The Concorde thread (Don't start a separate one!)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't Branson just buy the plastic Concorde from the end of the tunnel?
By the way, what's going to happen to Speedbird One/ It's one helluva callsign.
By the way, what's going to happen to Speedbird One/ It's one helluva callsign.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Aix en Provence, France
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget to sign the petition on
www.saveconcord.co.uk !
www.saveconcord.co.uk !
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo
I cannot agree with all you say - you show too much dogma. Bit like showing a sock with holes in it.
I am certain it WOULD have been possible for Virgin to operate Concorde.
Why could Virgin NOT do it when BA had to demonstrate that they could - right at the beginning? It was a fresh AOC then and much has been learned since. Poaching would probably have not have been an issue. I think pilots and engineers would have been more than willing to leave BA. The estimate that Concorde could have flown on for another, what was it, 10 or more years would have suited many of them rather than stay with BA.
I personally know two Concorde pilots who are disgusted with the treatment they have received by BA management. A classically bad management over the past 20/30 years! I can re-call one very senior manager who was pushed - only to get himself a job running the London Underground. He was sacked from that job too. Sort of proves he couldn't run anything below ground let alone above ground.
The AOC and all other situations could easily have been resolved if BA had been willing to hand over the operation to Virgin. If all matters per the relevant CAP were in place the CAA are not very well placed to object are they. Their function is to ensure that the operation is properly conducted in all areas of operation. Virgin are well placed. They have a superb infrastructure, and they know how to operate aeroplanes and have a brilliant record doing it - AND they are profitable. The CAA would not, and could not, ignore that. You seem to suggest they could. Not true!
There WAS a way, in spite of Airbus, who would have had a mighty sword with RB inscribed on it hanging over them if a deal had been struck. AF was just an excuse. They are so poorly run that their demise was almost a certainty, and I would take a bet that they engineered an altruistic deal to kill Concorde. The link with KLM was their only way out but Concorde was in the way.
However, what was needed, and was never a runner, was BA to have binned it's absolute dislike of RB and Virgin and let RB get on with it - even with their assistance. They would have made some money too. But............while Marshall and King are pulling the puppet's strings it was NEVER an option. They could not be seen to help RB after their exposed "Dirty Tricks" campaign against Virgin yet they were the villains of the act. Pity the two of them couldn't show some remorse and got together with RB who has always been willing to do that.
It isn't too late now but leopards spots and all that..............
I cannot agree with all you say - you show too much dogma. Bit like showing a sock with holes in it.
I am certain it WOULD have been possible for Virgin to operate Concorde.
Why could Virgin NOT do it when BA had to demonstrate that they could - right at the beginning? It was a fresh AOC then and much has been learned since. Poaching would probably have not have been an issue. I think pilots and engineers would have been more than willing to leave BA. The estimate that Concorde could have flown on for another, what was it, 10 or more years would have suited many of them rather than stay with BA.
I personally know two Concorde pilots who are disgusted with the treatment they have received by BA management. A classically bad management over the past 20/30 years! I can re-call one very senior manager who was pushed - only to get himself a job running the London Underground. He was sacked from that job too. Sort of proves he couldn't run anything below ground let alone above ground.
The AOC and all other situations could easily have been resolved if BA had been willing to hand over the operation to Virgin. If all matters per the relevant CAP were in place the CAA are not very well placed to object are they. Their function is to ensure that the operation is properly conducted in all areas of operation. Virgin are well placed. They have a superb infrastructure, and they know how to operate aeroplanes and have a brilliant record doing it - AND they are profitable. The CAA would not, and could not, ignore that. You seem to suggest they could. Not true!
There WAS a way, in spite of Airbus, who would have had a mighty sword with RB inscribed on it hanging over them if a deal had been struck. AF was just an excuse. They are so poorly run that their demise was almost a certainty, and I would take a bet that they engineered an altruistic deal to kill Concorde. The link with KLM was their only way out but Concorde was in the way.
However, what was needed, and was never a runner, was BA to have binned it's absolute dislike of RB and Virgin and let RB get on with it - even with their assistance. They would have made some money too. But............while Marshall and King are pulling the puppet's strings it was NEVER an option. They could not be seen to help RB after their exposed "Dirty Tricks" campaign against Virgin yet they were the villains of the act. Pity the two of them couldn't show some remorse and got together with RB who has always been willing to do that.
It isn't too late now but leopards spots and all that..............
Paxing All Over The World
By the way, what's going to happen to Speedbird One/ It's one helluva callsign.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: london
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, Priscilla, for the save concorde web address.... but I think it should have had an "e" on the end of the word Concord... so the adress is www.saveconcorde.co.uk
Clearly you must be very old and remember the days before Concorde was called Concorde and just called Concord!!! (you may even remember Millibars before the Frogs insisted they were called Hectopascales after the Great Frog of the same name.)
As everyone knows, the UK designed it and its engines, but in order to get the Frogs in we had to agree that the name would be spelt the French way.....with an E. And of course we gave them all the technology etc etc ....
So nothing changed in all those years ... They don't fly it, we don't fly it... they say NON, we agree.....
Clearly you must be very old and remember the days before Concorde was called Concorde and just called Concord!!! (you may even remember Millibars before the Frogs insisted they were called Hectopascales after the Great Frog of the same name.)
As everyone knows, the UK designed it and its engines, but in order to get the Frogs in we had to agree that the name would be spelt the French way.....with an E. And of course we gave them all the technology etc etc ....
So nothing changed in all those years ... They don't fly it, we don't fly it... they say NON, we agree.....
Dir. PPRuNe Line Service
On April 25th 2001, three PPRuNers were fortunate enough to have a close look at G-BOAF and G-BOAG. I took photographs which are now up on my website.
Concorde pics
Concorde pics
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After my rather serious posts on this topic, the least I could do was post something I hope will make you smile.
In 'anorak' mode.
I tried hard to get that stupid grin off my face but for some reason it wouldn't go.
In 'anorak' mode.
I tried hard to get that stupid grin off my face but for some reason it wouldn't go.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 29th Oct 2003 at 04:54.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for those wonderful photos of Alpha Golf (my personal fave 
) in the hangar.
From every angle she looks perfect: the ultimate embodiment of form and function. "If it looks right, it'll fly right."
Tony Benn on the Last Day:
"If you showed it to someone who knew no better and told them that it was the latest thing........they'd believe you."
) in the hangar.From every angle she looks perfect: the ultimate embodiment of form and function. "If it looks right, it'll fly right."
Tony Benn on the Last Day:
"If you showed it to someone who knew no better and told them that it was the latest thing........they'd believe you."
FL - I have a picture of a rather younger Tudor at RAF Newton pre-flighting hs Chippie about 31 years ago. With the same familiar grin on his face.....
Donations to the PPRuNe fund might prevent its publication....
Donations to the PPRuNe fund might prevent its publication....
Guest
Posts: n/a
A friend of a friend with (and you'll have to trust me on this one) excellent contacts says that the one thing BA never mentioned, and if it's true good on them, that on Sept 11th as the Twin Towers fell over 50% of BA's top pre-2000 100 Concorde travellers lost their lives.
If I was reading this I'd go "yeah, right, BA propoganda", but this came from a far more "regulatory" source and I'm inclined to believe it when one thinks of the likes of Cantor Fitzgerald with their World HQ in NYC and their International HQ in London. I think I'm right in that they were the main employers of the Brits there?
In the face of that, combined with the spectre of the 2000 crash, it's easy to see, to those with no long term financial view, that the prospects were difficult.
Though I think they should have given it more of a shot than they all have.
If I was reading this I'd go "yeah, right, BA propoganda", but this came from a far more "regulatory" source and I'm inclined to believe it when one thinks of the likes of Cantor Fitzgerald with their World HQ in NYC and their International HQ in London. I think I'm right in that they were the main employers of the Brits there?
In the face of that, combined with the spectre of the 2000 crash, it's easy to see, to those with no long term financial view, that the prospects were difficult.
Though I think they should have given it more of a shot than they all have.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CaptainFillosan, allow me to point out the rather large holes in your sock, errrr, I mean argument.
Indeed it was a fresh AOC then, and the AOC was earned off the back of tens of millions (in old money) of government funding. Funding that is not available today. Furthermore, much of what has been learned since then will be lost unless Airbus play ball, and they've clearly stated they won't.
Flight Engineers, yes. Senior Captains close to retirement, maybe. FOs, no way. 10 or more years? The oldest aircraft are due some very heavy maintenance from 2007 I think. Virgin certainly can't afford that.
Well they'll be in good company with the hordes of subsonic BA pilots who feel the same way. Never seen one resign yet.
What, you mean all the maintenance assets we've developed and paid for ourselves? What about the engineers and mechanics? Do you think they might have something to say about being transferred to Virgin (unless you expect BA to continue paying them whilst they work for VS). How do we then work with the shortfall of engineers who worked on Concorde and other BA aircraft?
Yes, its a third party contractor and Dublin is a lovely place.
A mighty sword with RB inscribed on it? Please, lets keep some sense of perspective here. Virgin have , what, about 14 long haul Airbuses, and 5 or 6 A380s on order? They hardly constititute a mighty customer compared to Emirates, Cathay, Air France, Gulf Air, Northwest, Air Canada, Lufthansa, FedEx, ILFC etc. etc.. BA themselves have 60 A320 series with a significant requirement for 767 replacements, not to mention the Concorde fleet and they couldn't sway Airbus.
Do you think that could, or indeed should, happen when RB uses practically every breathe of oxygen he gets to knock BA? This is business after all.
You say I show too much dogma, I beg to differ. If RB, and a willing consortium, can find the funds to keep a Concorde flying in a heritage role then I'm all for it. As a real enthusiast I'll even stump up a healthy donation myself. But if you believe that there was ever any prospect of any other operator running commercial Concorde operations then you are just deluding yourself. Concorde has always been an expensive political beast. BA have been defeated by a combination of economic and political hurdles, and even if somebody could overcome those you can be sure that new hurdles would mysteriously appear. Sadly the old birds been done for by politics, and no amount of goodwill, TV bleating or cynical self-promotion will overcome that.
Why could Virgin NOT do it when BA had to demonstrate that they could - right at the beginning? It was a fresh AOC then and much has been learned since
I think pilots and engineers would have been more than willing to leave BA. The estimate that Concorde could have flown on for another, what was it, 10 or more years
I personally know two Concorde pilots who are disgusted with the treatment they have received by BA management
The AOC and all other situations could easily have been resolved if BA had been willing to hand over the operation to Virgin
Virgin are well placed. They have a superb infrastructure
There WAS a way, in spite of Airbus, who would have had a mighty sword with RB inscribed on it hanging over them if a deal had been struck.
However, what was needed, and was never a runner, was BA to have binned it's absolute dislike of RB and Virgin and let RB get on with it
You say I show too much dogma, I beg to differ. If RB, and a willing consortium, can find the funds to keep a Concorde flying in a heritage role then I'm all for it. As a real enthusiast I'll even stump up a healthy donation myself. But if you believe that there was ever any prospect of any other operator running commercial Concorde operations then you are just deluding yourself. Concorde has always been an expensive political beast. BA have been defeated by a combination of economic and political hurdles, and even if somebody could overcome those you can be sure that new hurdles would mysteriously appear. Sadly the old birds been done for by politics, and no amount of goodwill, TV bleating or cynical self-promotion will overcome that.
Everybody's gotta be somewhere
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denham
Age: 62
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPrune Dispatcher,
Many thanks for posting your pics.
Views of the bird I'd never seen before - what a work of art!
To say I think you and your cohorts are lucky bar stewards would be an understatement - but thanks again
dd
Many thanks for posting your pics.
Views of the bird I'd never seen before - what a work of art!
To say I think you and your cohorts are lucky bar stewards would be an understatement - but thanks again
dd
that on Sept 11th as the Twin Towers fell over 50% of BA's top pre-2000 100 Concorde travellers lost their lives.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting you mention Jock Lowe. He was on the Concorde fleet for 25 years, ended up as Chief Pilot of BA and Commercial Director Concorde before he retired.
Nobody knows more about the financial challenges of operating Concorde profitably and he doesn't agree with BA's decision.
Nobody knows more about the financial challenges of operating Concorde profitably and he doesn't agree with BA's decision.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But for christ's sake, for the nth time, it's not BA's decision!
Airbus have pulled the plug. Why else would BA have already sold this winter's BGI services? They were surprised, that's why.
The decision was sprung upon them. There was no "plan to get rid of Concorde" within BA as some of you claim.
Airbus have pulled the plug. Why else would BA have already sold this winter's BGI services? They were surprised, that's why.
The decision was sprung upon them. There was no "plan to get rid of Concorde" within BA as some of you claim.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cranleigh
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moving on...
I think it unlikely that we (or anyone) will ever be able to get one, definitive version of what really happened but the reason we're so interested and so passionate is because we love the old girl and can't bear to let her go.
Let's try to affect the things that still might be affected by public opinion and common sense (the two do occasionally coincide) and focus on ways of keeping at least one flying in (at least) a heritage role.
Over on www.concordesst.com they have come to much the same conclusion and seem to be progressing well (some threads are still dragging over the coals but there are quite a few that are moving forward).
The odds are that pretty much everyone here who's *really* into Concorde will already know about their efforts (they're probably not alone either) but I have shared the information here in case anyone was not aware.
Let's try to affect the things that still might be affected by public opinion and common sense (the two do occasionally coincide) and focus on ways of keeping at least one flying in (at least) a heritage role.
Over on www.concordesst.com they have come to much the same conclusion and seem to be progressing well (some threads are still dragging over the coals but there are quite a few that are moving forward).
The odds are that pretty much everyone here who's *really* into Concorde will already know about their efforts (they're probably not alone either) but I have shared the information here in case anyone was not aware.