Concorde, Should it have been takin out of service?

**Mario87** · 24th October 2003

What do you think?

I think that they should have kept it in service, because it had less crashes than 747's and 737's. In the end it was really all down to money

!

**Roper99** · 24th October 2003

Most of us would never have used it in our life time so I don't care

**djm2k1** · 24th October 2003

personally i think its a bloody disgrace its gone

What an amazing feat of British Engineering and innovation (remember it was first flew about 30 years ago) to go twice the speed of sound...faster than what the earth spins at

they should have let Branson buy them like he wanted to. He would have made it for the people so the average smoe like me can afford to get to America in 3 hrs and would have made it a huge success.

RIP concorde
When you think of Britain one of the first things you think of (well i do

) is the Concorde as its only us and the frogs who have it

tis a shame

**CominAtcha** · 24th October 2003

Originally Posted by djm2k1

RIP concorde
When you think of Britain one of the first things you think of (well i do

) is the Concorde as its only us and the frogs who have it

tis a shame

Hmmmmm, this gives me an idea for a thread.....

What do you think of when you think of Britain?

**2High** · 24th October 2003

I reckon theres something they aint telling us, Branson wanted to buy them and said BA wouldnt even talk to him.

**djm2k1** · 24th October 2003

What i thought interesting was the geezer doing an interview after on Sky News (Benn or whatever his name is) mentioned Hypersonic being looked at but at present is way too expensive. Hypersonic would mean getting to Australia in like 20 minutes.

Oh well it's certainly an end of an era.

**DSR** · 24th October 2003

[QUOTE=djm2k1]What i thought interesting was the geezer doing an interview after on Sky News (Benn or whatever his name is) mentioned Hypersonic being looked at but at present is way too expensive. Hypersonic would mean getting to Australia in like 20 minutes.

Yeah and you could get back that quick as well so its not all bad.

**doug** · 24th October 2003

yep branson should have been allowed to buy em....................they belong to the taxpayer not ****ing b.a.........pure beurocratic pish

**supadid** · 24th October 2003

Isn't anybody surprised at the low progress of planes.

Things really havent changed much have they in the last 20 years? yeah they might be safer and probably cheaper to run but nothing really ground breaking.

**wizer** · 24th October 2003

this is terrible. I watched the final flight today and I don't mind admiting I hat a lump in my throught and a tear in my eye. This is yet another proud British accomplishment abolished. The reason Branson never got them is BA hate Branson. There was no way he was going to get Concorde. The reason that Concorde was grounded was purely money. BA wasn;t earning 'enough' They was making a huge profit, but it wasn't enough. They grounded Concorde to fill their dwindling Business/Premier class planes. Its all about the money and its sickening. What do you expect when a f uc kin ozzie is running BRITISH Airways

sick sick sick

**Pongo** · 24th October 2003

Originally Posted by djm2k1

personally i think its a bloody disgrace its gone

What an amazing feat of British Engineering and innovation (remember it was first flew about 30 years ago) to go twice the speed of sound...faster than what the earth spins at

they should have let Branson buy them like he wanted to. He would have made it for the people so the average smoe like me can afford to get to America in 3 hrs and would have made it a huge success.

RIP concorde
When you think of Britain one of the first things you think of (well i do

) is the Concorde as its only us and the frogs who have it

tis a shame

A very great shame for us all, a fantastic feat of engineering, the ultimate in luxury (well as far as travel goes).
And Branson fell at the first fence (sadly). The FROGS put a figure on maintaining it for X years, but it proved too much

And yes I DID fly it and YES it was FUN****INGFASTIC.

**Gooner_bear** · 24th October 2003

I find it hard to believe that Concorde has been discarded due to commercial reasons. If it was unviable to run, why not allow Branson to have it? It would make sense for BA to give it to their rival to make a loss!! Yes, Branson would have made a killing in the publicity flying Concorde but that would not have lasted long if it is true that Concorde has no commercial value and he would have received bad publicity if he then stopped flying it.

Still it opens the way for Boeing to produce the worlds only flying supersonic plane, and for BA to get a big discount on it. :nowords: I bet that one will be able to sonic boom all over America and the world. :whistle

**Mario87** · 24th October 2003

I remember watching a program about concorde on the discovery channel about a week ago, it said that the major problem was the sonic boom it created, and that the US air force had designed a super sonic plane that was about 1/4 as loud as any other super sonic plane due to it's design, it wasn't streamlined, but it had right angles, that's what made it quiet (and ugly looking), but it was the streamline of the plane that made it so loud, they explaned that a sonic boom happens when the wind flowing past the nose and the wind flowing past the wings "meet". They were saying that with this new technology a newer, quieter super sonic airliner may be on its way!

**corby** · 24th October 2003

I was at birmingham airport on monday and although it was a sight to bewilder, the noise was deafening. It must have superiour engines to compete with the market today. I`m sad that it has made its last flight but the writing was on the wall. Having said that, Branson should have had been given an opportunity to continue in some capacity.

**The Prodigy** · 25th October 2003

It's very sad to see such a great British engineering achievement ending up on the scrap heap but at the same time I think it's for the best?!?

Concorde is VERY fuel hungry and can ONLY carry a maximum of 128 passengers so the amount of Carbon monoxide produced per passenger is ridiculous compared say to a Boeing 747.
So from an environmental point of view I would say yes it's a good job it has been taken out of service.

LaterZ
Leftfield_2k2

ABCMan · 25th October 2003

Sad to see a wonderful plane go to the scrapheap whilst it still had at least 10 years flying time left, i've been on it and it realy was an amazing journey.

i remember the first time i saw it thinking how tiny it looked compared to the other planes around at the time, yes it wasnt exactly fuel efficent, but it got there far faster than than a normal slow jetliner so although it burned more fuel it did it for much less time.

maybe we should start a campaign to force ba to give them to branson

**The Prodigy** · 25th October 2003

For Concorde to be as fuel efficient as a Boeing 747 it would need to travel at over 2,470 MPH!! It does not it cruises at 1,400 MPH. So yes the Concorde is VERY fuel inefficient and bad for the environment in my opinion.

LaterZ
Leftfield_2k2

**CzarJunkie** · 25th October 2003

F**k Concorde...................nothing but a massive white elephant that has cost the ordinary taxpayers of this country fukin billions in development and billions in subsidies to BA in the early years. And what legacy has that experience of building a technological marvel such as concorde left us with??? Yes, thats right, f**k all, our legacy is a memory of our once great engineering tradition and world class aviation industry. But it could have been so different, our partners the French, love em or hate em, didn't just stand and admire their work, they got busy creating a legacy in the shape of Airbus Industries. Yes, they achieved something that every french citizen can be proud of.

Makes me fukin laff the way people like wizer harp on about how much they love concorde, when the closest most ordinary taxpayers gets to it is seeing it fly fukin past full of the tiny percent of people who were able to afford to fly on it. It represents everything thats wrong with society, the poor work so the rich can benefit.

Yes, the ordinary man in the street worked hard to put concorde in the skys for a few pop stars and rich businessmen to use, and left the people of Britain with nothing, how fukin proud should we be about that? Makes me feel sick.

**elephantsoup** · 25th October 2003

Couldn't of put it better Czar.. A rich mans toy paid for by the working man.

**TwoPlAnKs** · 25th October 2003

Originally Posted by supadid

Things really havent changed much have they in the last 20 years? yeah they might be safer and probably cheaper to run but nothing really ground breaking.

i prefer my planes to not be ground breaking if its all the same with you