Does anybody have info or more pictures of the Concorde which was in RCJI #56, Oct/Nov 2002? The in flight (landing?) shot is gorgeous. Span, length, engines, weight, area, lots of pictures!

The plane was shown at Mallorca Jets 2002 and is listed as owned by Peter Michel.

I wonder how it would fly? My guess is slow in pitch and therefore turn rate but quick in roll.

Stephen

Flight's never gonna happen (in my opinion). Its a real nice static display though!

RN

Eletrick,

Stephan is not refering to the AMT USA hangar queen but the Concord that flew in Mallorca, Spain. I believe that the jet flown in Mallorca was a twin turbine version. Stephan, you're right---that in-flight shot was stunning!!! Could have been the real thing. The article said that the nose drooped too. A landing shot at high alpha with the nose drooped would be toooooo cool....

Kevin

Kevin,

I saw a picture of that same airplane (I think) with the nose pitched up and drooping down at the saem time....not exactly high alpha but it was pretty cool.

DR

Do a Search, I posted a Video of the Concorde Landing here in the jet section.

The AMT Concorde is unfortunately, probably going to have to be shipped to Europe somewhere so it can fly. The AMA wont let it go here. Jim certainly has the $$ to get it done and RTF if he hasn't already.

How would that be more cost effective than just getting an insurance policy for a day or so and doing it at a non-AMA field here in the states? A policy like that won't be as expensive as shipping a plane that size to Europe. AMA doesn't have the final say, except for insurance.

Or, just go to a dry lake out west where nobody cares.

I think what you saw was the nose is composed of two parts. There is a glass section over the windscreen which retracts below the line of sight whenever the nose is drooped. The nose has three positions. Up, mild droop (for taxi, take off and just before touch down) and extreme droop for approach.

I saw the AMT Concorde recently and was told they are waiting thrust reversers for the remaining two engines. However, it has been a long wait and obviously they have been beaten to the punch as it were. Even the small shot in RCJI shows more detail then the AMT one up close.

I wish that Jim would eventually fly the AMT Concorde. I know that he's probably tired of wiping my drool off of it at every jet rally. The last time that I saw it, the AMT Concorde was being fitted with thrust reversers. The craftsmanship on them is unbelievable. Sorry about the hanger queen remark...just getting tired of not seeing it fly.

Kevin

Does it need thrust reverser's to fly? Don't see why it couldn't be flown at any time. But, thats their decision! Nice model...

For add info to the Concorde of Peter Michel, just visit
his homepage http://www.michel-concorde.com

Interesting Information to the construction and flying this
large model with two turbines. Furhter, you see more pics
and news of other projects, as Peter is real airliner - freak.

Swiss-Jet

the concorde described is on peters homepage is concorde number one.
the one flown at mallorca this year is much more detailed.
Niels

look at Eddie's DC-10's, they have flown after hours at many events. And Eddies not the only one, who's done this kinda thing.
Like I said its my opinion, but I think the ama thing is a cop out.
Dry lake, or after hours at one of the events.

I don't think that queen is ever gonna be fueled! Someone else told me the same kinda story on the RC Jet list a few years ago, fly it and I'll believe it!

Richard Newman

Because, Jim wants Terry Nitch to fly it, and the AMA has threatened to permanently revoke Terry's AMA license if he flies it. Now how can Terry win the Top Gun again next year without an AMA license?

The difference is Eddie Weeks DC-10 was/is "reported" to be under 55 lbs. and "reportedly" comforms to the .9 to 1 "DRY" Thrust to Weight ratios. Jim's Concorde is like a 200 pound airplane with almost 200 lbs of thrust. I say GREAT, cool let it fly at Darby Dan on a regular basis, but I'm not the AMA.
This is one of the MANY reasons I'm reluctant to renew my AMA membership each year.

Remember the AMA has eyes and ears EVERYWHERE, and even if flown on a dry lake bed, they would find out about it. As far as I've been told the AMA even hears Terry flew it, his license AND turbine waiver are gone.....permanently.

Baloney. When that goofy rumor was started some years ago, I called Dave Brown direct, and he said it was complete nonsense. Total BS.
As a matter of fact, he said HE wanted to see it fly. It just would not be AMA insured.
Why don't you ask Jim Weigle or Terry Nitsch, too?

Cool we agree on something. What I do in my back yard is no sob's concern. And I mean NO ONES!! Period

This is the biggest bunch of BS I ever heard!!!! Helps to think before shoving foot in mouth!

Even IF it was true, how could the ama pull Terry's cards for flying it in a private area? It would have nothing to do with them.
Oh well. I hope to see it fly before I die.

I posed the following email to Dave Brown, and his response is below the actual letter.

Mr. Brown:
>
> As a third generation AMA member, I recently read some very disturbing
> information regarding the power that AMA has over members. I am sure you
> are aware of the large, heavy, and powerful Concorde model that the owner
of
> AMT has constructed. This plane is far too heavy for flight at an AMA
> field, even with a special waiver in my opinion. My complaint comes from
> the rumor that I heard regarding the pilot of choice, Terry Nitch. Was he
> told/threatened not to fly this plane ANYWHERE for fear of the AMA
revoking
> is turbine waiver and his AMA membership.
> Is this true? If this is indeed the facts, how can the AMA think that is
> has the power to control what an individual does away from AMA fields on
his
> own time? Please clarify or defend this mentality, as this has me greatly
> concerned about the AMA's influence over its members.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jeff Haywood AMA#189187

RESPONSE FROM DAVE BROWN:

As is typical, your information is way oversimplified.

First, Terry, as a member of the Safety committee/Turbine advisory
committee, has a different waiver than the average joe, which allows him to
fly turbine engines, during the test phase, before the engines are
"certified". This waiver allows him to be covered by our insurance, while
flying the test programs, in spite of the fact that the turbines are not on
the approved list.

The problem with him flying a model, which violates the safety code, such as
the Concorde, you mention, is that, this special waiver COULD be used as a
way to force AMA to cover the liability of any such flights he would be
making.

The only way to ensure this does not occur is to, either not have him fly
the out of limits model, OR, revoke that waiver.

If AMA doesn't seek to protect itself from such legal loopholes, it will
become impossible for it to provide insurance to it members, for "normal"
aeromodeling. I don't think you want that, .....Do you?

Another way of putting it is to ask what you would think if you had to stop
flying R/C, as a result of such a flight wiping out your insurance, and
nothing else was available?

Another thing to think about, .....What do you think the chances are of the
sport of R/C surviving, (politically), if a person who is on the
Safety/Turbine Advisory Committee of the national organization, creates a
catastrophic accident, while flying a model which violates the very safety
stds of that association? I'd say you would be as likely to re-institute
the legality of cock fighting!

Dave Brown

I thought it was implied (or maybe stated) in the AMA insurance stuff, that if an AMA member flies a model at a non-AMA designated field, he is not covered by AMA insurance. Therefore, there should not be any issues with Terry (or anyone else) flying the model (large Concorde, or anything else) at a remote location. If the AMA thought that somehow a loophole could rear it's head, a simple signed statement from the pilot, holding the AMA free of any claims in case of an incident should be enough.

Of course, having the model fly at an airshow, or modelling event, would be a different story. I don't see why you'd have to pack it up and go to Europe to fly it, though!

i think what BVM said is pretty much exactly what Dave Brown just described in his response. The AMA is in fact limiting what Terry may do in his "free time". To me if they wanted to fly this thing, and they go out to a dry lake bed somewhere and light it off, it is no one's business.

Sounds to me like the longstanding "rumor" was true.


Terry Nitsche cannot fly the Concord or loose his AMA special waiver....

This has been going around since Florida jets 2000 I think.

Certainly NOT the same answer I got from DB when I asked him last year.

Perhaps not but given that Terry may be something more then a regular member they would ask for a little slack with this kind of thing. (sort of implided) That said it also means as we all knew that a regular member could fly anything they want to in their own non AMA controled space, be that a back yard or a dry lake bed.

Ugh. I dunno and I don't really care. If Jim Weigle wants to fly his Concorde, AMA can't stop him. I hope he does fly it, I wish him luck.
When I heard this rumor well over a year ago, I talked to DB and he said it was not true.
I don't know about the post above, or the person who posted it, but it sounds awfully weird to me. Didn't a guy run around here posing as Dave Brown just a few weeks ago? This could be a troll. I don't know, and I don't care.
I have too much building to do this week to argue on the internet. I'm unsubscribing from this thread and you-all can have at it all you want!