Ex Cargo Clown
What a bizarre comment. You have clearly never heard of words such as "yield" or "revenue management".
Absolutely right sir, I completely agree with you.
The sad fact for the Concorde detractors here is that for BA at least, a fully laden Concorde earned far more revenue/operating profit than a fully laden subsonic of any size or flavour. As much as I've tried to stay out of this thread I feel that someone has to speak up and defend the aeroplane that many of us love dearly, in the face of some really mis-informed and total drivel being posted. (Including even from one who obviously worked at the GW Division at Filton; one would expect better of such people).
PBL
And that aircraft flew after 64 years of powered flight, and continued flying, doing its thing very well, for twenty-four years of service until the Paris crash (after 95 years of powered flight), and only stopped because EADS decided to discontinue support. We are now at 105 years. With one airplane, one airplane only, lost. Everyone else in those twenty-four years had a good flight.
mike-wsm strikes me as the kind of contributor who would say on an arts-appreciation site that Picasso was just another scribbler, and that his plumber knew it.
Very well said PBL, you phrased your point beautifully. I suppose it is easier for some to criticize something far easier, if it's from a point of view of ignorance and stupidity. (The point about the 'E' in Concorde was absolutely pathetic).
Regards
Dude
