5 ms·

Here is a thought, Imagine if a Concorde got hijacked? An F16's top speed is approx 1320 mph and the Concorde's is 1350 mph per wikipedia. I feel like there mig

Here is a thought, Imagine if a Concorde got hijacked? An F16's top speed is approx 1320 mph and the Concorde's is 1350 mph per wikipedia. I feel like there might have been some government pressure to take this plane out of service with all the fear mongering post 9/11

zhte415 12y ago
You may be interested in the movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078740/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078740/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_p... where a Concorde isn't quite hijacked, but has some chase scenes between a Concorde and various rouge missiles and airforces.
oh_sigh 12y ago
A concorde going 1350 mph still has less kinetic energy than a 747 going 600mph. Also, I'm not positive, but I'd suspect that the concorde couldn't hit 1350mph at only a few hundred feet due to the really soupy atmosphere down here.
- masklinn 12y ago
  > A concorde going 1350 mph still has less kinetic energy than a 747 going 600mph. Not really no. Remember that Ek grows with the square of speed, so you need 4.5g of 747 for each gram of Concorde, something you only get when closing in on a 747 at MTOW (400t for a -400, 440t for a -8i) and a completely empty Concorde (80t). Comparing the 747-400 and Concorde using maximum takeoff weights, the 747 comes out at 15GJ[0] when Concorde is 33GJ[1]. Using empty weight has roughly the same ratio. Even swapping the -400 for a -8i yields only marginal improvements to 17GJ[2]. With a loaded but dry plane (simulating the arrival at the end of a flight, under the assumption that fuel is a much bigger part of a Concorde than a 747) and maximum fuel load at takeoff, Concorde comes out at 16GJ[3] and the 8i at 10GJ[4]. Even if we use the same route, halve the 8i's fuel load (to account for twice the range) and replace it all with additional payload (which I'm not sure makes any sense), it's still only 13GJ. Going back to the first paragraph, fully loaded 747's 15~17GJ[0][2] would indeed beat a completely empty Concorde's 14GJ[5], but that's about it. [0] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+396890+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+396890+kg+*+%28... [1] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+185000+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+185000+kg+*+%28... [2] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+442253+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+442253+kg+*+%28... [3] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28185000+-+95680%29+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28185000+-+956... [4] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28442253+-+216840+*+0.81%29+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28442253+-+216... [5] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+78700+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+78700+kg+*+%282...
rjsw 12y ago
An English Electric Lightning could catch a Concorde.
- z303 12y ago
  With a stern conversion intercept no less http://www.lightning.org.uk/oct04sotm.html http://www.lightning.org.uk/oct04sotm.html
Curmudgel 12y ago
A Concorde could not outrun an F-15, which has a maximum speed of more than Mach 2.5 at the cruising altitude of a Concorde. And an F-16 would only need to get close to a Concorde in order to shoot it down with missiles.
- Scramblejams 12y ago
  Still, you'd be surprised how a fast target shrinks missile envelopes. I spoke with a guy who spent a few minutes chasing a MiG-21 over Vietnam in a Navy F-4. They were both supersonic -- don't know how fast, but they were in the weeds and IIRC even in the 80s the Tornado IDS doing M1.2 at sea level was about the fastest thing at that altitude -- and from 7 miles astern, his Sparrows just didn't have the range to do it. That from a missile that we think of as a 30+ mile range weapon. Similar story with today's weapons. I've read about frustrated F-15 drivers saying all an F-22 has to do in a mock dogfight is change his heading by 10 or 20 degrees and the F-15's beyond-visual-range missile solution goes out the window, such is the F-22's usual speed advantage with supercruise.
  - Curmudgel 12y ago
    I was thinking that in the hypothetical scenario an F-16 would intercept the Concorde head on. I don't think that a Concorde had the right kind of radar to detect a BVR missile launch so it would not be able to turn and outrun the missile. But even if it was able to do so, an additional pair of F-16s on each flank of the lead fighter could wait for the Concorde to turn and run towards them after the initial missile launch.
aidenn0 12y ago
The Soviets could shoot down an SR-71 that invaded their airspace by 1980 (I can't find a reference ; it seems likely we could shoot down a Concorde if needed. (I say likely rather than definitely, since a large part of the USSR deterrence involved scrambling interceptors before the SR-71 reached their airspace, and by 9/11 we no longer had a plane capable of launching an AIM-54 which could almost trivially shoot down a Concorde).
- genericacct 12y ago
  Wasnt that a U2?
  - aidenn0 12y ago
    They did shoot down a U2; a Mig(31?) was able to gain missile lock on an SR-71. In any event shortly after they had developed the capability we ceased to enter soviet airspace with an sr-71.

zhte415 12y ago

You may be interested in the movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078740/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078740/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_p... where a Concorde isn't quite hijacked, but has some chase scenes between a Concorde and various rouge missiles and airforces.

oh_sigh 12y ago

A concorde going 1350 mph still has less kinetic energy than a 747 going 600mph. Also, I'm not positive, but I'd suspect that the concorde couldn't hit 1350mph at only a few hundred feet due to the really soupy atmosphere down here.

masklinn 12y ago
> A concorde going 1350 mph still has less kinetic energy than a 747 going 600mph. Not really no. Remember that Ek grows with the square of speed, so you need 4.5g of 747 for each gram of Concorde, something you only get when closing in on a 747 at MTOW (400t for a -400, 440t for a -8i) and a completely empty Concorde (80t). Comparing the 747-400 and Concorde using maximum takeoff weights, the 747 comes out at 15GJ[0] when Concorde is 33GJ[1]. Using empty weight has roughly the same ratio. Even swapping the -400 for a -8i yields only marginal improvements to 17GJ[2]. With a loaded but dry plane (simulating the arrival at the end of a flight, under the assumption that fuel is a much bigger part of a Concorde than a 747) and maximum fuel load at takeoff, Concorde comes out at 16GJ[3] and the 8i at 10GJ[4]. Even if we use the same route, halve the 8i's fuel load (to account for twice the range) and replace it all with additional payload (which I'm not sure makes any sense), it's still only 13GJ. Going back to the first paragraph, fully loaded 747's 15~17GJ[0][2] would indeed beat a completely empty Concorde's 14GJ[5], but that's about it. [0] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+396890+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+396890+kg+*+%28... [1] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+185000+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+185000+kg+*+%28... [2] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+442253+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+442253+kg+*+%28... [3] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28185000+-+95680%29+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28185000+-+956... [4] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28442253+-+216840+*+0.81%29+kg+*+%28988+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+%28442253+-+216... [5] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+78700+kg+*+%282158+km%2Fh%29%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2+*+78700+kg+*+%282...

rjsw 12y ago

An English Electric Lightning could catch a Concorde.

z303 12y ago
With a stern conversion intercept no less http://www.lightning.org.uk/oct04sotm.html http://www.lightning.org.uk/oct04sotm.html

Curmudgel 12y ago

A Concorde could not outrun an F-15, which has a maximum speed of more than Mach 2.5 at the cruising altitude of a Concorde. And an F-16 would only need to get close to a Concorde in order to shoot it down with missiles.

Scramblejams 12y ago
Still, you'd be surprised how a fast target shrinks missile envelopes. I spoke with a guy who spent a few minutes chasing a MiG-21 over Vietnam in a Navy F-4. They were both supersonic -- don't know how fast, but they were in the weeds and IIRC even in the 80s the Tornado IDS doing M1.2 at sea level was about the fastest thing at that altitude -- and from 7 miles astern, his Sparrows just didn't have the range to do it. That from a missile that we think of as a 30+ mile range weapon. Similar story with today's weapons. I've read about frustrated F-15 drivers saying all an F-22 has to do in a mock dogfight is change his heading by 10 or 20 degrees and the F-15's beyond-visual-range missile solution goes out the window, such is the F-22's usual speed advantage with supercruise.
- Curmudgel 12y ago
  I was thinking that in the hypothetical scenario an F-16 would intercept the Concorde head on. I don't think that a Concorde had the right kind of radar to detect a BVR missile launch so it would not be able to turn and outrun the missile. But even if it was able to do so, an additional pair of F-16s on each flank of the lead fighter could wait for the Concorde to turn and run towards them after the initial missile launch.

aidenn0 12y ago

The Soviets could shoot down an SR-71 that invaded their airspace by 1980 (I can't find a reference ; it seems likely we could shoot down a Concorde if needed. (I say likely rather than definitely, since a large part of the USSR deterrence involved scrambling interceptors before the SR-71 reached their airspace, and by 9/11 we no longer had a plane capable of launching an AIM-54 which could almost trivially shoot down a Concorde).

genericacct 12y ago
Wasnt that a U2?
- aidenn0 12y ago
  They did shoot down a U2; a Mig(31?) was able to gain missile lock on an SR-71. In any event shortly after they had developed the capability we ceased to enter soviet airspace with an sr-71.