Air France Concorde F-BTSC ran over a titanium strip that had dropped off a Continental DC-10 a few minutes before.
I believe I have read that lawyers for Continental or for the maintenance guys have argued the case that evidence shows the fire to have started before the location of the strip.
After typing that I checked around, and found that stories put out by the BBC, ABC, and other news organizations report that claim being made at the opening of the February 2010 trial.
Can anyone who has seen the evidence on that point pro and con discuss their own assessment? I have not.
Strip or no strip, the tires then in use failed often enough, and the aircraft was vulnerable enough to that failure, that a serious accident would seem unduly likely to have happened within a few years unless at least one serious corrective measure had been taken (either tires much less likely to fail this way, or an aircraft with considerably reduced vulnerability).