Concorde Flight from BIKF to EGLL

[mzoe]

Hello All,

After a while of absence, i was in mood to try again the Concorde from our classic hangar.
The flight goes from Rejklavic (BIKF) to London (EGLL). Flight time arround 1:25 in total with fast climb out and a final FL of 530 on Mach 1,98.
Routing: ING LIPGO DIKAS NIGIT OCK

Deceleration Point west of Belfast over open water. Approach on a rainy day in London with some cross winds of 247/20.

On producing this video i see some indifferences between the recording and the playback. Mostly it concern the speed (showing sometime a lot more on speed) the lighting, the CoG factor, even if it is in range during the flight. All these had to be reajusted on playback. Hope you dont mind.

I really enjoyed flying this nice bird, hope you will either.

Have fun, see you next time

Michael

[Herman]

Nice video of the Concorde Michael. Well flown approach considering the meteorlogical conditions.

Herman

[Nathan Ford - HJG]

Fantastic Michael, I really enjoyed watching it. I have never flown the Concord in flightsim, but after watching you video, you have inspired me to learn it.

Once again, I really enjoyed it.

Cheers,

Nathan.

[mzoe]

Thank you Herman and Nathan!

It is really worth, give that simulation a try. After a few hours getting deeper into the flight mods of this Aircraft it makes such a lot of fun.
The Aircraft CFG is a little bit tricky on the beginning. I have made a few ajustments on it to make it more comfortable to fly and land.

Thank you again and see you soon on a next adventure.

Regards

Michael

[Mike Monce - HJG]

mzoe,

As one of the people who spent literally 10s to 100 hours adjusting and fine tuning the FDE on the Concorde, I'd like to know what you find wrong with the FDE and what modifications you are undertaking. BTW, we spent a lot of time on the landing characteristics of the Concorde as it's not supposed to be particularly easy, especially given its very high nose up attitude.

Mike

[mzoe]

Hello Mike!

There is nothing "wrong" with the FDE! It it very good balanced compared to other ones. What I change some part on the settings is just for my personal feelings and needs I would like to see this simulation flying. For example: I spend hours and hours (like you do) on Posky FDS for their 747s especially the classic ones. After endless flights i could manage to fly them as I feel it could be also posible in the simulator.

But to answer your question. For the Concord my ajustments concerns mainly the weight and balance. I found out to set the value of empty weight CG postion from -10,20 to -7,20 gives a more feelable balance and also effects the CoG settings before take off to a better position.
On the airplane geometry section I have changed the oswald effiency factor a bit up from 0,90 to 0,95
Another point is to be set in the Autopilot section to get a smooth interception and hold of the ILS beam and the Glideslope hold (BTW this value can be changed in all of the FDEs for better attitudes). Now you stay on the ILS even on stronger Crosswinds, which make the concorde now better on final approaches.
I changed Nav_proportional_control to 18 instead of 15 and also the GS_proportional_control to 15 instead of 10
and the last thing for a better AoA value on finals for the Concorde: in the Flap 0 section just lowering the lift value to 0,90. A 9 degree pitch is now posible to fly on touch down (with a little practice of course .--)))

Thats it. Again. This is only my personal setting and work very well for me and doesnt mean it will work for others or satisfies others.
You have done a great work on this simulation and I am sad seeing not so much reports or discussions for that Aircraft.
But for me it is always a good choice for testing and expanding my Simulator Pilot Skills ,-))

Thank you for your respond and have a great day

Michael

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

Part of any FDE deficiency with the CONCORDE .... if any's evident all all .... may (possibly) be traced, in part, to the panel we opted to use for it .... since the 2D panel which accompanies this simulation "IS NOT" the intended "official" (customized) FSFT version designed for their simulation.

I do have the intended FSFT panel, but, was never able to get it functioning satisfactorily .... hence our use of the rather basic stand-in/alternative we currently have and which does impose a couple of minor issues .... and which may also have imposed some non-standard FDE editing in order to make "it" work acceptably (most of our simulations have a degree of FDE/panel inter-relationship which can't be avoided). We were sort of between a rock and hard place there .... so .... what we've currently got is based on all we could get (panel-wise) that would work I'm afraid .... until such a time we can get the "official" FSFT panel sorted out/working properly .... if ever at all.

Apart from that .... what we currently offer does work satisfactorily (resulting in this simulation being able do most of what CONCORDE should do .... provided it's flown properly to start with .... and probably also including some very minor panel features which CONCORDE was never actually equipped with ) .... despite some of the limitations imposed upon us and the fact we'd like to have been able to offer something superior/much better panel-wise.

We are aware of a COG gauge discrepancy within the 2D panel and a need to possibly use an odd trim setting on both T/O and landing in order to offset its effect .... in fact I mention this a few times within our forum based CONCORDE manual.

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[Mike Monce - HJG]

Well this is embarrassing

I pulled out the Concorde and happened to take a look at the cfg and already found what appears to be a bit of a typo/screwup in the W&B section. OK, it was 7-8 years ago we worked on the this plane, and I've learned a bit more since then. So, I'm going to pull out my 3-view drawings, TCDS, and other materials and give the Concorde a bit of a once over and see what I come up with.

Thanks mzoe (Michael) for your post. We get so involved with current projects, that some of the older birds get left behind.

Mike

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

Nothing, at all, to be embarrassed over Mike.

FDE witing is technical work .... and as such mistakes can, and do, sometimes occur .... and when they do these can be difficult to detect or remain existent for a very long time before they are ever realized .... and that's despite the fact we always endeavour doing the best we can, in accordance with our accumulated knowledge, and do test things well before they're released (a COG panel gauge issue was noted to exist at the time of CONCORE's release, as is advised within our form manual/flying guide, and as stated by me above .... but .... its cause escaped our "then knowledge").

Some 9 years have passed since we released CONCORDE .... and as you say we've learned "A LOT" about FDE writing since then (and we continue learning too .... new theories/ideas), so, we can look at this as "an update"

Everything we offer here is "FREE". Nobody has to pay for any of it. So .... that errodes any right of complaint .... although I respect "nobody's actually complaining on this occasion"

At least we acknowledge issues when these arise. Then do something about these ..... "in accordance with time at our disposal" .... and even if it takes us a while to do so too .... whereas any number of other groups, in the past, simply don't bother.

Leave it with you Mike .... and I guess I'll hear from you privately later on

Thanks also "MZOE"

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[mzoe]

Hello Mike!

As Mark says, really nothing to be embarresed! I am more then happy that over the last 20 years of flightsimming I found so many enthusiastic people providing such good products to make our hobby as real as posible. In the past there where so many freeware provider with a lot of compedence they can be proud of.

I am pleased that my own impressions of the nearly forgotten Concorde give you the inducement getting again closer to the FDE to make it adaptable and more perfect as it is now.
And as Mark said, the Similation works satisfactorily as it is right now and if the user is refering to the flightmanuals (which also is a lot of work we have to appriciate)we all will have a great experience using this Classic birds.

Thank you all for your efforts!

Saludos

Michael