Concorde web site .... NB

[Guest]

Sorry about this plug for the site .... but I - like many others - would like to see a Concorde grace the skies again .. and these guys have taken the plunge to see if they can do it >

http://www.save-concorde.co.uk/index.htm



<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Kristal]

Well, I'm very glad that someone is having a go. I cried like a baby watching her last take-off from JFK - mainly because my colleague and I were covering it for our particular little allotment of the BBC, and he got to go to Heathrow to watch three of them arrive, while I sat underground with a sound desk and a telly!!

God Bless her. If they need volunteer pilots, I'll learn...

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://d205161.u24.uk.assimilatedservers.net/cryspics/>Crystal II in Pictures</A>

 

[Guest]

Watched the last schedule out from LHR ... have a few digi-pics, but she's way too high for good shot.
Have the BBC program recorded where the 3 return to LHR on the final flights.
Have seen her sitting on tarmac in LHR a few times since then .... looking lost and raring to go ....

I am sad about her - its an era that will be lost and only history. My Father wass deeply involved in flight routes and operation of the concordes in his latter years at DTi / CAA and I remember his pride when all started up and she flew commercial fare flights. I just hope that he doesn't look down and hate us too much for allowing his baby to fall by the wayside.

I still feel that UK Govt didn't do enough to try and keep her at least operational in memorial flight or similar - letting the French without apparent discussion revoke its Certificates is unforgiveable ....

I have a Russian wife and even she remarked on the grace and look of her while watching the BBC program .... she is totally confused why we let her go out like that ....


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Guest]

Why is Concorde unique in this >

Tiger Moths, Sopwiths, Dakotas, Lancaster, Spits etc. etc. all still have one or two still flying ... some in numbers .... so why is Concorde so sectioned out ? OK so its still one of the most technologically advanced aircraft around ..... but is that the reason - or is it just plain let it go and she'll fade away ??


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Guest]

Strange coincidence ....

Labour Govt in cahoots with USA ----- TSR2 scrapped, only now a ground based display aircraft.

Labout Govt now - close to US Govt .... lets Concorde go .....



<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[AlexL]

Re: Why is Concorde unique in this >

while we have a defence minister who is seriously considering axing the red arrows, I don't think there will be any money forthcoming for concorde. Branson offered to take them on and keep them flying BA refused - thats the real shame in this situation. As they are really the governments planes anyway and not BA's the government should have insisted that BA sell them to Virgin.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MapisM]

Can't understand the remarks of your wife...
In her home country, they did a comparable job with the TU-144, at least with respect to grace and look.
Not quite comparable for overall performance, though.
Sadly, Paris did not bring luck to both of these planes....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[halcyon]

Very sad day when they went, did you see the programme on C4?, they reconned the French crash report was a big white wash. Nothing to do with a bit of metal and the fuel tank, think they were saying it was a faulty wheel spacer installation, over stated take-off weight , and a sub-standardard runnway, then a 747 got in the way.
Are the States about to go super sonic, or were we helping the French like good EU citizenes that the government are.

Brian

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[[2068]]

Re: Why is Concorde unique in this >

I feel that Concorde's time has passed. It was the most graceful, elegant, and fastest flying passenger service of it's time, past tense.

The fundamental problem is that economic conditions changed, coupled with increasing support/maintenance costs causing Air France to want a get out, which led to Airbus bailing out of supporting it. Without that support, and the UK government exerting as much influence as a wet lettuce, BA had no real choice.
"Noel Forgeard, Airbus chief executive was quoted in the Financial Times : "The costs of operating Concorde, and in particular maintenance and support, have become such that operations are unrealistic for any operator."

The real shame here is that there isn't "Concorde II" waiting in the wings, ready to fly in maybe 5 or 10 years. With a more modern, lower maintenance airframe, newer engines, and greater pax capacity, it should be possible to run profitably. If we don't build it, you can bet that someone else with some long term vision will one day...(Embraer ? Watch this space.)

dv.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

Concordski was what it was ...

too fast of the board and with defects .... my Brother was at Paris when it happened ---- sad day for all.

It is public knowledge that Airbus was under pressure to pull the AWC ... as Air FRance never made any profit on it. BA actually did at times as the route LHR to NY was much more lucrative ......

My father who was involved in Concorde back right at its start said that 747's carrying greater paylaod could over a set period shift more 'bums' cheaper over the atlantic .... we are talking comparison of flight time and numbers carried .... in etn time of one flight of 747 - Concorde even with min turn round etc. couldn't match 50% of its capacity ..... so it had to concentrate on the wealthy passenger .... which it actually did. It had a dedicated passenger following .... pity that it didn't equate to more profits ...

It also has to be remembered that BA advertising the final months - caused an increase of revenue that exceeded previous .... a good marketing ploy ....

Branson was still reeling from the Dirty Tricks game of BA and BA was still and probably today - not so happy with RB ... so do you think they would sell such a marketing tool to him ?? I don't think so somehow.

Spares for Concorde haven't been produced ... should say had not been produced for some time before her withdrawal from service .... supposedly surviving on off-shelf items that were fast running out. Airbus shut down the production of the itenms in line with their planned pull of the AWC .....

QED ......... Now we wait to see what will have the Stars and Stripes on and we'll run and buy .....as USA has already flown small jets with mods to try and reduce sonic signature etc. the biggest problem that Concorde had and affected its routeing ....



<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Kristal]

The rumour is that Concorde was doomed from inception by a suspicion within the industry that Boeing were planning a faster, higher aircraft with more capacity, and that airlines that might otherwise have invested in the project decided not to, preferring to wait for the American version. Of which I've never heard a provable fact about.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://d205161.u24.uk.assimilatedservers.net/cryspics/>Crystal II in Pictures</A>

 

[Guest]

Boeing in deed were designing a high speed passenger plane - but it was dropped before even Concorde took to the skies on test .... even before concorde was actually fully built. The US decided that it was too expensive, and not economically viable.

Originally France was trying to design and construct a high speed plane at same time as UK ... and it was decided in an attempt to increase Entente Cordial to join forces and in so doing beat the US Boeing design to the tarmac .... in the event that was not necessary as Boeing indeed scrapped their plans. France during the design stages tried to get out of the mounting costs of Concorde but were held by the contract that they signed .... Concorde took to the skies and then the Environmental guys / US administration etc. then restricted her flight routes to the final LHR - JFK .... US had to back down when the noise footprint was shown to be less thatn other aircraft in service ....
But the big killer apart from operating cost was the boom she made when passing the sound barrier ....

It is interesting that Boeing had resurrected the old design they had and revamped it to be a Hyperspace aircraft .... and people still talk about this as though it may happen .... maybe with coordinated coopperatioon between US aircraft manufactruing companys ...... in competition with that upstart Airbus Industries..........


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[AlexL]

the so called environmental restriction of the concorde overflying the US had nothing to do with the sonic boom and everything to do with the fact that it didn't say Boeing on the tail. The US government today in 2004 are frantically passing laws to try and restrict airbus sales in the US - including ruling the A380 'illegal' under world trade laws because of EU government subsidies. Had concorde been a Boeing it would have been given permission to overfly the US and loads would have been sold, thus reducing the operating costs. The US government can be very protectionist at times - almost as much as the EU /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

My father was deeply involved in Concorde flight routes and operatiions ..... being in the DTi later CAA ... heading up various cmttees etc.

One of the memories I have of this period ..... is a comment he made about 'Environmental Groups' campaigning about the noise pollution and 'alleged' damage to society from the Concorde sound footprint. One claim was that farmers milk production wouls uffer under its flightpath !!! The arguments really got silly at times - but all added up to increase the pressure on sales ....
Before she took up service the order books were full and it would have been a success, but orders drifted away - one of the biggest being Pan Am .....
I remember my father saying that it may come down to whether it would be possible to get US to stop putting up barriers to every argument and piece of evidence .......

I agree that Boeing .... even McD ... with their lobby'ists had tremendous power over US govt .... given the financial damage that loss of US Aircraft manufacturing providing worlds aircraft .... and of course that Anglo-French cooperation COULD lead to Europe producing competing aircraft in other forms .... they were right ...... tough t......ies I say. Biz is Biz ......

The US as my dad said - rallied the Environmental groups around and used them along with their landing rights restrictions to effectively block Concorde till they got what they wanted .... at one stage they even started suggesting that the flight deck crew should be increased .... knowing that provision was not in the design for the number they were talking about ....

The final joke is ..... the number of AMERICAN passengers that flew and WANTED Concorde were literally the most numerous and frequent boarders. USA didn't want Concorde flying their precious airspace ..... but when it's grounded and up for display on ground .... US was quick to step in and grab ... Just Hope all techno was stripped out before it appears in their next generation job .....

A close friend was involved in TSR2 ECM and EW ...... he told me about the day he was informed that project was shutting down. He was told to compile all docs and data that he had and file ready for archiving. The files did not go to a UK Archive ..... he handed them to a rep. for US use. He swears that a lot of his work and others appeared on US built military fighters etc. - but no recognition or reward to UK what-soever ..... as he puts it ... we developed so much for TSR2 and then had to buy it in from US ...... now I am only repeating what he told me ..... if true or not - we shall not know .... being joe public. BUT as he said look at shape and detail of TSR2 and look at next generation US jets .... see any similarity ......

I apologise to any US persons reading this .... but ist a fact that is known .... many techno advances in US are as a result of outside experience being captured (space / rocket ...) or bought in ......


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[beancounter]

it would appear that Airbus were toying with a just-subsonic design a couple of years ago (in response to Boeing's announcement). My son recently finished his degree in Aerospace Engineering at Bristol Uni, which has close links with Airbus. Their 3rd year group design project was set by Airbus - to design a plane carrying (I think) 250 - 350 passengers at near sonic speeds. A couple of years previous to Chris's project, Airbus had set the then 3rd year a design brief for a 500 - 700 seat aircraft..... I wonder if any innovative features from the students projects have made it into the A380?

<hr width=100% size=1>Fabricati Diem, punc

 

[Cornishman]

While I also feel many of the emotions expressed here I cannot help being reminded that I am pilloried by all the PC types for driving my inoffensive little Skoda for a few miles each week and creating the pollution which caused Boscastle to be devastated. Yet aircraft like Concorde etc create so much more pollution each time they fire up their monstrous engines (and pay no duty or VAT on the fuel). Is it not time that the whole business of air travel came under a serious review?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philwebb]

Sorry Nigel but I hope this project is unsuccessful- so would you if you lived
in SW London. Concorde was the noisiest of noisy aircraft. When it went over
you could not hear what people were saying to you or hear your television.
Also from the amount of fuel being used to transport such a small
number of people it was very environmentally unfriendly.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

I grew up around airports .... had most of my childhood near Gatwick in the village of Tinsley Green. My father used to take me to airports when he was on Govt biz often .....

I apprecaite what you say and don't disagree. Trouble is I think a piece of history is being lost and if they can preserve Lancs etc.- they can preserve a Concorde ....

Another point is that LHR will not probably the base for it if they succeed ?? So flights will only be few and far between and not such a nuisance ....


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Jacket]

>if they can preserve Lancs etc.- they can preserve a Concorde ....

The difference being that any competent engineer can help maintain a Lancaster or similar in their spare time (which is how places like Duxford keep running) using relatively inexpensive equipment. But there's very few people with the ability (or money) to look after Concorde.

<hr width=100% size=1>