Originally Posted by
paradoxbox
if the fact that the captain overloaded the aircraft and took off with a tailwind is true, it would seem that was one of the greatest factors in explaining why the aircraft crashed.
Not sure to follow you train of thought. Do you mean that if the aircraft was 1.5t lighter it would have accelerated faster, thus not hitting the titanium strip ?
This accident has been discussed ad nauseum at the time and I think there is pretty much a consensus that once the massive leak ignited it was game over: they couldn't stop, they couldn't fly.
As for engine 2 shut down I agree that the lack of communication is surprising and didn't help, although it was the "right" thing to do given the circumstances. They had clear engine fire alarms, engine surge indication and ATC screaming the same. How could they guess that it was not actually an engine fire (which no one suspected until much latter) ? But in any case it didn't change the eventual outcome - except maybe for the victims on the ground.
atakacs I'd be interested to hear your doubts on the titanium piece.
I am not privy to any "inside" information but I muss say that despite knowing the huge loads on Concorde tires at takeoff and the simulation by the BEA I have a hard time to believe
that strip really destroyed the tire. To be honest, very, very convenient. And even if it did, the missing spacer on the landing gear was pretty much overlooked in the report whereas it was designed to precisely help in such circumstances. Overall I would say the Concorde operation at AF did not look as professional as it should in 2000.