EXCEL. If that aircraft has fuel in it's tanks and hydraulic oil in it's pipes, I would be very very surprised. Are you a qualified engineer?, or just looking at it from a 'wishful thinking ' point of view. It seems to me that you are ignoring many facts regarding it's safe operation. Putting this back in the air is not simply a matter of 'kicking the tyres and lighting the fires' Where are the crews going to come from, how many training flights are going to be needed, engineering support from full-time engineers, costs, not to mention the fact that NO insurance company will touch it with a barge pole. Your facts are wrong about Concordski. It's isn't flying. Some years ago it did about 7 flights funded by the Americans, but research flights, not as an air-display machine. Also, I am still intrigued by your mention of the failure of the sweptwing competitor to Concorde that the Americans built, which you mentioned in a previous post. I think this was news to most of us on this thread!!!!. Abandon your pipe-dream, because that's all it is, I'm afraid.
Last edited by JEM60; 4th February 2011 at 08:06.