Concorde (merged)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concorde not even for Air Displays?
I read in The Times yesterday that Airbus are not allowing a Concorde to be kept airworthy for use in air displays and special flypasts. Grrrr!
What's there problem? Surely Concorde is a fantastic advert for BA, BAe, Airbus and UK Ltd?
I feel frustrated...all too soon Concorde will be grounded - it's slipping through our fingers, never to fly again.
Who can I lobby? Anyone got any suitable contacts in BA, Airbus, CAA?
Martin - Bristol, UK
What's there problem? Surely Concorde is a fantastic advert for BA, BAe, Airbus and UK Ltd?
I feel frustrated...all too soon Concorde will be grounded - it's slipping through our fingers, never to fly again.
Who can I lobby? Anyone got any suitable contacts in BA, Airbus, CAA?
Martin - Bristol, UK
Pegase Driver
AFR not the correct one, EADS ( Airbus bosses) are . they are the ones who decided to pull the plug on maintaining / manufacturing the spares. No frantic opposition from AFR and BAW I was told who were possibly looking for such an excuse for the (very) poor load factors . 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What The Times said was:
-----------------------------------------------------------
September 06, 2003
Airbus ‘non’ keeps Concorde off air show circuit
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
A FRENCH refusal to help British Airways’ plans to keep at least one Concorde in working order means the supersonic plane is unlikely to fly beyond the end of this year.
Airbus, the plane’s Toulouse-based manufacturer, will not co-operate with a team assembled by BA to investigate how one of the airline’s seven supersonic planes could be retained for flypasts, air shows and royal celebrations.
Airbus is refusing to share its technical expertise with any other company that could take over the role of supporting Concorde.
The 30-year-old plane is now unlikely to take to the skies again beyond the end of this year. Its last commercial flight is on October 24 and there may be a flight to America to coincide with the centenary, on December 17, of the Wright brothers’ first flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.
Safety rules require every plane to have a “type certificate” to keep flying. Concorde’s type certificate is held by Airbus, which monitors any safety modifications to the planes and provides technical advice to BA engineers.
Jock Lowe, BA’s former chief Concorde pilot, was asked by the airline six months ago to draw up a plan for saving one Concorde. “The idea was just to run half a dozen flights a year on special occasions. At least the plane would be alive and people could enjoy seeing it in the air.”
Mr Lowe said that Airbus would need to provide only minimal support because the ceremonial flights would be subsonic and contain no passengers. “We are only talking about 100 flying hours spread over five years. For that much flying, you could cannibalise the other Concordes for spares. But Airbus appears unwilling.”
Mr Lowe has spoken to several British companies about supporting Concorde and is confident one of them would be prepared to take on Concorde’s type certificate if Airbus was willing to co-operate.
But an Airbus spokesman said the company believed that Concorde should be grounded for good. “It’s all very well to have a dream of keeping on flying but at the end of the day, if it is prohibitively costly, it doesn’t make sense. Concorde may be an icon and something we can be proud of, but it’s a very old plane. Are people seriously suggesting that we maintain a number of technical experts for an aircraft in case something needs to be changed or modified?”
Asked whether Airbus would be willing to pass on the type certificate to another company, the spokesman said: “I think the answer is ‘no’. It’s not like a car where you can just slap on a spare part. You have to have an understanding of how it all fits together.” The spokesman initially claimed that Airbus employed a “huge number” of Concorde engineers, but when pressed to say how many, he admitted that there were “relatively few”.
The Civil Aviation Authority, the air safety regulator, said it would be willing to allow Concorde to keep flying if another company took on the plane’s type certificate. A spokesman said: “It is possible, however, the new people would need Airbus to hand over everything that they hold on the aircraft. If Airbus won’t do that, there is no way we can make them do it.”
The BA source said that the airline had wanted to keep Concorde in service for at least two years. But the airline had been forced to accelerate Concorde’s retirement after Airbus said it would not support the fleet beyond October. Air France, the only other Concorde operator, which lost one plane in a crash in Paris, had been making heavy losses and is believed to have held secret talks with Airbus to agree an early retirement date. Air France has already retired its five Concordes and has given them away to museums.
-----------------------------------------------------------
September 06, 2003
Airbus ‘non’ keeps Concorde off air show circuit
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
A FRENCH refusal to help British Airways’ plans to keep at least one Concorde in working order means the supersonic plane is unlikely to fly beyond the end of this year.
Airbus, the plane’s Toulouse-based manufacturer, will not co-operate with a team assembled by BA to investigate how one of the airline’s seven supersonic planes could be retained for flypasts, air shows and royal celebrations.
Airbus is refusing to share its technical expertise with any other company that could take over the role of supporting Concorde.
The 30-year-old plane is now unlikely to take to the skies again beyond the end of this year. Its last commercial flight is on October 24 and there may be a flight to America to coincide with the centenary, on December 17, of the Wright brothers’ first flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.
Safety rules require every plane to have a “type certificate” to keep flying. Concorde’s type certificate is held by Airbus, which monitors any safety modifications to the planes and provides technical advice to BA engineers.
Jock Lowe, BA’s former chief Concorde pilot, was asked by the airline six months ago to draw up a plan for saving one Concorde. “The idea was just to run half a dozen flights a year on special occasions. At least the plane would be alive and people could enjoy seeing it in the air.”
Mr Lowe said that Airbus would need to provide only minimal support because the ceremonial flights would be subsonic and contain no passengers. “We are only talking about 100 flying hours spread over five years. For that much flying, you could cannibalise the other Concordes for spares. But Airbus appears unwilling.”
Mr Lowe has spoken to several British companies about supporting Concorde and is confident one of them would be prepared to take on Concorde’s type certificate if Airbus was willing to co-operate.
But an Airbus spokesman said the company believed that Concorde should be grounded for good. “It’s all very well to have a dream of keeping on flying but at the end of the day, if it is prohibitively costly, it doesn’t make sense. Concorde may be an icon and something we can be proud of, but it’s a very old plane. Are people seriously suggesting that we maintain a number of technical experts for an aircraft in case something needs to be changed or modified?”
Asked whether Airbus would be willing to pass on the type certificate to another company, the spokesman said: “I think the answer is ‘no’. It’s not like a car where you can just slap on a spare part. You have to have an understanding of how it all fits together.” The spokesman initially claimed that Airbus employed a “huge number” of Concorde engineers, but when pressed to say how many, he admitted that there were “relatively few”.
The Civil Aviation Authority, the air safety regulator, said it would be willing to allow Concorde to keep flying if another company took on the plane’s type certificate. A spokesman said: “It is possible, however, the new people would need Airbus to hand over everything that they hold on the aircraft. If Airbus won’t do that, there is no way we can make them do it.”
The BA source said that the airline had wanted to keep Concorde in service for at least two years. But the airline had been forced to accelerate Concorde’s retirement after Airbus said it would not support the fleet beyond October. Air France, the only other Concorde operator, which lost one plane in a crash in Paris, had been making heavy losses and is believed to have held secret talks with Airbus to agree an early retirement date. Air France has already retired its five Concordes and has given them away to museums.
From my understanding then, it is the Fr*gs again putting spoke in.
Can I suggest that next time we design something decent, we keep it to ourselves ? - or am I being too naive ?
Sleeve.
Can I suggest that next time we design something decent, we keep it to ourselves ? - or am I being too naive ?
Sleeve.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
did anyone see Concorde fly over the Oval on friday last on approach to LHR (England versus South Africa Test match) .....
the Batsmen looked up !!! ..... the Fielders looked up!!! .... the Umpires looked up!!!! ..... and of course the Spectators all looked up!!! ....
even the Bowler looked up (silly man !!!! ....lol)
Concorde still commands so much respect and admiration....
cheers .... hobie ....
the Batsmen looked up !!! ..... the Fielders looked up!!! .... the Umpires looked up!!!! ..... and of course the Spectators all looked up!!! ....
even the Bowler looked up (silly man !!!! ....lol)
Concorde still commands so much respect and admiration....
cheers .... hobie ....
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concorde Fleet Engineering Manager said the other dayat RAeS speech, and quite rightly really, that if one is kept going, then it should be kept going in full commercial service, since the corrosion issues on the airframe when it is not flown mean that simply keeping it for airshows would be untenable after a while.
Bear in mind that the airframe requires supersonic travel to heat up, remove moisture buildup and to prevent corrosion. Unfortunately nobody has the money to do just that - it has been rather unlucky with the load factors in the economic climate, but with the highest houred at 7,900 flight, and an 8,500 limit before major rewoking is required, it wouldn't be able to last long even in Branson's hands.
Bear in mind that the airframe requires supersonic travel to heat up, remove moisture buildup and to prevent corrosion. Unfortunately nobody has the money to do just that - it has been rather unlucky with the load factors in the economic climate, but with the highest houred at 7,900 flight, and an 8,500 limit before major rewoking is required, it wouldn't be able to last long even in Branson's hands.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the situation here is that Concorde is only tenable if a reaonable sized fleet is flying. Then, the astronomical suprort costs can be amortised across the fleet.
The Frogs pulled out, which imposed all those costs onto the BA fleet. So BA is pulling out. Who could afford those costs set against one 'airshow' Concorde?
An amazing part of our aviation heritage is passing away. It's very sad. All I can say is those of you who haven't yet sampled it, do it before it goes!
SSD
The Frogs pulled out, which imposed all those costs onto the BA fleet. So BA is pulling out. Who could afford those costs set against one 'airshow' Concorde?
An amazing part of our aviation heritage is passing away. It's very sad. All I can say is those of you who haven't yet sampled it, do it before it goes!
SSD
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gilligans Island
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I note it is the french keeping concorde from a useful future, either with Dickie Bs airline or as a display kite. What then should we do about the FSTA contract? Will that have the plug pulled by the onion scoffers, when they decide we 'need' a new tanker because the Toulouse factory is losing money again? Why are they so scared of handing the Design Authority over to someone else, a lesser man would conclude they have something to hide.
Perhaps the final months of this supersonic marvel should be given to pleasure flights for people who can afford it. And all moneys taken donated to the Vulcan fund, so at least one awe inspiring delta will stop people in their tracks as they watch it go by.
Q. How many frenchmen does it take to defend paris?
A. Nobody knows they havent managed it yet!
Perhaps the final months of this supersonic marvel should be given to pleasure flights for people who can afford it. And all moneys taken donated to the Vulcan fund, so at least one awe inspiring delta will stop people in their tracks as they watch it go by.
Q. How many frenchmen does it take to defend paris?
A. Nobody knows they havent managed it yet!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hold on a mo. Why should they pay to keep Concorde airborne just because people like to see it? There happens to be NO financial incentive in doing so. If there was, believe me, they'd do it.
The facts of the matter are that Concorde, whilst being graceful, noisy, fast, blah, blah is extremely expensive to keep operating. The outlay of keeping her up would not be covered by enthusiasts going to see it. And before anyone points to all recent flights being full, they wouldn't be if she weren't finishing in October.
Concorde has been both a refreshing and resolutely European part of the aviation scene for the last thirty some years. Now let's let her retire with some dignity.
P7
Bear in mind that when people hear such xenophobic crap as above, then they tend not to want to help out anyway.
The facts of the matter are that Concorde, whilst being graceful, noisy, fast, blah, blah is extremely expensive to keep operating. The outlay of keeping her up would not be covered by enthusiasts going to see it. And before anyone points to all recent flights being full, they wouldn't be if she weren't finishing in October.
Concorde has been both a refreshing and resolutely European part of the aviation scene for the last thirty some years. Now let's let her retire with some dignity.
P7
Bear in mind that when people hear such xenophobic crap as above, then they tend not to want to help out anyway.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 35K
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well maybe if BA's sharelholders had question thier company (it is thiers not Ozzie Ed's or Lord Marshland's) on thier burning 84Million Pounds mothballing the fleet, when Branson was publicaly prepared to take the birds, parts and people. this state of affairs would not have arrisen. I think many of the nigels may underestimate Branson's bargaining power with Airbus. He i taking deliverys of 346s right now (10 on order), and has 6 380's on order - additionally it is well known he is in talks about expanding the fleet - the possibility of an all airbus fleet has been mentioned. In addition he is 49% controled by Singapore Airlines who are the launch client for both the 345 (5 ordered and 5 options)and 380 (10 ordered and 15 on option). BA has no Airbus Longhaul aircraft on order however it does have 56 operating 319/20s and with a further 20 319/20/21s on order - most interesting is the 99 319s it has optioned. It is intersting that BA has no boeings on order or option - i have raised these figures and find myself at a different conclusion than I was at when i began typing.
BA has 99 options on Airbus craft - all its boeing shorthaul fleet is leased ie get ridable for want of a term. Why have they not brought pressure to bare on Airbus
This is a ridiculous state of affairs - Europe is faces with throwing away technology 20 years early because of the French - lets go to war - the US will support us
BA has 99 options on Airbus craft - all its boeing shorthaul fleet is leased ie get ridable for want of a term. Why have they not brought pressure to bare on Airbus
This is a ridiculous state of affairs - Europe is faces with throwing away technology 20 years early because of the French - lets go to war - the US will support us
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gilligans Island
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P7.
Nobody expects the french to pay for it, just do the decent thing and hand over the Design Authority to somebody who is willing to use it to maintain the aircraft. Branson is no fool, or he would still be peddaling cheap CDs on a market stall somewhere. If he reckons he can make it work then why not give him a chance to. If he fails I will happily accept a big fat told you so.
Xenophobe? No. Francophobe yes, and with good reason IMHO.
Call me cynical but I firmly believe that the reluctance of Airbus is purely because Air France would look prize Chumps, if a British company operated it at a profit WITHOUT massive subsidy from the government. And yes, I am fully aware that before BA was privatised HMG chucked a substantial sum at them particularly the Concorde fleet. We onlyhave to look at agriculture to see the level of protectionism in the french economy: British lambs burnt alive in lorries on the docks at Boulogne, Fines from the EU for not reallowing British beef, fines incidentally which are still not paid, creation of butter mountains and wine lakes... the list is endless.
Please see the paragraph of The Times article above relating to the amount of Concorde engineers to illustrate further my point that there is something niffy about the Airbus Industries response to requests for Type Certification
I wonder if Jongar has any stats on the amount of business that air france are putting Airbus's way?
Nobody expects the french to pay for it, just do the decent thing and hand over the Design Authority to somebody who is willing to use it to maintain the aircraft. Branson is no fool, or he would still be peddaling cheap CDs on a market stall somewhere. If he reckons he can make it work then why not give him a chance to. If he fails I will happily accept a big fat told you so.
Xenophobe? No. Francophobe yes, and with good reason IMHO.
Call me cynical but I firmly believe that the reluctance of Airbus is purely because Air France would look prize Chumps, if a British company operated it at a profit WITHOUT massive subsidy from the government. And yes, I am fully aware that before BA was privatised HMG chucked a substantial sum at them particularly the Concorde fleet. We onlyhave to look at agriculture to see the level of protectionism in the french economy: British lambs burnt alive in lorries on the docks at Boulogne, Fines from the EU for not reallowing British beef, fines incidentally which are still not paid, creation of butter mountains and wine lakes... the list is endless.
Please see the paragraph of The Times article above relating to the amount of Concorde engineers to illustrate further my point that there is something niffy about the Airbus Industries response to requests for Type Certification
I wonder if Jongar has any stats on the amount of business that air france are putting Airbus's way?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London & Edinburgh
Age: 38
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is we can allow the French to screw up British Heritage?
Lets look at the evidence:
They failed to clear the runway at CDG prior to the crash.
They wanted the plane withdrawn, because their schedule was unprofitable.
They get to refuse to service our Concordes.
They get to say no to give the contract to anyone else.
How can we allow this to happen?
They didn't support the war and won't send troops, so I say no to them getting any of the Iraqi Oil.
Let's tell them where we stand once and for all.
Jordan
Lets look at the evidence:
They failed to clear the runway at CDG prior to the crash.
They wanted the plane withdrawn, because their schedule was unprofitable.
They get to refuse to service our Concordes.
They get to say no to give the contract to anyone else.
How can we allow this to happen?
They didn't support the war and won't send troops, so I say no to them getting any of the Iraqi Oil.
Let's tell them where we stand once and for all.
Jordan
Most posters, in their attack on Airbus, seem to be missing the obvious point that is wrong in Airbus's approach.
Surely it is not Airbus's place to say that it would be uneconomical to continue operating Concorde? What Airbus should do is provide BA with a cost of mainting the type certificate (no doubt they would make it enormous). Then it is up to BA, who pick up the tab, to decide whether they can afford it or not. The supplier gives a price, the customer decides whether they can afford it or not.
Or is this not the French way of doing business?
Surely it is not Airbus's place to say that it would be uneconomical to continue operating Concorde? What Airbus should do is provide BA with a cost of mainting the type certificate (no doubt they would make it enormous). Then it is up to BA, who pick up the tab, to decide whether they can afford it or not. The supplier gives a price, the customer decides whether they can afford it or not.
Or is this not the French way of doing business?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Groundloop - I think that's the way it happened. Airbus comes up with a big number, Air France says 'time to pull out' ('cause they aren't that keen to operate the bird anyway). Airbus says 'in that case, BA, since AF have dropped out, you'll have have to pay ALL this big number yourself'. BA can't make the numbers work, so have to pull out of Conc operations as well.
Mr Branson spots a publicity oportunity and, quite naturally, exploits it.
SSD
Mr Branson spots a publicity oportunity and, quite naturally, exploits it.
SSD
Supercharged PPRuNer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Doon the watter, a million miles from the sandpit.
Posts: 1,183
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Were it not for the ‘onion-scoffing’, ‘cowardly’, ‘protectionist’, ‘frogs’, the British government would have pulled the plug on the Concorde project before it even entered service, and we wouldn’t be having this ‘debate’ (I use the term loosely) now.
Still, let’s not let that get in the way of a bit of frog-bashing. Makes me proud to be British.
Still, let’s not let that get in the way of a bit of frog-bashing. Makes me proud to be British.
As I understand it Airbus as the successor to BAe / BAC are contractually bound to provide the support for Concorde as long as ONE of the operators wants to use it. I don't know if there are any clauses that guarantee sensible pricing for this service......
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hobie: absolutely it stopped everyone at the Oval and was shown on national t.v. - brilliant advertising or what?
shaggy: no, the plan was to keep 1 in flying condition and not license it for fare paying pax - I imagine the this would keep costs down somewhat. Certainly BA were seriously looking at this until the news on Saturday.
point seven: no you are wrong - the financial incentive is pure advertising - as mentioned above, it's a crowd stopper wherever it goes - enough to make BA consider keeping just 1 flying.
country calls: I think you've hit the nail on the head - the French have had an uneasy relationship with Concorde no doubt excerbated by the tragic crash. I do believe it's a historically important aircraft, a crowd pleaser and still totally unique - how on earth can we be letting it become a static museum piece?
As has been said, I don't think Airbus should be in a position to say 'non' - they should cooperate with whoever wishes to continue operating this magnificent aircraft, commercially or air display only.
Martin - Bristol, UK
Lastly - good postings chaps but...
Does no one know the answer to my original posting - i.e. a contact in Airbus or BA or BAe to lobby? With old historic aircraft being resurected all the time, it seems crazy to take Concorde out of the skies. It'll be too late in just a few months to do anything about it.
Martin - Bristol, UK.
shaggy: no, the plan was to keep 1 in flying condition and not license it for fare paying pax - I imagine the this would keep costs down somewhat. Certainly BA were seriously looking at this until the news on Saturday.
point seven: no you are wrong - the financial incentive is pure advertising - as mentioned above, it's a crowd stopper wherever it goes - enough to make BA consider keeping just 1 flying.
country calls: I think you've hit the nail on the head - the French have had an uneasy relationship with Concorde no doubt excerbated by the tragic crash. I do believe it's a historically important aircraft, a crowd pleaser and still totally unique - how on earth can we be letting it become a static museum piece?
As has been said, I don't think Airbus should be in a position to say 'non' - they should cooperate with whoever wishes to continue operating this magnificent aircraft, commercially or air display only.
Martin - Bristol, UK
Lastly - good postings chaps but...
Does no one know the answer to my original posting - i.e. a contact in Airbus or BA or BAe to lobby? With old historic aircraft being resurected all the time, it seems crazy to take Concorde out of the skies. It'll be too late in just a few months to do anything about it.
Martin - Bristol, UK.
Sims Fly Virtually
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Used to be 3rd Sand Dune from the Left - But now I'm somewhere else somewhere else.
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Branson?
I, too, would love to see Dicky operate it. Just imagine what it would look like in Virgin colours!
Everything the guy touches turns to gold (Okay - await flaming from Virgin staff here, about how he keeps costs down?) so, if he thinks he can make Conc viable, I'd bet he could
At this point very tempted to "frog bash", but resists the temptation
_______________________________________
"Martin Baker - the ONLY way to fly . . . . .
Everything the guy touches turns to gold (Okay - await flaming from Virgin staff here, about how he keeps costs down?) so, if he thinks he can make Conc viable, I'd bet he could
At this point very tempted to "frog bash", but resists the temptation
_______________________________________
"Martin Baker - the ONLY way to fly . . . . .