Re: Concorde

[Alex A]

Tim Walters wrote:
Hello,
> I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider
> Concorde to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small
> contribution from the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much
> (in terms of ideas, inventions, and engineering) each nation
> contributed?
>
50/50
Without (British) Olympus Concorde can not fly ...


> Tim Walters
> Remove number for e-mail.

Bye
Alexandre

[Matt]

BAE tend to say "They did the styling, we did the engineering."

"Tim Walters" > wrote in message
...
> I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider Concorde
> to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small contribution from
> the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much (in terms of ideas,
> inventions, and engineering) each nation contributed?
>
> Tim Walters
> Remove number for e-mail.

[David Bromage]

Matt wrote:
> BAE tend to say "They did the styling, we did the engineering."

Probably some truth in that. Much of the research came from the TSR-2.

Cheers
David

[John Halliwell]

In article >, David Bromage
> writes
>Probably some truth in that. Much of the research came from the TSR-2.

Weren't Avro working towards a supersonic Vulcan as well?

--
John

[David Bromage]

John Halliwell wrote:
> In article >, David Bromage
> > writes
>
>>Probably some truth in that. Much of the research came from the TSR-2.
>
> Weren't Avro working towards a supersonic Vulcan as well?

RAF issued Operational Requirement 330 in 1954 for a supersonic recon
platform which could also be a supersonic V bomber. Most of the British
aircraft manufacturers made submissions but the project was cancelled in
1957. Do a search for the Avro 730, Vickers SP4 (which had 16 engines!),
Handley Page HP.100 and English Electric P.10. Shorts also did a design
but I can't remember what it was called.

Cheers
David

[Matt Clonfero]

In article >, Tim Walters
> wrote:
>I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider Concorde
>to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small contribution from
>the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much (in terms of ideas,
>inventions, and engineering) each nation contributed?

Easy. The UK contributed the design, and the French the spelling of the
name.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
--
To err is human
To forgive is not
Air Force Policy

[John Mullen]

"Matt Clonfero" ]> wrote in message
...
> In article >, Tim Walters
> > wrote:
> >I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider Concorde
> >to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small contribution from
> >the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much (in terms of ideas,
> >inventions, and engineering) each nation contributed?
>
> Easy. The UK contributed the design, and the French the spelling of the
> name.

Or how about:

The UK started them, the French finished them

;)

John

[Crazeagle]

Correction :

Without Rolls-Royce & SNECMA (french) Olympus Concorde can not fly
;-)

"Alex A" > a écrit dans le message de
...
> Tim Walters wrote:
> Hello,
> > I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider
> > Concorde to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small
> > contribution from the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much
> > (in terms of ideas, inventions, and engineering) each nation
> > contributed?
> >
> 50/50
> Without (British) Olympus Concorde can not fly ...
>
>
> > Tim Walters
> > Remove number for e-mail.
>
> Bye
> Alexandre
>
>

[Crazeagle]

Correction :

Without Rolls-Royce & SNECMA (french) Olympus Concorde can not fly
;-)

"Alex A" > a écrit dans le message de
...
> Tim Walters wrote:
> Hello,
> > I've just read in one of the French ngs that the French consider
> > Concorde to have been the product of Gallic genius, with a small
> > contribution from the Brits. Does anyone here happen to know how much
> > (in terms of ideas, inventions, and engineering) each nation
> > contributed?
> >
> 50/50
> Without (British) Olympus Concorde can not fly ...
>
>
> > Tim Walters
> > Remove number for e-mail.
>
> Bye
> Alexandre
>
>

[Keith Willshaw]

"Crazeagle" > wrote in message
...
> Correction :
>
> Without Rolls-Royce & SNECMA (french) Olympus Concorde can not fly
> ;-)
>
>

The Olympus engine predates Concorde having been
initially developed by Bristol Aero-Engines in 1950
and used in the Avro Vulcan and TSR-2

Keith

[John Mullen]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Crazeagle" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Correction :
> >
> > Without Rolls-Royce & SNECMA (french) Olympus Concorde can not fly
> > ;-)
> >
> >
>
> The Olympus engine predates Concorde having been
> initially developed by Bristol Aero-Engines in 1950
> and used in the Avro Vulcan and TSR-2

Well, sort of.

Vulcan (B1)

4 Bristol-Siddeley Olympus 101 (11,000 lb), 102 (12,000 lb) or 104s (13,500
lb)

Vulcan (B2)

4 Bristol-Siddeley Olympus 201 (17,000 lb) or 301s (20,000 lb)

TSR-1

Olympus 22R Mk.320

Thrust 13865kg
Dry Thrust 8880kg

Concorde

Olympus 593 Mk 610-14-28

Dry 139.4 kN (31,350 lb st)
Afterburner 169.2 kN (38,050 lb st)

As I'm sure you know already the Olympus was a family of engines developed
over a 20 year period. Weren't some of them also used in ships? I'm sure
also that I've seen a pic of a Vulcan with an underslung 593 under test
during the Concorde development programme. THe size difference is very
noticeable.

Best

John

[Ian Craig]

Slight digression, but wasn't a Vulcan used in the development of the RB199
for Tornado? Carried in a 'pod' underneath that was a replica of the
proposed air intake solution?

"John Mullen" > wrote in message
...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Crazeagle" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Correction :
> > >
> > > Without Rolls-Royce & SNECMA (french) Olympus Concorde can not fly
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > >
> >
> > The Olympus engine predates Concorde having been
> > initially developed by Bristol Aero-Engines in 1950
> > and used in the Avro Vulcan and TSR-2
>
> Well, sort of.
>
> Vulcan (B1)
>
> 4 Bristol-Siddeley Olympus 101 (11,000 lb), 102 (12,000 lb) or 104s
(13,500
> lb)
>
> Vulcan (B2)
>
> 4 Bristol-Siddeley Olympus 201 (17,000 lb) or 301s (20,000 lb)
>
> TSR-1
>
> Olympus 22R Mk.320
>
> Thrust 13865kg
> Dry Thrust 8880kg
>
> Concorde
>
> Olympus 593 Mk 610-14-28
>
> Dry 139.4 kN (31,350 lb st)
> Afterburner 169.2 kN (38,050 lb st)
>
> As I'm sure you know already the Olympus was a family of engines developed
> over a 20 year period. Weren't some of them also used in ships? I'm sure
> also that I've seen a pic of a Vulcan with an underslung 593 under test
> during the Concorde development programme. THe size difference is very
> noticeable.
>
> Best
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Keith Willshaw]

"John Mullen" > wrote in message
...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> ...

>
> As I'm sure you know already the Olympus was a family of engines developed
> over a 20 year period.

Sure, thats true of most engines in fact


> Weren't some of them also used in ships? I'm sure
> also that I've seen a pic of a Vulcan with an underslung 593 under test
> during the Concorde development programme. THe size difference is very
> noticeable.
>

Quite true.

Keith

[John Halliwell]

In article >, Ian Craig
> writes
>Slight digression, but wasn't a Vulcan used in the development of the RB199
>for Tornado? Carried in a 'pod' underneath that was a replica of the
>proposed air intake solution?

Wouldn't surprise me, it was also used as Pegasus test bed. Wasn't one
Vulcan testbed damaged when an engine for TSR2 exploded on the ground?

--
John