Charlie Farley
Supporter
Amusing story, and not due to the SR-71 content.
BBC News - Could Concorde ever fly again? No, says British Airways
BBC News - Could Concorde ever fly again? No, says British Airways
Concorde & the SR-71 Blackbird.
- Thread starter Charlie Farley
- Start date
The Concorde's top speed was 1350mph and 60K ft of altitude, while the government admitted to the SR71 top speed of 2000mph and 80K ft of altitude. I spoke to a SR71 pilot, he said it was a bit faster than that. Of course it took two states to turn around.
Charlie Farley
Supporter
Al,
I did state " not due to the SR-71 content."
When will the US aircraft industry get around to building a supersonic airliner ?
It's been nearly 60 years behind, so far..
I did state " not due to the SR-71 content."
When will the US aircraft industry get around to building a supersonic airliner ?
It's been nearly 60 years behind, so far..
Charlie Farley
Supporter
Al,
This was a video posted for fun, not seeing who can piss the highest.
After all, the SR71 could only transport 2 "bags" (pilots) & a bag of shit apiece, what they produced, that's all.
No ordinance...
Concorde was an entirely different brief, a PASSENGER aircraft...
Good grief.
This was a video posted for fun, not seeing who can piss the highest.
After all, the SR71 could only transport 2 "bags" (pilots) & a bag of shit apiece, what they produced, that's all.
No ordinance...
Concorde was an entirely different brief, a PASSENGER aircraft...
Good grief.
I only stated the differences, I thinks another supersonic airliner would drive the "greenies" over the edge. The SR71 didn't need ordinance, it could outrun anything. We are speaking apples and oranges. Personally, I'd like a ride in the SR71.
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Interestingly, no Concorde is in France. A bit odd, when you consider that some of them flew in AF livery, didn't they?
Lovely planes. Wish I'd got a ride in one back in the day. Kind of like that voyage on the SS United States I missed out on (wrong family, bad timing on my part- picked the wrong parents, I did)
Lovely planes. Wish I'd got a ride in one back in the day. Kind of like that voyage on the SS United States I missed out on (wrong family, bad timing on my part- picked the wrong parents, I did)
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Jimbo,
A few years ago, i went aboard a Concord Prototype at Le Bourget during the Paris Airshow, I'm fairly sure its still there.
As I recall, it had the short tail and a slightly different nose profile compared to the production aircraft, the fuselage was mostly filled with 1960s electronics, tubes and all.
A few years ago, i went aboard a Concord Prototype at Le Bourget during the Paris Airshow, I'm fairly sure its still there.
As I recall, it had the short tail and a slightly different nose profile compared to the production aircraft, the fuselage was mostly filled with 1960s electronics, tubes and all.
Last edited:
PeteB
GT40s Supporter
Why would we? It's just not economically feasible. The Concord NEVER made money.
I would dispute that - on average Concorde made an operating profit of £30-50 Million a year for British Airways in the boom years where many passengers were travelling first class. British Airways reportedly received £1.75 Billion in revenue for Concorde services against an operating cost of around £1 Billion. Air France made a much smaller profit.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
The may have made money operationally, but I think thats because BA and AF the two airlines that flew the plane did not pay anything close to the real cost to develop and build each aircraft.
If you took the cost of development and construction then devided that by only 14 commercial aircraft............
I doubt they would never have earned enough to pay for their "actual" cost of development, construction and operation, much less profit.
But that said it was a wonderful endevour and a more elegant machine may never be built.
If you took the cost of development and construction then devided that by only 14 commercial aircraft............
I doubt they would never have earned enough to pay for their "actual" cost of development, construction and operation, much less profit.
But that said it was a wonderful endevour and a more elegant machine may never be built.
Last edited:
Great post Andrew, thanks.
As to new ss transports, I believe the next crop will come in corporate form and not airliners. The biggest hurdle to clear is quieting down the ss boom over land and civil regs not allowing M1+ travel over land.
Gulfstream or Dassault could easily build a viable one today.
The Dassault 7X I maintain already has the industries first digital FBW flight controls with no mechanical link to the control surfaces. A little creepy if you ask an old timer like me but this is where we are headed.
Although a long read, the link posted sheds some light on justifying just such an aircraft.
Why the Supersonic Business Jet is Inevitable – Part 3 (Final Installment) | Chris Broyhill Books
Cheers,
Scott
Hi,
I know there's one in the US, & in Germany there is one displayed along side a 'Concordski'.
Sadly none of them will ever fly again. I hope people don't waste too much time & money on an impossible dream.
Regards Steve
I know there's one in the US, & in Germany there is one displayed along side a 'Concordski'.
Sadly none of them will ever fly again. I hope people don't waste too much time & money on an impossible dream.
Regards Steve
I sort of had the right kind of parent. ~40 years ago, my father wrote to BAC and asked if he could get a tour of the Concorde (he was a college professor at the time and explained he wanted to write a paper about the plane). So the two of us got a personal guided tour of the factory floor where they were building the Concordes. We even got to go on board one of them and got to see the cockpit.
I remember being told that the main limit on speed for the Concorde was friction and air temperature. The guide said they could have used titanium instead of aluminum (aluminium), but that would have only resulted in a minor increase in speed. Because they couldn't pound the rivets into place, they chilled the rivets to shrink them and then delicately pressed them into place. To make sure that the rivets hadn't warmed up too much, they were color-coded so they could know which batch of rivets they were using. The window openings on the inside of the Concordes were large, but the plastic trim tapered to the actually size of the small windows on the outside. This was done to fool the passengers into thinking the windows were larger. The engines were powerful enough that the plane could fly with just one engine
A few years later, we were in an antique store in NYC. I overheard a couple of people talking about popping over to London for lunch. It turned out they took the Concorde to London for the day just so they could have lunch in London. It's cool that we had planes that allowed people to do that, but that also required a lot more money than I have.
I remember reading an article saying that the short flight times of the Concorde allowed short-lived medicines to be flown to other parts of the world.
I never got to fly on the Concorde, but I was delighted when I saw a Concorde sitting on the tarmac at Heathrow (this must have been just before the accident).
I hope for the contrary, it's what makes us great.
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Oh, why the hell not? We spend far larger amounts of money on things far less impressive. I for one would love to see another SST. Why the hell not.....
PeteB
GT40s Supporter
The one in the US is a bomber, not a passenger plane. XB-70:
Very impressive airplane, on display at the National Museum of the Air Force.
Keith,
According to the BBC it looks like you are not as misguided / confused as we thought.
Supersonic successors
Talking of money, let's scotch that myth that the great gas-guzzler did not make any cash for British Airways.
Going back to Jock Lowe, he told me that up until that horrendous crash at Paris in 2000, she made a net average profit of about £30m a year.
That is £500m net profit over her lifetime. And Jock insists that in her final few months before retirement, she was still making money.
Still, he does not think Concorde will ever get airborne again. And when I spoke to British Airways the answer was the same as it has always been.
No chance.
"We firmly believe that the technical and safety challenges of returning a Concorde to the skies are absolutely prohibitive," says BA.
So will we ever see her like again?
Well, the world's two dominant planemakers, Airbus and Boeing, certainly do not plan to build something supersonic any time soon.
But there other options on the horizon.
Sir Richard Branson's space plane Virgin Galactic is due to take its first paying passengers next year and he is promising that within his lifetime, they will be able to fly people from London to Sydney in two and a half hours with minimal impact on the environment.
around the world
Airbus UK, Filton, Bristol, UK
Manchester Airport, UK
Museum of Flight, near Edinburgh, UK
Heathrow Airport, UK
Museum of Flight, Seattle, US
Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum, New York, US
Grantley Adams Airport, Bridgetown, Barbados
Brooklands Museum, Weybridge, UK (never commercially flown)
Source: British Airways
Ian Anderson
Lifetime Supporter
Thanks Nick
But is British Airways also so totally unionised that you cannot even fart without it being approved by the union first?
At the time British Airways was taking Concorde out the sky it was a political move
Actually Branson made an offer to purchase all the planes, spares etc and promised to keep them flying. He even advised he would keep them in full british flag livery (not Virgin red)
He was turned down as the Loony labour govenrment of the time saw it as a way of killing off another British Icon
The Unions even put out some bullshit that the rudder fins were all cracking and could not be repaired and that the spares supplier "Airbus France" said they could not manufacture more. Why not it was by then a 40 year old design! But by then the "Healf and Safety" bregade got on the union side and added another nail to the coffin!
My Brother in Law works in BA maintenance and confirmed ther was no problem in supply of said parts!.
Anything is possible and yes they should all be put back to work and made to fly again.
Ian
But is British Airways also so totally unionised that you cannot even fart without it being approved by the union first?
At the time British Airways was taking Concorde out the sky it was a political move
Actually Branson made an offer to purchase all the planes, spares etc and promised to keep them flying. He even advised he would keep them in full british flag livery (not Virgin red)
He was turned down as the Loony labour govenrment of the time saw it as a way of killing off another British Icon
The Unions even put out some bullshit that the rudder fins were all cracking and could not be repaired and that the spares supplier "Airbus France" said they could not manufacture more. Why not it was by then a 40 year old design! But by then the "Healf and Safety" bregade got on the union side and added another nail to the coffin!
My Brother in Law works in BA maintenance and confirmed ther was no problem in supply of said parts!.
Anything is possible and yes they should all be put back to work and made to fly again.
Ian
Similar threads
