...was significantly more dangerous than other models in operation.
Au contraire. I think you must mean that Concorde was significantly less safe than other models, which is not quite the same thing. If it were dangerous it would not have received a Type Certificate after more extensive testing and proving trials than any other aircraft, before or since, has ever been subjected to. Much safety evaluation is necessarily subjective, but the aircraft met the airworthiness requirements and was a safe machine.
If FOD results in penetration of a fuel tank or fuel system the result will generally be catastrophic for any aircraft. That is after all, why B737s now have armoured fuel tank access panels - but what were the chances of turbine disk shrapnel striking and bursting a small, ordinary fuel tank access panel, allowing fuel to flood onto the open hot section of an exploded engine and starting the Manchester fire? Such things are random events that can occur at any time, unrelated to aircraft type.