It was the Lancaster crews, that really had the weird toilets 
, nothing glamorous about them.
Many years ago, post 9/11 I took a āClassicā BA 747 to Kemble. A Chinese businessman was buying three of the four engines but eventually worked out that it was going to be easier to fly the whole aircraft to China and break out up there. So another crew flew it to Heathrow, and then myself and three other pilots and three flight engineers (end of career swan song - the Classic was the last BA aircraft that needed them) flew it to Xiamen, positioned to Hong Kong, enjoyed a few liquid days there and positioned home in First Class. All very pleasant 
3 Likes
I remember standing out on the banks of the Thames in London one afternoon many years ago to watch the final flights of the last (four?) British Airways Concordes into Heathrow.
Their flight safety certificates had been withdrawn by the Civil Aviation Authority, in a nakedly political decision after the disastrous Air France Concorde loss on the runway in Paris.
I felt profoundly sad watching these aeronautical marvels, which were destined to go āhomeā to Filton to be broken up and scrapped.
Itās sobering to think that my darling six-year-old granddaughter may never see that wonderful planeās like again.
Well, you wouldnāt want to offend the sensibilities of any Yank Space Shuttle astronauts (or any Soviet cosmonauts who might have smuggled themselves onboard) on their way up or their way back down, as that would be the only other man-made flying object at 60,000 feet.
Concorde flew for a while after the disaster in France.
The poor old girls were getting so old. From a distance they are still beautiful and graceful, but a walk underneath shows how ancient they were. Theyād have gone by now, even with the best will in the world, Covid wouldāve seen to that.
1 Like
A lot of loos get used when on the ground, those with dodgy prostate know all about the need for access to loos. I have stopped flying economy , simply because of the er sometimes pressing need for a pea.
The last time I flew economy, I ended up with a group of Scottish football fans . They were great, and I would have no qualms about travelling with them again, except for the queue for the loo.
I recall that the manufacturers modified the fuel tanks by adding some sort of mesh (not sure if thatās correct) to stop fuel bursting out if the tanks were ruptured, but the planes were on borrowed time, and the fleet was withdrawn from service not long after the dreadful Paris crash.
It was extraordinary to be allowed to stand at the back of the open cockpit (in those much more innocent pre-9/11 times) at 60,000 ft and actually be able to see the curvature of the Earth in front of you. And because of the Mach 2 airspeed and the depleted air, the cabin walls got palpably warm to the touch.
An amazing technological achievement, and sad that weāve gone backwards since.
1 Like
I thought that Concordeās cockpit windows were covered by heat shields (when the nose went up) during super-sonic flights?
It was said that the crew couldnāt see where they were going, only where they had just been.
Of course, they ācrackedā the nose, so it hung below the fuselage for landing and while on the ground, so that the pilot didnāt stick it into hangar doors. 
I have no idea whether there were heat shields on the cockpit windows, but I was allowed (as were other passengers who were interested) to stand at the back of the cockpit, and I could see our direction of travel and the curvature.
I canāt imagine that the pilots would have felt it safe to have 150-odd passengers and crew on board without being able to see where they were going. (That is, of course, my rationalisation after the event.)
But if a British Airways or Air France pilot wants to come on to the thread to say that Iām misremembering the experience, thatās fair enough.
My only other cockpit experience thatās remotely similar (but very different) is when I was given control of a Chipmunk trainer over the Firth Of Forth in the Combined Cadet Force while I was at school in Edinburgh.
Iām not a pilot but the outer windows were see through. Thatās visible in several pictures of the aircraft including the beginning of āThe Wild Geeseā.
A quick search on Google seems to provide an answer.
Apparently, the pre-production Concordes had metal visors which slid up over the cockpit windows during flight, obscuring forward vision. By the time of the first production models, glass technology (laminated with a thin gold layer) had advanced sufficiently to take the heat and force of supersonic flight. So, the heat visor/shield became glazed to enable forward visibility from the cockpit.
When Concorde flew sub-sonic it appears that the visor/shield was not raised, and the normal cockpit windows were sufficient. Apparently, Concorde would have to drop out of supersonic speeds on occasion to give the outer skin a chance to cool down.
Regarding the issue of āflying blindā, what could it have encountered at 60,000 feet (other than another Concorde or an occasional Apollo rocket)?
āSpyā planes like the U2 and SR-71 would operate up to 80,000 feet plus. Now that would have been some formation with a Concorde at 60,000 feet!
1 Like
In the late '70s I was flying regularly during school holidays to Washington DC and I remember a couple of times at least seeing a Singapore Airlines liveried Concorde, although the livery was only on one side of the plane (BA on the other side), so doubtless some sort of co-operation agreement.
This is worth a watch if you havenāt seen before ā around 6ā45āā is astonishing.
āBig Motherā!
7 Likes
The ādroopingā nose on Concord was there solely for drag and visibility reasons. It was up to be more streamlined during supersonic flight (and subsonic cruise) and down so that the pilots could see the runway for landing (always an advantage, Iāve found) as the angle of attack is necessarily much higher then. The need for windows was simply because it was considered unsafe not to have them. Mach 2.5 does not generate sufficient heat to be an issue. The X-15, though, flew at Mach 5 which generated sufficient heat that it āstretchedā by around a foot (I believe). It was designed with this in mind, thus it leaked like a sieve on the ground, but all the seals tightened up when it got hot! The SR-71 was similarly designed as it flew at around Mach3.5. Clever stuff
Thanks for that , very impressive
To me, this is the most impressive Lightning video. Itās the cockpit dash during a climb. The horizontal gauge at the top is indicating airspeed with Mach number under that on the same gauge. The large dial on the left is altimeter, with one revolution of the needle equalling 1,000ft.
Astonishing.
Edit: take off is at about 52 seconds
1 Like
ā¦did someone say supersonicā¦
Unfortunately this isnāt doing that anymore!
Static display at Duxford, was there during the BoB Airshow - hanger was mobbed but I had this shot in mind and combined long (up to 10 minute) exposures to make the crowds disappear!
Would have loved to have seen this roar and soarā¦
7 Likes
Just in case anyone is interested, last Saturday I went to a little reunion for a few ex-RAF mates. We met up at the City of Norwich Aviation Museum. A lovely little museum, and a tour, including the cockpit, of their Vulcan is Ā£2.50ā¦ They also do tours of the Nimrod.
4 Likes
Itās a tight wee space, the Vulcan cockpit, even more so for my 6ft 4 frame.
7 Likes