There are 2 Shackletons sat at the end of the runway at Paphos Airport Cyprus.
You can just see them as your plane lines it’s self up for take off.
I think there is some duspute over rent for storage on them, so they’ve just sat there for years.
Firstly the actual radio communications by the Concorde crew referred to an engine problem loss of power and surging.
It’s clear that any uncontained blade failure would be far worse in the case of Concorde’s engine locations v it’s wings and fuel tanks.Similar to any such major event in the case of the Comet.
It’s obvious that there would be a motive to hide such a known flaw from day 1 if such an engine failure caused such an event.
I’ve never bought the tyre blowout and tyre piece impact shockwave narrative.
Shrapnel from a blown engine causing catastrophic damage within the wing and fuel tanks and fuel supply lines seems more logical.
You aren’t wrong. Much money was spent for no end product.
But much was learnt in the R&D that went into the project, and that carried forward into other designs of course. The Olympus engines first used in the Vulcan was used with afterburners in the TSR2 and then modified again for the Concorde.
Military projects are notorious for the changing requirements of the forces, the moving of goalposts etc and being Gov financed there are always the risks of changes to the administration. Without getting partisan Govs tend to have short term views looking at the next election, rather than looking at long term strategy.
It all becomes clear, now. A conspiracy and cover up.
Again.
Try again.
When the Shakleton took part in the Queen’s Birthday flypasts, as a low speed, long endurance, marine patrol initial design, it had to be flown flat out in order to maintain staion with the accompanying modern fighter jets.
The video possibly illustrates that the “Shakleton Growl” could, maybe, get failry near Vulcan levels of noise.
Governmental myopic vision is partly (largely?) a product of its fetish with money: screw vision and backing invention, the bottom line is always about the books.
So precisely which engine blew up and what where the factors that caused it?
That surprised me: changed from a taildragger to a tri-cycle.
You do realise that the only reason Stephen Hawking failed to achieve his objective of defining a grand unified field equation is that in his arrogance and shortsightedness, he failed to run it past Carryfast
Hawking, you nugget!
1 Like
A bit (a long way) off topic, but there are few limits on who can be called to stand on a jury in the UK… 
What a surprise they obviously don’t want those links being accessed easily.
World News - The Telegraph news/europe/france/1350462/One-of-the-engines-had-a-catastrophic-failure.html
Better link here.As I said known issue.
What would I know working in the aviation fire fighting industry at that time.
Uncontained blade failure number 1 or 2 engine ?.
The Comet’s and Concorde’s and less so VC10’s, iffy engine locations, in the event of uncontained blade failure and engine blow up, is fact not conspiracy.Assuming such an event then resulted in a disaster a cover story would be predictable.
I’m sure the cancellation of, including the destruction of all tooling and drawings for, TSR2 had more to do with the same reasons as to how the Soviet Union came into possession of British jet engine technology.
It was designed to do a similar job as modern stealth bombers but using low level high speed instead of modern radar deflection methods.Whereas the Lightning was the modern counterpart to the Spitfire the TSR2 was the counterpart of the Mosquito bomber variants.
Harold Wilson was obviously told by his handlers that they didn’t like it.
Yes one engine failed, that’s a matter of record. I asked you to explain the cause of its failure.
I’ll wait…
I don’t like the term “conspiracy theorist” myself, but if the shoe fits…
Anyway, back to the main point:
Following the unseemly and unnecessary demise of TSR2, Britain had to fill in a big gap in its air defence. As part of the deal, the F-4 Phantom (itself not invulnerable) was adopted and adapted by the Royal Navy and the RAF. Seeing the F-4 Phantom (F4M and F4K) at airshows with their RR Speys on full re-heat made quite the impression on me and, well, talk about distinctive planes…
