Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by evoluzione, Oct 24, 2003.
well, it's here, the end of an era...
a sad day, but what a list of passengers eh.
Tis a sad day....
I can't believe BA wouldn't let Branson give it a go.... christ, it's not really even BA's in the first place.
Concorde has more than a few years left in it, and I for one think it's a massive injustice that it's not continuing to fly.... if it's not economically feasible for BA then so be it.... give it to Branson and see what Mr Midas could do with it!
And to think it's still pretty much the fastest thing in the sky, even most military aircraft can't sustain the same speeds for the same durations...
Concorde.... we salute you!
Re: Concorde's Last Flight
Just been watching the live coverage of the Concordes landing at Heathrow.
The days of air travel being seen as glamorous are now well and truly over. Concorde had that sixties vibe about it; that and a timeless design as well as the Joan Collins factor have a made it a legend in our lifetime.
I hear people travelling by Concorde over the last few months have been stealing anything they can get their hands on for keepsakes (i.e. anything not screwed down). Someone even nicked a toilet seat.
It's still the most exciting thing in a aviation.
The Concorde made one of it's last flights here in Boston at Logan Airport last week. As far as I can remember it was only the second time that the Concorde landed at Logan. Wonder what museums will host the Concorde?
AND I MISSED IT?! Oh wtf!
I believe that the last flight cost around $60,000 ouch!
I saw all 3 coming in to Heathrow from the train on the way home (they were passing over Canary Wharf), an amazing plane, I can't believe they won't let Virgin keep it running, those BA bastards!
Did I understand Joan Collins correctly when she said LA to London in 3 1/2 hours????
This is sad and i hope this is not a reflection of mankind the past 20 years. look at how our space program has floundered. I was lucky enough to see the first two concords land in orlando at the same time. I thought wow we are going somewhere but here we are with no sportscar to space and no sportscar from Europe to the U.S or anywhere else in the world.
I meant seeing it land.
If she said LA to London, she must have been on something. It's NY to London that takes 3.5 hours.
I shall miss it flying overhead twice a day. It sounded and looked like nothing else.
I'm sorry, I misunderstood your comment. Is there any talk of letting the public view the Concorde at the airport?
Someone needs to bring back the spirit and the romance of air travel. It's officially dead now, and as long as it is dead, air travel will only be a necessary evil, not a joyful and pleasurable experience.
Yeah now untill they get those 'Space-Like' Flying ships (Space-Ships that don't go into space) Airtravel sucks.
They actually should go into space. You know, that would be really sweet. For like, Sydney-London flights or something.
Hmm - 2 hours from Sydney to London... including 15 minutes of weightlessnes!
I took my little 3 year old boy to see the three Concordes land on Friday - we were standing on a footbridge over some train lines in Twickenham, just down the road from where we live. There was a little crowd of locals there - it's a good spot to see them, as it's below the flight path into Heathrow. People were genuinely saddened to see the last 3 go in - Oscar stood there and waved, saying "Bye-bye, Concorde!". On hearing that, one woman actually started crying...
I'll miss Concorde accelerating past my place as it makes its tight right-hand turn off to New York twice a day - it was a beautiful sight, even though it made every window in the house rattle in their panes. It was always a wonderful display of raw power - and a sight that made even non-planespotters look up in awe...
One was designed many years ago, about the same time as Concorde was on the drawing board. It was called the Silver Goose, Barnes "Bouncing Bomb" Wallis' last project. It was to be launched from a rocket sled on a runway, up to a speed where its ram-jets would kick in, then climb into the stratosphere and basically sit there while the earth turned below it and then glide down to Sydney. Two and a half hours flight time, London to Sydney. Nice idea, but nobody would back it. After all, Concorde was nearly scrapped.
Besides the Bouncing Bomb, he also designed the R100 airship, the Wellington bomber, the swing-wing and the TSR2 fighter-bomber, all of which were decades ahead of their time.
Sigh. In this budget conscious world we won't be seeing anything like the Concorde for a long time. The planes themselves never made back the billions of dollars that it took to develop them. Mostly they were symbols of pride and technological achievement- an answer to the American and Soviet battle for the celestial heavans.
I'll look forward to seeing one up close at the Air and Space museum and wonder if we'll ever dare to dream again.
From my experience air flight is only pleasurable if you have the funds to fly first class. When we moved to Boston in 1984, we treated ourselves and bought first class tickets. That trip was of great pleasure. The flights that I made in the Air Force to me were uncomfortable. Even if I got the bulkhead or emergency row.
I think the best first class seats are on BA, full flat beds, power, even internet access! And I bet the only comfortable Air Force flights are the ones with modified Gulfstreams or 747's and are reserved for gov't officials
Air Force One is probably pretty comfy
Sadly after taking aerodynamics and turbine engine classes I highly doubt we'll be seeing supersonic commercial flight again. We just can't make engines or airfoils that are efficient at both subsonic and supersonic speeds. If you've ever seen Concorde take off you know what I mean about inefficient engines *cough* *gag*
This is not to say that we won't EVER have it, I just don't see it anytime soon. Besides, most people are pretty content with subsonic flight especially at 1/10 the cost.
And as for development, I really doubt any business, government, or investor with any sense would try something like the Concorde again. It was a botch on the highest of scale. Even when they charged an arm and a leg they couldn't recover the cost of R&D. Even after, what, 30 years of service? I imagine requesting billions of dollars to build a new Super Sonic Transport (SST) would be a hard sell to say the least.
From what I can tell, the future of aerospace is not in speed but economy.
Hey, the Americans pulled out when they saw what a waste of time and money it was. I think the big ego award goes to France and the UK for this one.
The military flights that I flew were Air Evac, used the C 141. It was easily modifed to carry patients. They had a module that was modified for restrooms and a galley to prepare food. The seats were standard issue, not plush. The head room for someone 6' 8" was great. I would of had a problem being a passenger, because the leg room was poor. Fortunately being a flight nurse we sat in an area with good leg room. Also had the advantage of being able to be up walking around during the flight. The major problem on a military plane is no insulation, so the noise level is a problem. Had to wear ear plugs. Needs to speak loudy to be heard.
That's pretty much what I thought.