Concordski

[Isak922]

Everyone's favorite first ever Super Sonic Airliner  ;) Yes, The Tu-144 did come first. Beat that Concorde!  ;D

Took a hop from some Airport in Russia which name escapes me (Began with a V... I should smack myself for not remembering... Really long runway)... All the way to Istanbul, Turkey for fun. Really nice plane, Really graphic intensive though... and No VC! One of the few I fly that doesn't have one.

Enjoy  :D


Takeoff! Look at those burners!  :o



Climbing to Cruise Altitude...



FL600 and still going strong. Those contrails are a B747-400 at FL350  :P 8-)



The mandatory Plane + Sun shot  ;D



On Approach...



After Touchdown... Kinda foggy down here  :D


This beast can climb to 60,000+ feet, and hit Mach 2.3+ at that altitude  8-) Very fun plane.

http://www.simviation.com/fs2004jets105.htm Bottom of the page  ;)

[TheletterR]

Too bad it has that wacky black cockpit glass.

[Boca]

Too bad it has that wacky black cockpit glass.

I'd like to think that you know that's a sun visor.  ;)

Anyway, the Tu-144 could only attain and retain Supersonic speeds over short periods of time with the afterburners constantly activated. It's fuel consumption made Concorde look positively small. It would never have been a success because while it was in service, simply put, there was no market for it. Most Soviet citizens were too poor to travel on it under Communism, and all the western Supersonic routes had already been filled by Concorde (the Technically far superior plane ).
  Pilots complained that the noise in the cabin and cockpit was shockingly loud, we're talking earsplittingly loud. Compare this to the Concorde where passengers only knew they were going supersonic by the machmeter and looking out of the windows as they ate their caviar and champagne.
     The Canards , whilst ugly, was one good idea the Concorde didn't incorporate for low speed handling, but, as you can see from this video, the Tupolev wasn't exactly graceful coming into land.  ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzyb5n-OORE

One other thing, isn't it spooky how an example of the only two Supersonic airliners ever built both crashed in Paris ?  :o

[TheletterR]

I'd like to think that you know that's a sun visor.

Err, um, of course! I was just testing our younger veiwers. You know with all this newfangled technology we have to keep them on their toes!

*note to self: remember to not act stupid!*

[Helms]

Nice shots. 8-)

[bok269]

[quote]The Canards , whilst ugly, was one good idea the Concorde didn't incorporate for low speed handling, but, as you can see from this video, the Tupolev wasn't exactly graceful coming into land.

[ATI_7500]

One other thing, isn't it spooky how an example of the only two Supersonic airliners ever built both crashed in Paris ?  :o

It was the French, I'm telling you...

[ashaman]

Actually, that I know, of the two supersonic civilian planes, the Tu144 did not use afterburners (did not have them at all, actually). The 144 had mounted four turbofan engines and could take off and transition in supersonic without the need of engage reheat (that it did not have anyway).

The Concorde mounted four turbojets that did need for afterburners in both takeoff and supersonic transition.

In the end, even being the engines of the Concorde not really as modern (being turbojets, and not turbofans) and with need of reheat in the more demanding part of the flight, the Concorde was indeed less thirsty of fuel and less noisy inside than its Russian brother.

The 144 was a mite faster true, but its demands for more fuel pretty much made it die even before having been born. Then again, seen that it was a child of espionage on the blueprints of the Concorde, it never really had a chance.

[Ivan]

Actually, that I know, of the two supersonic civilian planes, the Tu144 did not use afterburners (did not have them at all, actually). The 144 had mounted four turbofan engines and could take off and transition in supersonic without the need of engage reheat (that it did not have anyway).

The Concorde mounted four turbojets that did need for afterburners in both takeoff and supersonic transition.

In the end, even being the engines of the Concorde not really as modern (being turbojets, and not turbofans) and with need of reheat in the more demanding part of the flight, the Concorde was indeed less thirsty of fuel and less noisy inside than its Russian brother.

The 144 was a mite faster true, but its demands for more fuel pretty much made it die even before having been born. Then again, seen that it was a child of espionage on the blueprints of the Concorde, it never really had a chance.

Tu-144S has afterburners, as does the Tu-144LL. Tu-144D doesnt have afterburners. Engine shape tells me that this one is the 144S.

NASA said that while the wing was less sophisticated, the canards made low speed handling a lot better thatn the Concorde. And dont forget that they had rigged the 144LL to use Tu-160 engines... which had a few complications on the handing as well (main throttles at the front inoperative, major changes to the engine bays and bad throttle response as they basically had the FADECs linked to the existing cable / servo system)

Too bad it has that wacky black cockpit glass

Just the glareshield in case the nose is down

[Boca]

I'm just sorry these two 'Maverick' planes aren't still flying. Makes the world of aviation that little bit more boring.  :'(

[FSGT Gabe]

That tree in the last shot is so messed up .

- Kevin

[NDSP]

That tree in the last shot is so messed up .

- Kevin

Why, youve never seen floating leaves before?

[Isak922]

That tree in the last shot is so messed up .

- Kevin

That's from the tower view... I was switching through from Cockpit to Spot, saw that it looked like a nice shot, and picked it...  ;D

[ashaman]

Tu-144S has afterburners, as does the Tu-144LL. Tu-144D doesnt have afterburners. Engine shape tells me that this one is the 144S.

NASA said that while the wing was less sophisticated, the canards made low speed handling a lot better thatn the Concorde. And dont forget that they had rigged the 144LL to use Tu-160 engines... which had a few complications on the handing as well (main throttles at the front inoperative, major changes to the engine bays and bad throttle response as they basically had the FADECs linked to the existing cable / servo system)

If what you write is true then it makes this plane a flying mess. I knew the 144 had mounted different engines in hope to achieve a better fuel consumption and longer range, but the description you make, makes it a supersonic FUBAR whose only positive point were the canard wings. :-?

[Boca]

Might I make this download suggestion to anyone with Fs9,, it's a fabulous wee program that rectifies all the tower views more accurately and changes from tower to tower regardless of where you fly. Perfect for those groundshots of you going overhead at 35,000 ft.  ;)  http://www.fs2000.org/last/news.asp?id=10939