Deacon Brodie - the point that I made about the previous tyrebursts was that the CAA issued SBs and later an AD to correct the problem.

The French - or more correctly, Air France - chose to ignore it on 'economic grounds'.

Had they complied with it, then this incident would not have happened. It's as simple as that.

Guv,
The CAA ADs and SBs that BA apply and not AF concern the water deflector, not the tyre. The water deflector was not involved in the July 2000 accident.

The CAA has effectively withdrawn the requirement for reinforced water deflectors. In fact it was a condition of Concorde's re-certification that the steel wire reinforcement was removed because it is considered more likely to cause damage than to prevent it.

And all those who still think Brits can do no wrong and the French cannot be trusted, bear in mind that the AAIB was invited to be an observer to the BEA's investigation - an invitation that it wholeheartedly accepted - and that the Concorde Working Group that convened monthly to review the investigation and decide what the recertification mods should be was bi-national (that means, for the linguistically challenged, that both Brits and Frogs took part in it).

As for ATOW/MTOW/RTOW, yes I want the answers too, but I want to see what the report has to say about them before I judge.