Mr. Concorde wrote:
Typhoon,
OK then let's cut straight to the chase... I have a flight at 10:30 tomorrow morning over to JFK, and I am..... nackered, if I say so myself...
Anyhow,
1) There is no discreet answer to this question, in ways that both of these functions can be 'deferred'. Allow me to explain: let's take a look at the Nose System, the Concorde could indeed take-off and fly with it not attatched to the aircraft, although for starters you would be unable to exceed Mach .95 which is the speed at which the 'cone of death' as they used to call it begins to form around the aircraft suring its acceleration through the speed of sound... I'll just say that if you did, the sudden release of air (which, incidentally, creates a suction on the entire forward area of the aircraft) would implode the Main Windshield, exposing the whole interior to a 'horizontal tornado of wind' comprising of extreme cold and hot gases... this would not create a nice sight, and chances are you would not have time to notice at the speed of which it would happen.
Secondly, coming along to your query on the afterburners... I'll say it is possible to take-off without the use of afterburners, however doing so would be suicidal lol; for starters, once the aircraft is clear of the runway, chances are the power produced would be insufficient to create enough energy in order for the steep angle of attack ahead, and another thing to take into mind is the fact that the afterburners are a part of the engine... burning on pure fuel, the casing is attatched to the HyperFan system inside the Jet Engine which in turn allows engine cooling once the aircraft comes back through Mach 1. If you have ever looked closely at the front of a Concorde engine, you will have noticed a large 'flap area' which opens and closes to aid in cooling and controlling the amount of air and in which direction it passes around the engine, and this 'area' has long tubular canals which run the length of the engine to the afterburners. which, when engaged, open the flaps so as to let more air into the engine to help power the hydrogen, acting as an ignition source for the fuel. You may be surprised that an aircraft such as Concorde relies so heavily on such a dangerous gas; if you would like to know more about this, then please don't hesitate to ask!
2) De-pressurization... I remember it well as must all Concorde Pilots... cutting straight to the chase, let's just say that in the unlikely event (the figure being something around 1/7,000,000) of a window blowing out, well, as you can see if you have ever been up close to a Concorde, the windows are extremely small (pity this as you can catch great views!), around 6x3 inches, and this cut's down the possibility of this type of emergency arising, but in the case of this happening, the seat-belt and no smoking signs would be left as they are (not much point at Mach 2.04), and engine power on all engines brought back to 70%; this would lower our speed to about Mach 1.7, a safe speed to begin a descent. The passengers, at this point, will be in their seats; Concorde's windows are made in miniscule 'cubes', so if a window were to blow out, there would be a hole no larger than your or my thumbnail. The oxygen masks would be deployed from their position above the seats, and the passengers told via PA to enter the Emergency Position (head between knees and arms folded over head whilst holding on to the seat in front, or if not possible, the side of the seat). The passenger next to the window would by now be either pulled out through the window (even through a hole the size of our thumbnail...), or was holding on tightly to his/her seat, although the strength needed to do this would be phenominal. The engine flaps would be fully closed and the Hyper Fans engaged. This means that only a small amount of air would enter the engine, therefore slowing down speed greatly. Any air pressure in the engine would be released via 'spill doors' on the underside of the engine.
To answer your question in short, I'll say that Concorde has an excellent safety record, and if in the very rare occassion that something like this did happen, the above procedures would be followed and the aircraft brought back to a safe speed and descended to 35,000 feet. From there on we would guide (guide, not glide just so you don't misread!) the aircraft to the nearest airport at as slow a speed as mathematically possible. There are numerous airports in the south of Greenland which would be available from France/England to the US, and vice versa, so we always have plenty of options available to us.
3) Ah, nice simple question! Concorde's tyres will withstand a speed of up to 900 knots during any take-off/starting roll (which has never been recorded lol!), but if you are talking about maximum touchdown speed, the figure would be between 300 and 400 knots, taking into consideration the weight of the aircraft and the general condition of the tyres themselves.
4) The 738 has been in service since 1996 over here ( I am not sure about the United States, but since you are the ones who make the Boeing series...); up until then I was flying the 733 and 734. I joined British Airways in 1997 flying the 744, and joined the Concorde Fleet in 2001 (shortly before September 11th, so I was in just in time too!). My training was completed seven months ago, and as you know I am now First Officer (or simply Co-Pilot as we are known on Concorde), and my final ambition is to make it into that all-redeeming left-hand seat!
Hey, this message took longer than predicted to write lol but it's always nice to hand out details, just to keep up to spec!
If you have any more questions at all, please do ask, and I shall answer as accurately to my knowledge as I can.
Unless they don't have M.E.L.'s at British Airways, I think that says it all.
