Maybe not worth a thread, but I know a few of you are interested in aviation history. One of the early model Tu-144 is now in an aviation museum in Russia. Slowly being restored back to original condition.

Here’s a 20 minute video having a good close-up look around it. Some of it is pretty advanced, some of it looks a little bit quirky. I really enjoyed the video. Somehow he got permission to walk out on the wings, and got them to operate the nose and canard wings. So much more than just an aircraft doco.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbWF3ogRoto

I follow this guy’s youTube channel, he has some interesting stuff from to time.

party_pants said:

Maybe not worth a thread, but I know a few of you are interested in aviation history. One of the early model Tu-144 is now in an aviation museum in Russia. Slowly being restored back to original condition.

Here’s a 20 minute video having a good close-up look around it. Some of it is pretty advanced, some of it looks a little bit quirky. I really enjoyed the video. Somehow he got permission to walk out on the wings, and got them to operate the nose and canard wings. So much more than just an aircraft doco.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbWF3ogRoto

I follow this guy’s youTube channel, he has some interesting stuff from to time.

Worth a thread. There have only ever been two supersonic airliners that I have heard of. This is far more significant than restoring Connie.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

Maybe not worth a thread, but I know a few of you are interested in aviation history. One of the early model Tu-144 is now in an aviation museum in Russia. Slowly being restored back to original condition.

Here’s a 20 minute video having a good close-up look around it. Some of it is pretty advanced, some of it looks a little bit quirky. I really enjoyed the video. Somehow he got permission to walk out on the wings, and got them to operate the nose and canard wings. So much more than just an aircraft doco.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbWF3ogRoto

I follow this guy’s youTube channel, he has some interesting stuff from to time.

Worth a thread. There have only ever been two supersonic airliners that I have heard of. This is far more significant than restoring Connie.

Ah yes. The Concordski.

Tamb said:

Ah yes. The Concordski.

I really hate that name, I don’t think it does the plane justice. The plane itself had a few pretty neat design ideas. What let it down was the Soviets could not produce an engine with the required performance at that time. By the time they developed one the Soviet collapse was on and it was never economical to reintroduce them back into service. There was one modified in the mid 2000s with new engines (the one used on the Tu-160 supersonic bomber) and it flew some research missions, but was never considered to re-open the production line.

party_pants said:

Tamb said:

Ah yes. The Concordski.

I really hate that name, I don’t think it does the plane justice. The plane itself had a few pretty neat design ideas. What let it down was the Soviets could not produce an engine with the required performance at that time. By the time they developed one the Soviet collapse was on and it was never economical to reintroduce them back into service. There was one modified in the mid 2000s with new engines (the one used on the Tu-160 supersonic bomber) and it flew some research missions, but was never considered to re-open the production line.

I think the name was based on the wing shape.

Is there a one to one comparison of the Tu-144 and the concorde somewhere?

What would you change on this aircraft to bring it up to date as a realistic current design?

mollwollfumble said:

Is there a one to one comparison of the Tu-144 and the concorde somewhere?

What would you change on this aircraft to bring it up to date as a realistic current design?

The engines for a start.

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

Is there a one to one comparison of the Tu-144 and the concorde somewhere?

What would you change on this aircraft to bring it up to date as a realistic current design?

The engines for a start.

It never really took off the supersonic flight thing, was it the cost (it seems so, not cheap at all) or do people not care that much about getting somewhere in half the time or thereabouts going back a quick check of the speed of the concorde vs the 747-400.

It had a maximum speed over twice the speed of sound at Mach 2.04 (1,354 mph or 2,180 km/h at cruise altitude),

The 747-400, the most common variant in service, has a high-subsonic cruise speed of Mach 0.85–0.855 (up to 570 mph or 920 km/h) with an intercontinental range of 7,260 nautical miles (8,350 statute miles or 13,450 km).

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

Is there a one to one comparison of the Tu-144 and the concorde somewhere?

What would you change on this aircraft to bring it up to date as a realistic current design?

The engines for a start.

Exactly. What are the differences in engines and how much do the designs need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present?

So far as i know (and i admit my knowledge is negligible) there have only ever been three aircraft capable of long distance supersonic flight.

All the fighter jets can be dismissed because they have to drop back to subsonic speed after an hour or usually less.

And damnit, Australia needs supersonic passenger aircraft.

mollwollfumble said:

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

Is there a one to one comparison of the Tu-144 and the concorde somewhere?

What would you change on this aircraft to bring it up to date as a realistic current design?

The engines for a start.

Exactly. What are the differences in engines and how much do the designs need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present?

So far as i know (and i admit my knowledge is negligible) there have only ever been three aircraft capable of long distance supersonic flight.

All the fighter jets can be dismissed because they have to drop back to subsonic speed after an hour or usually less.

And damnit, Australia needs supersonic passenger aircraft.

The engines were the biggest issue, and possibly till are.

The Soviet plan was a bit ambitious for its day in wanting to use turbofan engines, with afterburner to accelerate it up to speed and then supercruise on dry thrust for the duration of the rest of the normal flight. However, the initial engines were not up to the task. So they switched to turbojet engines instead but these were much noisier and less economical. So it was all a bit shit.

Concorde used turbojets. Afterburner to get up to speed and then supercruise on dry thrust.

The biggest issues are engine noise and sound-proofing in the passenger cabin, particularly at the rear.

The other major issue is sonic boom. There has to be a design that minimises it otherwise it will never be allowed to fly over land. It is quite reasonable not to permit supersonic flight over land in most places. Maybe the Australian outback or Saharan Africa it might be possible, but really the focus should be on designing the sonic boom out of aeroplane – or at least down to polite levels.

I think Australia could do with supersonic international connections moreso than domestic. Sydney-Toyko in 4 hours, or Perth-Birmingham in 8 hours … that sort of thing.

There are a couple of start-ups spruiking low sonic boom supersonic areoplanes, notably Boom Aerospace and Aerion, but these will be rather smaller even than Concorde. About 20-50 passengers, and will probably be mostly used as private jets rather than regular scheduled passenger routes.

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Nah.

We need a robot industry.

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

That might be a bit of a stretch. maybe we should concentrate on developing a titanium industry in Australia, perhaps making a few aerospace components. I think a whole aviation industry is a bit beyond us for the moment.

party_pants said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

That might be a bit of a stretch. maybe we should concentrate on developing a titanium industry in Australia, perhaps making a few aerospace components. I think a whole aviation industry is a bit beyond us for the moment.

That’s exactly what I said.

And a AI chip industry.

Transition will love that.

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

we had two…CAC and GAF

sibeen said:

party_pants said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

That might be a bit of a stretch. maybe we should concentrate on developing a titanium industry in Australia, perhaps making a few aerospace components. I think a whole aviation industry is a bit beyond us for the moment.

That’s exactly what I said.

nah

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Why not all electric planes and spaceships too?

party_pants said:

sibeen said:

party_pants said:

That might be a bit of a stretch. maybe we should concentrate on developing a titanium industry in Australia, perhaps making a few aerospace components. I think a whole aviation industry is a bit beyond us for the moment.

That’s exactly what I said.

nah

I’m succinct.

sibeen said:

party_pants said:

sibeen said:

That’s exactly what I said.

nah

I’m succinct.

Anyways, I was doing a public service by repeating your post for the benefit of those that would not have read it.

party_pants said:

sibeen said:

party_pants said:

nah

I’m succinct.

Anyways, I was doing a public service by repeating your post for the benefit of those that would not have read it.

thank you.

Anyway, I recommend watching the video in the OP. Some interesting features on the plane, including limited heat protection on the cockpit side windows. They got rather warm during flight and heated the whole cockpit. Seems that was very popular with the pilots.

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

Tamb said:

The engines for a start.

Exactly. What are the differences in engines and how much do the designs need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present?

So far as i know (and i admit my knowledge is negligible) there have only ever been three aircraft capable of long distance supersonic flight.

All the fighter jets can be dismissed because they have to drop back to subsonic speed after an hour or usually less.

And damnit, Australia needs supersonic passenger aircraft.

The engines were the biggest issue, and possibly till are.

The Soviet plan was a bit ambitious for its day in wanting to use turbofan engines, with afterburner to accelerate it up to speed and then supercruise on dry thrust for the duration of the rest of the normal flight. However, the initial engines were not up to the task. So they switched to turbojet engines instead but these were much noisier and less economical. So it was all a bit shit.

Concorde used turbojets. Afterburner to get up to speed and then supercruise on dry thrust.

The biggest issues are engine noise and sound-proofing in the passenger cabin, particularly at the rear.

The other major issue is sonic boom. There has to be a design that minimises it otherwise it will never be allowed to fly over land. It is quite reasonable not to permit supersonic flight over land in most places. Maybe the Australian outback or Saharan Africa it might be possible, but really the focus should be on designing the sonic boom out of aeroplane – or at least down to polite levels.

I think Australia could do with supersonic international connections moreso than domestic. Sydney-Toyko in 4 hours, or Perth-Birmingham in 8 hours … that sort of thing.

Excellent. Thank you.

It’s said that noise-cancelling headphones are most effective against low frequency noise sich as aircraft engines.

So i’ve been wondering lately if noise-cancelling speakers placed at the rear of the passenger cabin, and perhaps elsewhere, as an alternative to bulky and heavy sound absorbing materials.

I can’t immediatedly see why it couldn’t cut the engine noise in the cabin by 10 to 20 decibels.

There is already a lot of work on reducing the sonic boom, ranging from subtle modification of the front end, to owl feathers.

Woodie said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Why not all electric planes and spaceships too?

Small planes yes, once batteries gets up past 1000km range

We could build small ion spaceships for asteroid sampling and mining

These would be self assembling once in space bought up by bigger rockets elsewhere.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Woodie said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Why not all electric planes and spaceships too?

Small planes yes, once batteries gets up past 1000km range

We could build small ion spaceships for asteroid sampling and mining

These would be self assembling once in space bought up by bigger rockets elsewhere.

P’raps Ikea could join the space race. :)

Tau.Neutrino said:

Woodie said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need an aviation industry

We need a space industry

We need to build all electric bikes, cars and trucks.

Why not all electric planes and spaceships too?

Small planes yes, once batteries gets up past 1000km range

We could build small ion spaceships for asteroid sampling and mining

These would be self assembling once in space bought up by bigger rockets elsewhere.

I liked the idea of robots assembling spaceships in space

but self assembling spaceships would be way better.

We need to develop self assembling habitat structures for the Moon and Mars.

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need to develop self assembling habitat structures for the Moon and Mars.

There is no need for habitat structures on the Moon or Mars. We can’t even build them in Hobart to alleviate the housing crisis.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Woodie said:

Why not all electric planes and spaceships too?

Small planes yes, once batteries gets up past 1000km range

We could build small ion spaceships for asteroid sampling and mining

These would be self assembling once in space bought up by bigger rockets elsewhere.

I liked the idea of robots assembling spaceships in space

but self assembling spaceships would be way better.

“Self assembling” as in George Jetson’s car is my favourite type of self-assembly.

I really like the idea of learjet-sized supersonic as a starting point. And about 6,600 km as a starting point for range (better is 9,500 km range).

Tau.Neutrino said:

We need to develop self assembling habitat structures for the Moon and Mars.

I heard today that Buckminster Fuller dropped self assembling habitat structures from plane for the Eskimos.

mollwollfumble said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Small planes yes, once batteries gets up past 1000km range

We could build small ion spaceships for asteroid sampling and mining

These would be self assembling once in space bought up by bigger rockets elsewhere.

I liked the idea of robots assembling spaceships in space

but self assembling spaceships would be way better.

“Self assembling” as in George Jetson’s car is my favourite type of self-assembly.

I really like the idea of learjet-sized supersonic as a starting point. And about 6,600 km as a starting point for range (better is 9,500 km range).

Self assembling one after the other.for space tugs, mission modules + engine, human missions + engine module

ION Engine gets taken up first, then propellent and electronics, then mission modules.

Various methods could be used for self assembly. One method could be that each module screws itself into the thread of other, repeating for each other module, the two surfaces within the thread are treated so that they weld themselves together.

Space tugs could be made in 2 parts. one for engine and the second one for propellent and electronics.

Missions and human missions would require three modules or more, less modules the better. Better use of space within the modules.

Tugs could then transport rocket fuel to the asteroids that are being mined then bring back resources on the return trip

Seems like forward swept wings are the go for reducing sonic boom…

party_pants said:

Seems like forward swept wings are the go for reducing sonic boom…

thunderbird 2 is go!

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

Seems like forward swept wings are the go for reducing sonic boom…

thunderbird 2 is go!

How hard could it be right? We need AI controlled robots building forward-swept wing supersonic airliners from locally-made titanium.

You know it makes sense.

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

Seems like forward swept wings are the go for reducing sonic boom…

thunderbird 2 is go!

How hard could it be right? We need AI controlled robots building forward-swept wing supersonic airliners from locally-made titanium.

You know it makes sense.

Get Wookie to oversee the project.

Self assembling spaceships could be simple modules that clip together, surfaces that weld themselves together, screw themselves together etc.

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

Seems like forward swept wings are the go for reducing sonic boom…

thunderbird 2 is go!

How hard could it be right? We need AI controlled robots building forward-swept wing supersonic airliners from locally-made titanium.

You know it makes sense.

Um, baby steps.

CSIRO has done a lot of work on locally made titanium, only be be undercut pricewise by China.

One forumite is making geodesic domes.

One forumite is making high performance race cars. It’s only a short step from there to aircraft.

At least three forumites have a strong interest in rocket design.

Australian boatbuilders are now high tech enough to switch to aircraft.

An Australian company is already building ramjet-powered pilotless supersonic aircraft, and is currently testing a liquid fuelled rocket engine for making faster supersonic pilotless aircraft.

Australia has made parts of Mars rovers.

All that’s really needed is the finance and organisation.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

thunderbird 2 is go!

How hard could it be right? We need AI controlled robots building forward-swept wing supersonic airliners from locally-made titanium.

You know it makes sense.

Um, baby steps.

CSIRO has done a lot of work on locally made titanium, only be be undercut pricewise by China.

One forumite is making geodesic domes.

One forumite is making high performance race cars. It’s only a short step from there to aircraft.

At least three forumites have a strong interest in rocket design.

Australian boatbuilders are now high tech enough to switch to aircraft.

An Australian company is already building ramjet-powered pilotless supersonic aircraft, and is currently testing a liquid fuelled rocket engine for making faster supersonic pilotless aircraft.

Australia has made parts of Mars rovers.

All that’s really needed is the finance and organisation.

Australians do make and export aircraft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GippsAero

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aircraft_manufacturers_of_Australia

Michael V said:

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

How hard could it be right? We need AI controlled robots building forward-swept wing supersonic airliners from locally-made titanium.

You know it makes sense.

Um, baby steps.

CSIRO has done a lot of work on locally made titanium, only be be undercut pricewise by China.

One forumite is making geodesic domes.

One forumite is making high performance race cars. It’s only a short step from there to aircraft.

At least three forumites have a strong interest in rocket design.

Australian boatbuilders are now high tech enough to switch to aircraft.

An Australian company is already building ramjet-powered pilotless supersonic aircraft, and is currently testing a liquid fuelled rocket engine for making faster supersonic pilotless aircraft.

Australia has made parts of Mars rovers.

All that’s really needed is the finance and organisation.

Australians do make and export aircraft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GippsAero

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aircraft_manufacturers_of_Australia

Thanks for that.

De Havilland still around. I thought it died out.