Very interesting thread.
It is, but now seems to be in a 3-way stalemate between:
1. those who appear to believe that the crash happened because Concorde was actually on the runway and shouldn't have been because it was not airworthy;
2. those who adhere to the evidence in the report, which states that the aircraft
was airworthy and would have enjoyed an uneventful flight had it not rolled over the titanium strip; and
3. Continental's lawyers, who appear to have thought that they wouldn't get away with using argument 1, and therefore used an "it wasn't me, mister" argument based on an alleged fire existing before Concorde hit the strip, rendering the strip incidental to the accident.
Do I read that right? Where do we go from here, then?
I dreamed of supersonic travel as a kid and look what happened.
The world's most beautiful aircraft.
