SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I added up all the numbers*, Concorde wins.
Tu-144
100510.658**.
Concorde
103060.323
* Stewardess values unavailable.
** for "?" I used the value of orange.
Who says I don't do research?
Tu-144: busting myths
- Thread starter bf109xxl
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Tu-144
100510.658**.
Concorde
103060.323
* Stewardess values unavailable.
** for "?" I used the value of orange.
Who says I don't do research?
- Thread starter
- #42
Objection! The Tu-144 should receive an additional point for the increased ogivality of the stewardesses' geometric shape! The stewardess values were 173.17 and 172.07 for the Tu-144 and Concorde respectively. Source: "Effect of Stewardess Ogivality on Passengers' Behavior During the Supersonic Flight", Journal of International Stewardess Research, Vol.14 (1978), Iss. 3, p. 1175.
I'm sure they are more fruitful than many others in this discussion.
PS. In the Tu-144, the food was also luxurious. But I think here the Concorde is beyond competition.
- Thread starter
- #44
...a journalist whose estimations based just on inner conviction are not a reliable source. Thank you for confirming what I said.
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 42,932
- Mar 26, 2007
How did you come to that conclusion about the journalist? I don't have in depth knowledge about the guy, but a quick look at his publications does not indicate to me that he is biased like you seem to suggest. Also the sources you use could be biased, especially since they are of Russian origin. No way for me to know as my knowledge of the Russian language is non existent and any translation probably will be sketchy at best I guess. So we non-Russian speakers just have to take your word for it I guess. Maybe you should take that into account when reacting on people that disagree with you.
- Thread starter
- #47
Pen and Sword Books: Titles by Piotr Butowski
Piotr Butowski is an aviation journalist, writer and photographer specialising in the aviation of Russia, especially the themes of aerospace industry and technology. Since 1978, he has published several thousand articles in aviation magazines all over the world, mainly in Poland, the UK, France...
He is just not a specialist on supersonic aerodynamics dislike the authors I referred to.
The books I'm referring to were mostly printed either during the years of relative democracy in Russia (1991-2007), or during the years when it was still possible to print something contrary to official propaganda in Russia (before 2014, very rarely even before 2022). Therefore, in this case, no general assessments in the style of "Russians could not write the truth" are adequate. One should read the book to get an impression and to understand how biased/distorted the facts are by the authors. I quite admit that somewhere the Tu-144 developers may have flattered themselves, which is why I am looking for any other reliable sources. However, given the complexity of any manipulation of figures, on which huge funding depended - in the USSR you could pay at least your career for it. So I estimate the probability of manipulation as extremely low. Besides, the figures have already been published in scientific monographs.
Unfortunately, there are very few reliable non--Russian sources on the Tu-144 - it is possible that there are none at all. Gordon's excellent books are really just translations of Russian-language sources, and when Gordon tries to compile Western sources, he makes mistakes. An example is L/D of the Concorde. The value of 7.5 Gordon obviously copied either from Orlebar's book or from Torenbeek's book, and one of these authors copied the figure from the other (most likely Orlebar from Torenbeek), but none of them provided the source of this figure. Therefore, it can be considered that the value of 7.5 is obviously wrong, most sources give 7.14, Soviet engineers in their comparisons rounded up to 7.2.
Modern automatic translators allow you to get a high-quality translation with minimal editing. The quality of the result of digitizing scanned text with modern OCR programs is also very high.
If someone disagrees, that's fine. What is not normal is when the argument is either personal opinion or prejudice in the style of "Russians could not write anything true". If you disagree, just make an argument with references to sources. Perhaps the discussion ends there. But opponents prefer a non-academic style of discussion.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
FWIW
In the late-1990s, NASA and Tupolev cooperated in a flight evaluation program under NASA auspices. The following is the NASA write-up on the program and the results.
Note that there is no comparison of the Tu-144 to the Concorde, but there is a lot of interesting info.
In the late-1990s, NASA and Tupolev cooperated in a flight evaluation program under NASA auspices. The following is the NASA write-up on the program and the results.
Note that there is no comparison of the Tu-144 to the Concorde, but there is a lot of interesting info.
- Thread starter
- #49
Thanks, this is the same report based on three flights by NASA pilots as co-pilots that we discussed above.
Almost all (or simply all - I can check it later if necessary) the shortcomings noted there were also mentioned in the books I referenced.
The Tu-144LL received different engines (NK-321), which required a longer pre-flight warm-up, instead of the engines used on the series production Tu-144 (NK-144A) and Tu-144D (RD-36-51А).
The use of a drag chute was not mandatory - the commander used it if necessary (I can quote the flight manual).
- Thread starter
- #50
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 42,932
- Mar 26, 2007
Thats actress Elena Prokova in the movie Mimino , A nice looking lady indeed
- Thread starter
- #52
Of course, I knew someone would figure out that these were shots from the movie. But the movie is great - I'm not afraid of such an epithet. It is an encyclopedia of Soviet life in the 1970s, compressed into a comedy movie. And the Tu-144 is one of the main supporting actors there.
Well I think that counts for both sides. An example is "He is just not a specialist on supersonic aerodynamics dislike the authors I referred to." You decided that the authors you refer to are reliable and that the author did not do a thorough research for his publications. I am not disputing that, but I don't have any evidence either, so I have to take your word on that. I think it's just a fact that most discussions on a forum like this are non-academic.
I have no beef in this discussion. I agree with you that the TU-144 is way more than a blind copy of the Concorde. I think it flew first and it was significantly different, albeit superficial very similar on the outside. I think we can all agree that the engines of the TU-144 were inferior. I think have read somewhere (non-academic, I know) that the TU-144 needed afterburner to sustain super sonic cruise flight while the Concorde did not. On the other hand, the TU-144 was bigger and faster. That's about all I know. In the end both aircraft were an economic failure, which, I think, is all that matters.
The irony is strong here.
- Thread starter
- #55
I pay for rudeness in the same coin. But I never leave the confines of an academic discussion first.
No, it's called "source analysis" and it's quite academic. If the author has no academic publications on the topic or didn't participate on the development, his opinion is not valuable. I see no reason to consider Butowski a specialist in supersonic aerodynamics. On the contrary, the authors of the books I referred to were directly involved in the development of the Tu-144, including its aerodynamic scheme. This information is quite verifiable even from English language sources. It is just easier for you to close your eyes and not see the difference.
I didn't decide anything. There are clear criteria for source reliability. I stated them above.
I don't care about most of the discussions. If they are not academic in nature, it is only a cause for regret.
Indeed, the RD36-51A engines for the Tu-144D had no afterburner. That's why I recommend using reliable sources with the best possible information.
Last edited:
Maybe you should find yourself another forum then.
- Thread starter
- #57
I prefer a more complicated way - I try to improve the world around me first. Sometimes it works. But this forum is really weird - the moderators are trying hard to kick out those who try to argue their point of view. One of these days I'm going to get sick of it and stop visiting here. But it will be my personal decision, not the pressure of moderators.
I am not pressuring you to leave, I am suggesting a different attitude. As I said, I don't care about the Tu-144. I also don't care about your views being different. All I care about is keeping peace on the forum as much as possible.
special ed
2nd Lieutenant
- 5,661
- May 13, 2018
A bit of trivia regarding Concorde. These Items have been M.2+ and survived Hurricane Katrina with authentic water stains. Unfortunately, I have no comparable items for Tu-144.
Wrong! We kick out the people who argue their point in an arrogant and uncivil manner using insults and snide comments, and claim they are debating from an academic standpoint when they clearly aren't.
And we only do that after repeated warnings and suggestions to change their approach.
And we are sick of it NOW, and not "someday."
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
