This thread has been an informative and amusing read.
I'll not add fuel to the "French vs. US Justice System" flame, other than saying this:
CO was perhaps a bit negligent in maintenance. Any fool can tell you that a more-or-less "hand formed" titanium shape riveted to an aluminum shape will eventually, given enough vibration, temperature change, et cetera, pull the rivets loose. The two metals have different coefficient of temp expansions, different flexibility. The RTV applied to this particular mismatch prolly helped it separate sooner, by transferring heat.
OTOH, we don't really know how many other titanium wear strips are flying around right now, and we don't know why the MX person chose titanium instead of AL.
Closing this thought off, I'll say that in some respects this part of the incident reminds me of a spate of lawsuits in the US brought against trucking companies transporting gravel in those large 38' open-topped semi trailers. A bit of gravel flies off, chips the windshield of the car following closely behind the truck, the driver of the car notes the license # (or "call about my driving" #) and promptly expects a new windshield. Most trucks in the US now have a sticker printed in 172-point type, readable from about 75' with average vision, which says "if you can read this you are too close."
It's impossible to apply this bumper-sticker "fix" to the air transport industry, and this puts the responsibility back on airport operators. Junk on runways happens, and it presents a clear and present danger, but airports are simply too busy to FOD-walk after each takeoff. Perhaps carriers should start assessing the "FOD-freeness" of runways and approach airport management with penalties for those fields which do not take the situation as seriously as they should.
Next, we've heard a lot about the Concorde and it's capabilities and the high points of its design, as well its frailties and weak spots.
At this point, you have to look at the overall record for the airframe: More incidents per "x" number of flights than average, but this is based on its limited routing.
OTOH, in many respects it never really got out of the "experimental" stage, due to the low number of frames manufactured and the [relatively] low number of pax-miles flown by the type.
Techincally it did, but in the "spirit" of my statement, I'll posit that it never really was "grown" past the initial few years of 707/DC8 learning.
It was, overall, a brilliant design. Although supersonic flight was, at the point of Concorde's EIS, a rather mature technology, the concept of supersonic commercial flight was pretty much an unplowed field. Concorde was the first, and it obviously had some "growing pains" trying to match the resource-intense regime of supersonic with the economic restrictions of commercial duty.
Reputations aside, I'd like to suggest that both operators did the best they could with the concept. Neither AF nor BA were deliberately negligent in the way they operated the Concorde. BA might have embraced the airframe a bit tighter than AF, but both companies made a valiant effort with regards to the unusual marketing, maintenance, and operation of the frame.
At this point, I'd like to suggest that we do two things:
1) Try like mad to get inside information on how the French court is proceeding,
and
2) Hold back a bit in the AF vs. BA battle of barbs
Both companies are reputable carriers, and the French system of justice - while somewhat "alien" to other countries - has a considerable reputation for trying to find truth.
Personally, I'd like to hear more from MX people and pilots. Not necessarily those connected with the Concorde, but those who are familiar with the C and its characteristics.
And, thanks to those who have already made some stunningly acute posts and posts which have started to tell the "inside" story of this wonderful aircraft.
I'll end on a somber thought.
It's too freakin' bad the cost of fossil fuel went up to a level which has killed the Concorde and reduced subsonic transport to cattle-truck levels of quality.
In the grande scheme of things, 2 developments have seriously changed the human experience:
-- The ability to go from one side of the world to the other in hours instead of months
-- The ability to share information from anywhere in the world in a matter of seconds
At some future point, mankind will learn how to do both without any kerfluffles; then we'll be able to consider them boring and really concentrate on new ideas!
Cheers!
RR