otherwise because they don't have the documents or access to people who knew....!!  In fact, the other day I thought I was going to have this problem with you because you seemed to be questioning the use of A/T on every approach, even involving a real world pilot - now you probably didn't mean to question it (or maybe you did!) but it read like that, and so I then had to prove my point using facts that were also backed up by a pilot - thankfully! 

Anyway, just some casual advice from me, not meant as criticism, but in the world we are in these days, we all have to be careful...🙂 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

Frazz, I know you mean well and we both share the desire for a 64-bit Concorde. I won’t be posting on Airbus topics any more but I felt I needed to to keep Concorde discussion alive. It served its purpose.

I wasn't questioning whether it was correct to keep auto throttles engaged in Concorde because I know it was. I asked the question to a 747 pilot because I was curious as to whether they did. It was just a question and I wasn’t debating if it was the correct procedure or not.

Strange another company should announce their Concorde so soon after AH and theirs does appear to be aimed at the serious user with a functioning FE panel. We live in hope it won’t be necessary to keep P3Dv3 installed forever.

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

41 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Frazz, I know you mean well and we both share the desire for a 64-bit Concorde. I won’t be posting on Airbus topics any more but I felt I needed to to keep Concorde discussion alive. It served its purpose.

I wasn't questioning whether it was correct to keep auto throttles engaged in Concorde because I know it was. I asked the question to a 747 pilot because I was curious as to whether they did. It was just a question and I wasn’t debating if it was the correct procedure or not.

Strange another company should announce their Concorde so soon after AH and theirs does appear to be aimed at the serious user with a functioning FE panel. We live in hope it won’t be necessary to keep P3Dv3 installed forever.

I understand what you are trying to do but if you think about it the other way round, and you started a topic requesting Concorde (which you must have done at some point) but you then got folk constantly saying "not before an A330" or similar, you would be a little irritated wouldn't you? 

I don't think it is your job or my job to keep discussions going on what was originally, a technical/assistance forum. Keeping discussion going will not change the status quo either unfortunately.  Personally, I think this is a good site for such discussion because over at FSL, people already own Concorde X or the 'buses and have their allegiances, valid ones, so to them bringing up Concorde is a "here we go again" scenario - even I think that when it comes to folk asking when or what the next release will be. 

To keep discussion going safely about Concorde on FSL, it would be advisable to stick with technical/flying aspects. 

Anyway, all personal opinion and meant as friendly advice Ray.   

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

Frazz,

Yes, if the roles were reversed I’d feel some irritation but not as much as perhaps we feel because there are already e 64-bit Airbuses whereas we Concorde owners have been waiting patiently for a considerable amount of time.

As I said earlier I don’t feel the need for any further discussion over there for now. They have to make a decision about P3D or MFS and then it should be full steam ahead. As they cannot disclose anything about MFS and whether they have access further prodding will not achieve anything.

I shall come back to you here when I have any technical questions, you being the font of all knowledge when it comes to Concorde. 😄

[trumpetfrazz1 89]

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Frazz,

Yes, if the roles were reversed I’d feel some irritation but not as much as perhaps we feel because there are already e 64-bit Airbuses whereas we Concorde owners have been waiting patiently for a considerable amount of time.

As I said earlier I don’t feel the need for any further discussion over there for now. They have to make a decision about P3D or MFS and then it should be full steam ahead. As they cannot disclose anything about MFS and whether they have access further prodding will not achieve anything.

I shall come back to you here when I have any technical questions, you being the font of all knowledge when it comes to Concorde. 😄

Just stick to "I" when making your views known rather than "we" and all will be well.

I'm glad you now agree regarding the "prodding". 

Well if asking anything technical start a new thread cause there are too many pages in this one!

I'm definitely not as you describe in that last sentence, I leave that title for the folk that worked with her.  

[John JF 98]

Hi

Im a bit of a Concorde fanatic and I have had both the SSTsim Concorde and the FSlabs Concorde, both of which I loved. I would like to see a decent Concorde for the new sim ASAP because as suggested above, the knowledge and expertise to produce such a sim won’t be around forever. 

From renderings alone it looks impressive, the geometry of the cockpit looks right and the external look spot on too. That gives me a little optimism however I also thought the same about the Colimata Concorde. To answer Ray, the development seems painfully slow, some basic autopilot functions still missing such as max climb, auto throttle is sloppy, the sounds leaves much to be desired and the flight dynamics don’t seem correct. E.g you can bust 250 knots at 20 degrees pitch 20 seconds after lifting off at max weight. I’m not much of a I’m depth systems person but I do know when the basics aren’t right. 
 

Fingers crossed for this project. 
 

John

[Ray Proudfoot 8,979]

9 hours ago, jonsonwonson said:

To answer Ray, the development seems painfully slow, some basic autopilot functions still missing such as max climb, auto throttle is sloppy, the sounds leaves much to be desired and the flight dynamics don’t seem correct. E.g you can bust 250 knots at 20 degrees pitch 20 seconds after lifting off at max weight. I’m not much of a I’m depth systems person but I do know when the basics aren’t right.

Fingers crossed for this project.

John

I was never going to switch to XP even for Concorde. The rate of progress seems painfully slow. Not sure why that is the case.

Regarding that speed / climb rate problem the reheats (depending on weight) would be cancelled between 40-80 seconds after throttles forward. If there was an automated process to cancel them and the throttles retarded to around 93% then the speed should then be controlled by pitch.

If left to the user then manual action to do that is required. Only then can you judge how well the flight model operates.

The FS Labs Concorde benefitted from a program called CPS-X created by a very clever Frenchman and that calculated reheat time based on weight. There needs to be an equivalent for XP.