|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 09:37 [#00916555]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
today British Airways operated the last revenue service of the great Concorde aircraft. A sad day for aviation people like myself :(
lots of people got lots of pictures, the today shots are here on airliners.net: Concorde Thread
the ace ones are here Concorde
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 09:39 [#00916558]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
Massive cover-up behind that incident
|
|
JAroen
from the pineal gland on 2003-10-24 09:39 [#00916560]
Points: 16065 Status: Regular
|
|
yeah .. they sold the last tickets for a rediculous prize
this ends the era where aviation was still something good and classy then i think..
:(
|
|
hyakusen
from 8=============> on 2003-10-24 09:39 [#00916561]
Points: 7021 Status: Addict
|
|
nice price for flight it was for sure - above 10.000$ for flight. i wouldnt take it even if i were richman , although concorde is a beautiful plane.
|
|
tolstoyed
from the ocean on 2003-10-24 09:39 [#00916562]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator
|
|
i read about this in the paper...its going to be pretty expensive...im still thinking about it, im not sure whether to buy a house or fly the concorde
|
|
hyakusen
from 8=============> on 2003-10-24 09:39 [#00916563]
Points: 7021 Status: Addict
|
|
correction: was
|
|
epohs
from )C: on 2003-10-24 09:53 [#00916577]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker
|
|
they should put them on auto pilot and fly them straight toward the moon... see how far them puppies get.
seems a shame just to retire them and sell them for scrap. there's gotta be cool things you could do with 'em.
|
|
nanotech
from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2003-10-24 09:54 [#00916582]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular | Followup to epohs: #00916577
|
|
thaz pretty bad ass idea
|
|
telica
from london/york on 2003-10-24 09:56 [#00916584]
Points: 789 Status: Regular | Followup to epohs: #00916577
|
|
nah, they won't sell 'em for scrap. they're part of aviation history(?!) so they'll keep them in a museum etc.
some mad rich person's bound to want to buy them anyway. i wonder how much it would cost. we should all chip in our pocket money and get an xlt concorde. how ace would that be?? hehe.
|
|
epohs
from )C: on 2003-10-24 09:58 [#00916586]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker
|
|
"we should all chip in our pocket money and get an xlt concorde."
i got five on it!
|
|
nacmat
on 2003-10-24 10:04 [#00916589]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker
|
|
I would like to live in a concorde
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-10-24 10:09 [#00916597]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker
|
|
I went to see Concorde in Cardiff yesterday! Such a sad loss to our country.
Damn shame those wankers at BA wouldn't sell it to Richard Branson
|
|
nacmat
on 2003-10-24 10:10 [#00916599]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to Jedi Chris: #00916597
|
|
I think aphex bought one of those for his next video
|
|
big
from lsg on 2003-10-24 10:20 [#00916614]
Points: 23728 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
|
|
so who are you over there mr jockstick blatant?
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-10-24 10:33 [#00916630]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker
|
|
Absolute damn shame, all of it. The government should step in and make BA do something with it. Its part of our countries heritage. :'(
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-10-24 10:34 [#00916632]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00916555
|
|
Awesome pics by the way.....the one with the Red Arrows is now my wallpaper.
|
|
danbrusca
from Derbyshire (United Kingdom) on 2003-10-24 10:43 [#00916663]
Points: 4570 Status: Lurker | Followup to epohs: #00916577
|
|
I have no idea what Air France are doing with theirs, but British Airways are sending two to a museum at Filton.
|
|
danbrusca
from Derbyshire (United Kingdom) on 2003-10-24 10:44 [#00916668]
Points: 4570 Status: Lurker | Followup to tolstoyed: #00916562
|
|
Well, you can't fly Concorde anymore, so it will have to be the house.
Or buy lots of cool stuff.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 10:47 [#00916678]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to Jedi Chris: #00916632
|
|
The problem is the Airbus Industries has said they will stop mx support for Concorde by October 31st.
Even if Branson got them for $1 each, he couldn't fly them for more than a week, even if they used a couple of the planes as parts only.
In regards to TonyFish, I assure you you haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 10:49 [#00916684]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
nice NYTimes article that sums things up nicely.
Yes you have to register
|
|
xlr
from Boston (United States) on 2003-10-24 11:05 [#00916727]
Points: 4904 Status: Regular
|
|
A fine aircraft, but sadly an environmental and economic failure.
Still one of the coolest planes out there, though. There was a funny story about a guy who ate £800 worth of biscuits to win a ticket aboard the last flight.
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-10-24 11:13 [#00916736]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker | Followup to xlr: #00916727
|
|
An economical failure yes, but there are people such as Richard Branson who want to continue to run it, even at a loss!
|
|
eric_hard_jams
on 2003-10-24 15:19 [#00917008]
Points: 1986 Status: Addict
|
|
fun day out for super-rich fuckwits
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 15:43 [#00917042]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00916678
|
|
I assure you I do.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:36 [#00917101]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to TonyFish: #00917042
|
|
typically I won't bother with trolling of this magnitude, but ok, I bite.
show me what you got.
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 16:38 [#00917106]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
trolling? Fuck off
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:40 [#00917107]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to TonyFish: #00917106
|
|
so I call your bluff and this is what you give me?
jeebus, weak hand
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 16:47 [#00917120]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
I don't appreciate your attitude. I watched a very interesting program about the various problems which had occured over the previous one or two years and the fact that these had not been dealt with approapriately. I'm not going to go into technicalities which I can't even remember but the general gist was that the explanation given to the public was a load of bullshit.
Happy? Now you can fuck off.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:53 [#00917128]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to TonyFish: #00917120
|
|
lol, listen, I just know a troll when I see when.
I figured you watched a telly show and new all the details.
Wasn't Prince Charles in a plane nearby, and the pilot didn't want to abort take off and hit his plane?
right.
-------- Tires blows upon hitting runway FOD (Foreign Object Debris) after V1 (after V1 you don't abort t/o, you go).
Tire shreds, punctures fuel tanks, etc. Flames, and the like. Two starboard engines shut down, (the reasoning behind this is the only suspect part)
Crew try for straight into airport ~miles away. With 2 engines in/op, high drag with gears down, plane stalls and crashes a few miles from runway.
Yes I've read the transcripts. Yes I've read the reports, yes I have the video, yes I have the recordings. Yes I've discussed this with pilots and mx engineers that work on Concorde (BA, not AF though)
Changes made were Kevlar lining of fuel tanks, NZG tires (net zero growth, so they don't explode if they deflate) and more thourgh search for FOD on active runways.
you sir = troll
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 16:54 [#00917129]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
you sir seem to have a bit of an attitude
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:54 [#00917130]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00917128
|
|
regret typos
|
|
eXXailon
from purgatory on 2003-10-24 16:56 [#00917131]
Points: 6745 Status: Lurker
|
|
too much hate, you two should hug and make up.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:57 [#00917132]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to TonyFish: #00917129
|
|
no, I know the facts, I study this shit, and I call BS when the public thinks they know what they don't have a fucking clue about.
I don't watch television and call BS about something you know alot about, like your or something. I don't slag off on you when I watched one Discovery Show program.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 16:58 [#00917134]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00917132
|
|
god damnit I can't make one sentence look right.
*like your JOB or something*
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 17:05 [#00917145]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
I appologise if it seemed to you that I was 'slagging off' on you. That was not the case. I was unaware that you were so knowledgable in this matter but does that justify agression? You introduced the note of agression here.
I resent being labelled a 'troll' (whatever the fuck that is) purely because I'm a 'member of the general public' and therefore don't know every little detail about the subject.
Apparently the fire started before the FOD as some witnesses stated. What is your educated opinion on this? (seriously)
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 17:25 [#00917164]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to TonyFish: #00917145
|
|
The reason for aggression, is the aviation community gets this shit a lot, and I don't mean to slag off on you, but it gets tiring.
--------------- Considering that Concorde is the only commerical airline to use re-hear (afterburners in military craft). You do SEE flames every time Concorde takes off, you should see four of them.
So, a witness afterwords could EASILY be confused with something like that. I mean that.
Now, in the video, the tower calls to the crew and mentions the flames, and the pilots acknowledge, they already now. Considering they would have ZERO view backward, especially with where the wings are and the engines are placed, they would have had a number of Master Alarms and such going off.
What started the fire was the piercing of the fuel tank. Obviously those tanks are full on take off. Fuel is now pouring out, where it is pouring out is right by the hot exhaust/reheat burners.
Flames go up and that sucks. Now, they could have made it to the diversion airport. There was confusion in the cockpit (sit in your room, have someone flash ALL the lights, sirens going off, tower saying your plane is on fire, I'm sure PAX screaming......engines at full throttle) and one of the engines was shut off when it was still producing power.
ANY commerical aviation aircraft, under FAA FAR rules Part 128 (i think it's 128, would have to look) is certified to take off, at MTOW (max take off weight) with one engine cut @ V1.
So they COULD have made it. But with the gear down, (they tried to get it up) it would be a struggle. Add that the second engine cut out (on concorde you figure one engine failure= two, as they as mounted together) they were pretty much doomed.
you CAN sometimes, make it on two, but you would need to be clean (gear up, etc) and have some speed, and some alititude.
They had none of these.
When engine #2 quits, it's your job as a pilot to land straight ahead. They hit a hotel, which is terrible, but you loose control in a stall like that, they basicall
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 17:26 [#00917166]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
When engine #2 quits, it's your job as a pilot to land straight ahead. They hit a hotel, which is terrible, but you loose control in a stall like that, they basically fell out of the sky.
That day, for aviation, was the darkest I can remeber in a long time.
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 17:31 [#00917171]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
Photos:
here is a super rear photo of an aborted takeoff about to happen, one re-heat didn't kick in
Reheat #3 out
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 17:35 [#00917175]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
Here is the photo of the new NZG tires in action. Tire
See how the tires deflated, but did not expode. That is a feature of the new tire, built just for Concorde. (now used on the Space Shuttle I believe)
|
|
TonyFish
from the realm of our dreams on 2003-10-24 17:44 [#00917182]
Points: 3349 Status: Lurker
|
|
Thanks for the clarification. I was aware of the point of no return and the fact that Chirac was onboard the Boeing(?) on the runway wasn't part of my argument. Who cares who was on it.
I can understand how uninformed people influenced by cheap sensationist TV programs can be annoying just try not to get too pissed, it's not our fault ;)
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 17:48 [#00917188]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
don't mean to lash out.
There is a large difference in the pilot community (no I am not a pilot) between mechanical failure and pilot error.
people get wound up when 100+ people die and others start judging actions made in a matter of seconds.
they say it kinda simply: "there but for the grace of God, do I walk and fly"
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 18:10 [#00917231]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
anyway, the last three birds did almost a formation landing today @ LHR (london)
good end to a great bird, sad, but bittersweet. I hope we see another Speedbird in the coming decades....
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 21:52 [#00917442]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker
|
|
and with those typos, you all stoppe caring
|
|
BlatantEcho
from All over (United States) on 2003-10-24 22:18 [#00917458]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00917442
|
|
last post, I know everyone stopped giving a shit:
official report on crash can be found HERE
|
|
Messageboard index
|