My first Mach 2 flight

[TurboKen 221]

So I picked up the DC Designs Concorde last night and decided to give it a go. I departed PDX with the intent to land at SFO, normally about 1 1/2 flight via 737. Once I got to 55,000' and Mach 2.03 I decided to just keep going as the terrain below was moving at an incredible rate of speed. Ray would have been err.. Proud until I started my decent way too late as I over shot my runway and had to perform a go around. Sadly my next attempt into LAX was not much better, too slow this time and well.... I crashed. 

Still It is a fun plane to fly and quite different then the normal tube liners or puddle jumpers I usually fly. I get some of the complaints about the graphics as inside and out they were just OK, I would like to see an update to improve things a little after they finish the MSFS version but who knows, we were probably lucky to have received it in P3d at all. It was fun watching all 4 afterburners lit up.😉

 

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

@TurboKen, well done on buying it and giving it your best shot! Its descent profile is very different to subsonic aircraft.

5nm before your calculated decel point engage altitude hold and turn off auto throttles. At decel point reduce thrust to 94% N2. Wait until 360kts IAS is achieved.

When it is engage VSpd and a gentle descent will commence. At 350kts IAS engage IAS hold on the right end of the AFCS, not the one above the autothrottles.

The nose will pitch down to maintain 350kts. At Mach 1.5 further reduce thrust to 77% N2. The descent rate will increase significantly. Up to 4,000fpm. Perfectly normal.

Aim to be subsonic no closer than 55nm before land otherwise your sonic boom will be heard.

On reaching Mach 1 reduce throttles to idle. Descent rate increases to 6000-7000fpm. Again, perfectly normal.

At 10,000ft reduce speed to 250kts, lower visor and nose to 5°. When on approach reduce to 190kts, nose fully down and gear down. N2 will need to be around 87% N2. Aim to land around 155kts. Once nose wheel touches down engage full reverse thrust with manual braking. Kill reverse thrust at 70kts. Taxi off runway and raise nose to 5°. Kill engines 2 and 3. Taxi to gate.

Piece of cake. 😁

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

One extra thing very important to Concorde’s performance is the air temperature.   Rather than read the actual temp we use the ISA DEV one.

An ISA DEV of +10°C means the climb rate is poorer but the opposite is true on the descent and you will get down quicker. -10°C will aid the climb rate but the descent will take longer.

It’s all a bit complicated to explain here but hopefully the docs with the aircraft will give some guidance on this.

When descending Mach 1 is generally reached at FL360.

[TurboKen 221]

On 10/2/2021 at 1:12 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

One extra thing very important to Concorde’s performance is the air temperature.   Rather than read the actual temp we use the ISA DEV one.

An ISA DEV of +10°C means the climb rate is poorer but the opposite is true on the descent and you will get down quicker. -10°C will aid the climb rate but the descent will take longer.

It’s all a bit complicated to explain here but hopefully the docs with the aircraft will give some guidance on this.

When descending Mach 1 is generally reached at FL360.

Thanks a lot for the info Ray. Your right totally different animal from subsonic aircraft. I was descending at 5k fpm and I think touchdown was about 185. This time I started my final much sooner and brought her in using every last inch of runway length. (if you have seen FIREFOX you will know what I'm talking about here). 

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

@TurboKen, it takes a lot of practice to master Concorde and it may be harder with a less accurate flight model. Both British Airways and Air France Concorde pilots adopted very similar flight procedures so the closer you can get to those the more satisfaction you’ll get.

I’m not surprised it took most of the runway to stop. It takes several seconds for the nose wheel to touch down and until it does you cannot engage reverse thrust. Try pushing the yoke forward gently to assist.

Portland to SFO should take you out to sea and remain a minimum 25nm off the coast to avoid the sonic boom being heard over land.

How long were the reheats on when you started your takeoff roll? They’re usually cancelled at 500ft together with a reduction in throttles to around 93% N2. Always use full power plus reheats for takeoff of course.

I vaguely remember Firefox and if your landings are like his perhaps you should change your handle to Clint! 😁

[cowpatz 243]

Which Concorde model are you using Ray?

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

@cowpatz, the 32-bit version from FS Labs designed for FSX and P3D v3. Considered to be the most accurate available. Well, it’s not currently available and we’re patiently waiting for FSL to make an announcement about the release for v4 and v5.

[TurboKen 221]

17 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Portland to SFO should take you out to sea and remain a minimum 25nm off the coast to avoid the sonic boom being heard over land.

How long were the reheats on when you started your takeoff roll? They’re usually cancelled at 500ft together with a reduction in throttles to around 93% N2. Always use full power plus reheats for takeoff of course.

I vaguely remember Firefox and if your landings are like his perhaps you should change your handle to Clint! 😁

So 25 miles off the coast is enough for Concorde's sonic boom? We have some F-15's that every morning at 9AM head out to the ocean and perform training missions, every few years we will here a sonic boom from one of the jets coming back in too quickly, we are about 60nm from the ocean here in Portland.

Reheats were on basically from the start then off at about 2k feet. I'll try another flight soon. Last night I did the same flight with the Phenom300, I was only managing 460mph ground speed or Mach .79 so the flight took much longer. Really makes you appreciate the Concorde. It had both speed and beauty.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

1 hour ago, TurboKen said:

So 25 miles off the coast is enough for Concorde's sonic boom?

If you’re flying parallel to the coast then the sonic boom travels a shorter distance. If you’re approaching a land mass head on your sonic boom spreads forward up to 50nm so BA pilots would ensure they were subsonic 55nm before the waypoint on the Devon coast when returning to Heathrow from JFK. Sometimes they miscalculated and Devonians would hear it.

For your flight down to KSFO I’d be inclined to head west until your 50nm off the coast and then turn south. By then you should be at FL280 / Mach 0.95. It probably needs a custom flight plan before joining the subsonic traffic on the STAR.

Then turn on your reheats with full thrust and pitch up to maintain 395kts initially then after going through Mach 1 engage MAX CLB and the AFCS will adjust pitch to maintain max speed. Reheats off at Mach 1.7 (approx 5-8 mins later) around FL430. Your climb rate will depend on ISA DEV temp. Only close to the tropics did Concorde reach FL600 since the troposphere is much colder there than at higher latitudes.

You need to kill reheats earlier. Note the fuel consumption with them on. Around 13T per engine per hour. That’s 52T for all engines. 😳

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

Ken, tune in a VOR and watch the distance change. At Mach 2 you cover 23nm per minute! 😳

[TurboKen 221]

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You need to kill reheats earlier. Note the fuel consumption with them on. Around 13T per engine per hour. That’s 52T for all engines. 😳

Ray I didn't mention this earlier but I let some fuel out to lighten the load and get to altitude quicker. It turns out I let out the perfect amount of fuel, luckily I didn't need to perform a go-around this time as it would have proven fatal. By the time I got to my gate in Los Angeles and the engines shut off I had precisely 859lbs of total fuel, maybe 2 min at idle. The definition of cutting it close I'd say.

[TurboKen 221]

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Ken, tune in a VOR and watch the distance change. At Mach 2 you cover 23nm per minute! 😳

Now if we can get that SR-71 MILVIZ was showing awhile back we can see MACH 3+. Unfortunately even though it has already been shown working in P3d it is only going to be released in MSFS.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

15 minutes ago, TurboKen said:

Ray I didn't mention this earlier but I let some fuel out to lighten the load and get to altitude quicker. It turns out I let out the perfect amount of fuel, luckily I didn't need to perform a go-around this time as it would have proven fatal. By the time I got to my gate in Los Angeles and the engines shut off I had precisely 859lbs of total fuel, maybe 2 min at idle. The definition of cutting it close I'd say.

You’ll have your collar felt by the authorities Ken. Concorde required no less than 10T of fuel when landing. For that flight I would estimate around 40T of fuel. Of course I have no idea of the models accuracy or what guidance is provided for determining how much you need.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,031]

Ken, I found this chart I created when testing FS Labs Concorde. It might help with your descents. Altitude on the vertical axis; time on the horizontal. See how close the DC Designs Concorde matches the FS Labs one.

It took 18 mins from the point the throttles were retarded to 94% N2 until reaching 10,000ft. ISA DEV of 0 was probably used so a higher one will assist descent and a lower one will take longer.

[TurboKen 221]

23 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You’ll have your collar felt by the authorities Ken. Concorde required no less than 10T of fuel when landing. For that flight I would estimate around 40T of fuel. Of course I have no idea of the models accuracy or what guidance is provided for determining how much you need.

Thanks again Ray, I will verify my decent with your graph and see how it does. Did you make one for climb out/ascent too?