Concorde to the sky?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aplogies for the lack of clarity.
SSD
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mfaff
That's correct. Airbus were pleased/relieved when AF made its decison, but I saw no indication whatsoever in my conversation with him of a 'vendetta' - just the harsh application of business considerations. Too harsh IMHO but, as I've already declared, I was a committed Concorde fan.
I remain of the view that if AF had wanted to continue (even alone), Airbus might have taken a different approach and the result might have been very different. Nothing he said led me to think that hunch was wrong but, interestingly, he changed the topic when I touched on that aspect.
ssd
The lack of clarity is mine. I was trying to answer your assumption that Branson must have known at the time.
Nothing I've read in the public domain (by way of facts, as opposed to supposition) leads me to think that assumption is correct and, in contrast, everything I've been told privately by people in a position to know points to it being incorrect.
His hope was certainly ambitious, but Branson isn't averse to trying ambitious projects which many others regard as too ambitious. Remember all the prophets of doom who forecast that the new and under-funded Virgin airline couldn't possibly succeed? The only disagreement was about how long it would last before failing.
That's correct. Airbus were pleased/relieved when AF made its decison, but I saw no indication whatsoever in my conversation with him of a 'vendetta' - just the harsh application of business considerations. Too harsh IMHO but, as I've already declared, I was a committed Concorde fan.
I remain of the view that if AF had wanted to continue (even alone), Airbus might have taken a different approach and the result might have been very different. Nothing he said led me to think that hunch was wrong but, interestingly, he changed the topic when I touched on that aspect.
ssd
The lack of clarity is mine. I was trying to answer your assumption that Branson must have known at the time.
Nothing I've read in the public domain (by way of facts, as opposed to supposition) leads me to think that assumption is correct and, in contrast, everything I've been told privately by people in a position to know points to it being incorrect.
His hope was certainly ambitious, but Branson isn't averse to trying ambitious projects which many others regard as too ambitious. Remember all the prophets of doom who forecast that the new and under-funded Virgin airline couldn't possibly succeed? The only disagreement was about how long it would last before failing.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 26th Jan 2007 at 11:07.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Eastbourne
Age: 69
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not had the chance too follow this thread for a number of months now but I see from the content that the original ideal of returning a Concorde to flight has not been totally lost, however since last calling in I have had a lot of time to research Concorde in detail from it’s inception to it’s demise and might offer this post for consideration,
Concorde in it’s operational lifetime was for ever a work in progress, in as much as almost every airframe was different in some respects and it’s operations took account of that fact.
It was also handicapped from day one by the limitations placed upon it, not only by it’s design but by political constraints that time did nothing too alleviate.
It was always destined as a result for retirement from service though this retirement was deferred by both BA and AF for as long as possible for which I suppose we should thank them both, and since almost all the service airframes of both companies fleets have in someway been preserved, again we might take a moment to thank them.
However, there is always a ‘However’, we should not thank the respective governments for the criminal lack of judgement they exhibited when they not only stopped further production and research of SST’s but as a result consigned the Mk 2 version of Concorde to silent history, it was after all a far better aircraft than the Mk 1 could ever have been as larger, greater passenger and freight capacity, quieter with no requirement for re-heat and with longer range it may just have been the redeeming factor in all of this that would have led today to SST transport being an everyday thing once more, I would agree it was a sad day and a mammoth backward step for the aviation industry in the UK when Concorde was finally retired and returning in the process as it did, BA too the status of a small provincial airline, but the sadness comes for the fact that without ongoing development of the Mark Concorde was always on the slippery slope to oblivion, but the UK has for generations been unable to come to terms with it’s aviation history and how successive governments have squandered that in favour of reliance on Uncle Sam who after all we have little to thank for in this respect as long before the oil crises finally sealed Concorde’s fate were the main sticking point in it’s introduction to revenue service, Sad to see her go, but inevitable.
Concorde in it’s operational lifetime was for ever a work in progress, in as much as almost every airframe was different in some respects and it’s operations took account of that fact.
It was also handicapped from day one by the limitations placed upon it, not only by it’s design but by political constraints that time did nothing too alleviate.
It was always destined as a result for retirement from service though this retirement was deferred by both BA and AF for as long as possible for which I suppose we should thank them both, and since almost all the service airframes of both companies fleets have in someway been preserved, again we might take a moment to thank them.
However, there is always a ‘However’, we should not thank the respective governments for the criminal lack of judgement they exhibited when they not only stopped further production and research of SST’s but as a result consigned the Mk 2 version of Concorde to silent history, it was after all a far better aircraft than the Mk 1 could ever have been as larger, greater passenger and freight capacity, quieter with no requirement for re-heat and with longer range it may just have been the redeeming factor in all of this that would have led today to SST transport being an everyday thing once more, I would agree it was a sad day and a mammoth backward step for the aviation industry in the UK when Concorde was finally retired and returning in the process as it did, BA too the status of a small provincial airline, but the sadness comes for the fact that without ongoing development of the Mark Concorde was always on the slippery slope to oblivion, but the UK has for generations been unable to come to terms with it’s aviation history and how successive governments have squandered that in favour of reliance on Uncle Sam who after all we have little to thank for in this respect as long before the oil crises finally sealed Concorde’s fate were the main sticking point in it’s introduction to revenue service, Sad to see her go, but inevitable.
"Was amazed to read it as anyone, ...but read in the French press a few weeks ago that the AF Concorde at Le Bourget is indeed being maintained with a long-term possibility to it flying again.
Article concerned a female AF engineer who previously worked on the fleet & now pops over to Le Bourget (once a week I think it was...) to conduct the work.
Anyone else know any more about this...? Is it an AF-sponsored intiative or pure volunteer effort??"
Whispers have it that the French president ordered that at least 1 Concorde had to be maintained in flightworthy status.....
Allegedly.
And I still think that, had mad old Maggie still been running the shop at No. 10, then Skippy would have been hauled in for a no-tea-or-biscuits interview. Followed by Le Grand Grenouille..............
Article concerned a female AF engineer who previously worked on the fleet & now pops over to Le Bourget (once a week I think it was...) to conduct the work.
Anyone else know any more about this...? Is it an AF-sponsored intiative or pure volunteer effort??"
Whispers have it that the French president ordered that at least 1 Concorde had to be maintained in flightworthy status.....
Allegedly.
And I still think that, had mad old Maggie still been running the shop at No. 10, then Skippy would have been hauled in for a no-tea-or-biscuits interview. Followed by Le Grand Grenouille..............
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
Le Grand Grenouille means bu@@er all to me , but if it's Froggy for a good handbagging, then I totally agree. One might say "en concorde"... (wish my French was better than CSE Grade Fail... Un cidre sil-vous-plais)
It means 'The Big Frog'... In other words, Le President des singes qui mangent du fromage et se rendent! Who would have been invited in for a lamb and handbagging lunch avec Mrs T.....
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
Merci! Serveur ! Un cidre pour moi et pour vous briquet ? Et pour votre singe ? Fromage...?
(I don't know how BEagle becomes Briquet, but I hope to God it's not an insult!)
(I don't know how BEagle becomes Briquet, but I hope to God it's not an insult!)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some great discussion points on here:
A couple of things from the French side of things.
When AF decided it wanted to get out of its loss making Concorde operation it was right in the midst of the yet unannounced KLM merger. After their near miss early in 2003 when they nearly lost a 2 airframe, they corporately decided enough was enough.
None of the French birds can fly without UK help, so lets not worry about our friends on the other side of the channel pulling a fast one and ignoring the rules. Airbus in TLS would lose all credibility if they held type certificate without have the UK DA engineers as part of the team. The UK engineers are now mostly retired. The engines were British and the Type certificate for them was held by Rolls-Royce. That was surrendered around the same time as the a/c type certificate. The actual piece of paper was handed over to the Rolls-Royce heritage trust.
The AF a/c at Le Bourget, although looks the part, it is leaking hydraulic and Jet A1 all over the floor. Imagine what would happen if all its systems were pressurised!
The end of Concorde's flying days are very much the same as what NASA is going though now in closing down the shuttle programme; you have literally hundreds of supporting OEMs all doing their little bit. Once you make the call to close that down they is no going back....not for all the tea in china.
If Concorde was to stand any chance of flying, BA and AF would have had to put their considerable supplies of spares into a very very large store and then beg all the OEMs to donate their spares too. Sadly that did not happen, so really she will never grace the skies again.
You would think that I personally would be shouting from the tallest building to get our girls back in the air, but I must admit my view has been for the past few years now that Concorde was built to fly at Mach2 across the Atlantic, not buzzing the crowds at 170knts at an airshow.
Finally what do we gain from spending millions for Concorde to fly for 5-10 years at Airshows: If that money was ever flowing from corporate and, I, and I guess everyone else here, would rather have every Concorde in the world be put into a purpose build building to be preserver for future generations.
A couple of things from the French side of things.
When AF decided it wanted to get out of its loss making Concorde operation it was right in the midst of the yet unannounced KLM merger. After their near miss early in 2003 when they nearly lost a 2 airframe, they corporately decided enough was enough.
None of the French birds can fly without UK help, so lets not worry about our friends on the other side of the channel pulling a fast one and ignoring the rules. Airbus in TLS would lose all credibility if they held type certificate without have the UK DA engineers as part of the team. The UK engineers are now mostly retired. The engines were British and the Type certificate for them was held by Rolls-Royce. That was surrendered around the same time as the a/c type certificate. The actual piece of paper was handed over to the Rolls-Royce heritage trust.
The AF a/c at Le Bourget, although looks the part, it is leaking hydraulic and Jet A1 all over the floor. Imagine what would happen if all its systems were pressurised!
The end of Concorde's flying days are very much the same as what NASA is going though now in closing down the shuttle programme; you have literally hundreds of supporting OEMs all doing their little bit. Once you make the call to close that down they is no going back....not for all the tea in china.
If Concorde was to stand any chance of flying, BA and AF would have had to put their considerable supplies of spares into a very very large store and then beg all the OEMs to donate their spares too. Sadly that did not happen, so really she will never grace the skies again.
You would think that I personally would be shouting from the tallest building to get our girls back in the air, but I must admit my view has been for the past few years now that Concorde was built to fly at Mach2 across the Atlantic, not buzzing the crowds at 170knts at an airshow.
Finally what do we gain from spending millions for Concorde to fly for 5-10 years at Airshows: If that money was ever flowing from corporate and, I, and I guess everyone else here, would rather have every Concorde in the world be put into a purpose build building to be preserver for future generations.
